Sand from Surplus Quarry Material
Final ReportReport no: QRF_b- SC9086-CF
31 January 2013
D Gardner, R Lark, M Pilegis,
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 2 of 45��
Summary
This project was supported by the National Assembly for Wales, via the Aggregates Levy sustainability Fund for Wales. In 2000 the Welsh Assembly acknowledged the need to find a sustainable use for the growing stock piles of crusher fines in Wales, and commissioned research into the use of these fines as a replacement for natural sand. The 2000 study showed that whilst certain crusher dusts were acceptable for use in concrete, they still needed to be blended with natural sands to satisfy the required fine aggregate specifications and desired fresh concrete properties. The report highlighted the need for sand products of consistent quality and acceptable grading and suggested that the manufacturing and screening processes were fundamental to achieving these attributes. It is now believed that this technology has been developed and improved to the point where reprocessed crusher dusts can completely replace natural sand in concrete.
An extensive Cardiff University led laboratory programme, together with information from literature and input from industrial project partners form the basis for the evaluation of the primary aim of this project which was to examine the potential for Kayasand to completely replace natural sand in concrete. The results obtained from the laboratory testing of a range of samples collected for this project provide additional data on grading characteristics and pre and post-processing physical properties of the Kayasand product. Additional investigation into the chemical properties of the Kayasand products is considered in a separate study in order to assess the suitability of the use of the fines in agricultural applications.
Four different rock types were considered in the present study, gritstone (sandstone), limestone, basalt and granite and all appear to varying extents in the geology of South Wales In order to evaluate the use of Kayasand in concrete a suite of physical characterisation tests were performed which were used to identify the effect of the physical sand properties on the fresh and hardened properties of concrete. Mix proportions were established for each individual rock type and a w/c ratio selected to achieve a fresh concrete slump of 50-90mm.
Additional laboratory tests were performed in order to observe the performance of the various Kayasand concrete mixes with the use of plasticisers at a fixed water/cement (w/c) ratio. These mixes allowed the potential for cement savings to be addressed.
The test results demonstrate that with appropriate adjustment to the mix proportions it is possible to replace marine sand in concrete with 100% Kayasand with no detrimental effects on the development of workability as measured by the slump test, compressive or tensile strength. Moreover, there was no apparent relationship between fines content and 28-day compressive strength in any of the Kayasand concretes. This suggests that there are no negative effects of higher fines contents on the compressive strength for the given mix compositions and range of fines contents investigated in the study. An increase in the fines content of the Kayasand mixes generally resulted in a small reduction in the slump of the mix, however only 1 of the 16 Kayasand mixes fell outside of the S2 slump range with some evidence of the fines acting as lubricants in Kayasand concretes with medium fines contents.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 3 of 45��
Table of Contents
Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................ 3
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 4
2. Literature Review ..................................................................................................................................... 6
3. Kayasand ............................................................................................................................................... 16
4. Laboratory Testing Programme .............................................................................................................. 17
5. Results and Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 24
6. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................ 36
7. References ............................................................................................................................................. 39
Appendix 1. Quarterly Reports produced by Cardiff University
Appendix 2. KEMCO Test Reports
Appendix 3. Full Stage 1 Results
Appendix 4. Full Stage 2 Results
Table 1. Stage 1 concrete mix proportions at SSD conditions ...................................................................... 22
Table 2. Stage 2 Table 2. Concrete mix proportions at SSD conditions ........................................................ 23
Table 3. Fine aggregate classification results ............................................................................................... 26
Table 4. Stage 1 and stage 2 fresh and hardened concrete results .............................................................. 31
Figure 1. Different forms of crusher (BGS, 2011) ............................................................................................ 8
Figure 2. Schematic representation of crushed rock fine grading compared to standard grading envelopes 10
Figure 3. Effect of fines addition on a) low strength concrete and b) high strength concrete (figure reproduced from Li et al., 2009) .................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 4. Changes of slump of concrete mixes with different type of coarse aggregate in different moisture conditions (figure reproduced from Poon et al. 2004) ................................................................................... 14
Figure 5. V7 Dry Sand-Making System (Figure reproduced from Pettingell 2008) ........................................ 17
Figure 6. NZFC Flow time envelope (Figure reproduced from Goldsworthy, 2005) ...................................... 20
Figure 7. Particle size distribution curves for Kayasand material .................................................................. 25
Figure 8. Correlation between RMBV and MBV values for all samples ......................................................... 27
Figure 9. NZFC voids and flow time results for all FEED and Kayasand material ......................................... 28
Figure 10. Influence of fines content on concrete consistency ...................................................................... 30
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 4 of 45��
1. Introduction
In 2000 the Welsh Assembly acknowledged the need to find a sustainable use for the growing stock
piles of crusher fines in Wales, and commissioned research into the use of these fines as a
replacement for natural sand. The 2000 study showed that whilst certain crusher dusts were
acceptable for use in concrete, they still needed to be blended with natural sands to satisfy the
required fine aggregate specifications and desired fresh concrete properties. The report highlighted
the need for sand products of consistent quality and acceptable grading and suggested that the
manufacturing and screening processes were fundamental to achieving these attributes.
Wider environmental concerns regarding the depletion of natural aggregate resources have
highlighted the need to find alternative sources of fine aggregate. One such source is crushed rock
material from stone quarries. However, the material produced differs in characteristics from natural
sands. The major differences being its shape and texture, grading and amount of fine filler. These
characteristics can detrimentally affect concrete; therefore Manufactured Fine Aggregates (MFAs)
are only reluctantly accepted within the industry (Harrison et al., 2000).
The MFA shape is typically highly angular, elongated or flaky. This characteristic greatly influences
the fresh and subsequent hardened properties of concrete. MFA shape depends on the parent rock
and to large extent on the crushing method (Ahn et al., 2001 and Manning, 2004).
Typical particle size distribution of MFA or “quarry dust” rarely conforms to the requirements of
national standards. These types of aggregate can produce “harsh” mixes with bleeding problems if it
is washed and screened to fall within the prescribed limits (Harrison et al., 2000). This is mainly due
to an excess of fine particles passing the 63 micron sieve and a deficiency of particles in the size
range 0.3mm to 1mm. Thus manufactured sands are commonly used in blends with fine natural
sands to overcome these shortcomings and minimise the negative effects on fresh and hardened
concrete properties.
An alternative to washing and blending is reprocessing the quarry fines by employing another
crusher to refine the particle shape and size distribution. Furthermore, if the classification process of
the product employs a dry instead of a wet system then environmental benefits can be gained. New
methods of manufacturing sand are now available which can more accurately control the sand
particle size, shape and gradation including particles in the usually deficient range. Indeed, it is now
believed that this technology has improved to the point where reprocessed crusher dusts can
completely replace natural sand in concrete.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 5 of 45��
The aim of this study is to explore the potential for the use of Kayasand, an MFA produced from
reprocessing quarry fines, in concrete applications in Wales and the UK as a 100% replacement for
natural marine dredged sand.
The motivation for this project is to address the increasing miss balance between the need for
aggregates in society and the availability of traditionally suitable geologic sources. A strong need is
realised for developing and implementing technology that can enable the use of alternative resources,
reduce the need for transport and present zero waste concepts for the aggregate and concrete
industry.�With small changes in gradations, cement contents in concrete can be minimised in a way
never envisaged before. It is also well known that consistency in sand is a key consideration when
deciding upon the amount of cement to be used in a mix. Savings in excess of 10% in the cement
content have been commonplace in recent tests, but a great deal of test work needs to be done to
formulate a model to find the ideal sand gradation for each stone type, including the highest tolerable
level of filler content to minimise waste. The results of such an analysis could well lead to
specification changes, if significant reductions in cement use generally are to be made, although this
is outside the scope of this particular study.
The core objectives of this study are:
• to establish the physical properties of a range of Kayasands of differing mineralogy and fines
contents, through a series of standard characterisation tests;
• to determine the effectiveness of the Grace Rapid Methylene Blue Test in comparison with the
standard Methylene Blue Test;
• to determine the w/c ratio and mix proportions required for a range of 100% Kayasand mixes
of differing mineralogy and fines contents to achieve a slump within a specified range (50-
90mm);
• to determine for the same range of 100% Kayasand mixes, the plasticiser content to achieve a
slump within a specified range of 50-90mm at a fixed w/c ratio of 0.55;
• to compare the fresh and hardened concrete performance of 100% Kayasand mixes to that of a
natural marine dredged sand mix;
• to evaluate the potential for cement savings in the Kayasand mixes to achieve equal
performance to a natural marine dredge sand concrete mix.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 6 of 45��
2. Literature Review
In Wales approximately half of all aggregates for concrete applications are from marine dredged
sources, with fine aggregate comprising the majority of this figure (Mankelow et al., 2011). The
other half, predominantly comprising coarse aggregates, are from land-base resources. The
processing of these coarse aggregates produces crushed quarry fines as a bi-product, which usually
represents up to 40% of the quarry output. The crushed quarry fines do find markets as partial fine
aggregate replacement materials, but they are generally lower value products, and often a percentage
can be classified as surplus or even waste products. The UK has significant reserves of crushed
quarry fines in its quarries, which could undergo further processing to provide the majority of the
sand required by the construction industry, using the same sales and delivery channels as it does now
for its coarse aggregates. The advantage of this being in the ability to specify aggregates from
quarries close to their place of end-use, thereby shortening transport distances, followed by less
pollution and increased employment opportunities for the local population. However the problem
currently lies in the quality of the crushed quarry fines, particularly in their shape, surface texture and
grading. Conventional impact crushing techniques have been employed for a number of years as a
method by which crushed quarry fines are reprocessed to form sands which are more suitable for
concreting applications. However, these MFAs are still deficient in their grading and need to be
blended with natural sand before use in concrete. Advances in crushing techniques over the last
decade have resulted in technology that produces well-graded MFAs with accurate control over the
volume of fines that are returned to the sand after processing.
All sands and indeed crushed rocks break differently under impact which results in various
gradations and particle shapes. As a result different sand gradation specification “envelopes”
generally based on natural sand gradations are provided by construction industry standards
worldwide. It is apparent that the best performing sands have good shape and an even gradation, but
very little work has been done on actual concrete performance using MFAs.
In order for the complete replacement of natural sand in concrete with MFA it is necessary to
understand the influence of the physical and mineralogical properties on the fresh and hardened
properties of concrete. This summary of the literature will look at various properties of aggregates,
their effects on concrete performance and compile the views expressed in scientific papers. It will
present the requirements and recommended tests for MFA in European Standards, published
documents and research reports.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 7 of 45��
2.1 Shape and Texture
Particle shape is influenced by the physical properties of the parent rock and by the method of
production. The consistency, flow, yield, air content, water requirement, bleeding and finishability of
concrete are all influenced by the particle shape of the fine aggregate (Ahn, 2001). Crushed
aggregates contain more angular particles with rougher surface textures and flatter faces than natural
sands that are more rounded as a result of weathering experienced over time (Ahn, 2001).
It is very difficult to describe the shape of three-dimensional bodies such as aggregate particles,
therefore, it normally proves convenient to define certain geometrical characteristics of such bodies,
and the terms used are sphericity, roundness and form. Sphericity is defined as a function of the ratio
of the surface area of the particle to its volume. Sphericity is influenced by the type of crushing
equipment (examples given in Figure 1) and is related to the bedding and cleavage of the parent rock.
Particles with a high ratio of surface area to volume are of particular interest because they increase
the water demand for a given consistency of the concrete mixture (Neville, 1995). Roundness
measures angularity or relative sharpness of the edges and corners of a particle. Roundness is greatly
controlled by the strength and abrasion resistance of the parent rock as well as the wear to which the
particle has been subjected. In case of the particle shape of crushed aggregate, it also depends on the
type of crusher and its reduction ratio, i.e. the ratio of the size of material fed into the crusher to the
size of the finished product. Impact crushers break rock by “hitting” the material, which causes the
rock to break along natural zones of weakness along grain interfaces (Marek, 1995) generally
producing particles with good cubical shape. Gyratory and cone crushers break rock by compression.
Size and shape can be controlled within relatively wide limits with such crushers. Product shape is
influenced by (i) the reduction ratio and (ii) the degree to which the crushing chamber is filled with
rock. The “best” particle shape is obtained when the crusher chamber is full because a large part of
the crushing work is accomplished by interparticle contact. Flat or elongated particles are readily
broken into more cubical shapes. Jaw crushers and large gyratories generally produce particles with
poor (non-cubical) shape due to the fact that the crushing chamber is rarely full to permit
interparticle crushing, and the degree of reduction is high (Marek 1995). Horizontal Shaft Impact
(HSI) and Vertical Shaft Impact (VSI) crushers are widely used to crush a range of soft to hard rocks
such as basalt, granite, hard limestone. The loading conditions of VSIs typically leads to a higher
probability of fracture of either weak or flaky particles, with fracture occurring by cleavage, with a
marked contribution from surface attrition. The result is that particles with greater integrity and more
isometric shapes are produced by this crushing process in comparison to other techniques, such as
cone, jaw and roll crushers.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 8 of 45��
Cone Crusher Horizontal Shaft Impact Crusher Vertical Shaft Impact Crusher
Figure 1. Different forms of crusher (BGS, 2011)
Equidimensional particles are generally preferred to flat and elongated particles for use as concrete
aggregates because they present less surface area per unit volume and generally produce tighter
packing when consolidated (Marek, 1995). Equidimensional particles of a given grading require a
minimum of cement paste for a given degree of consistency of concrete (Marek, 1995). Cubical
particles tend to decrease consistency and thus require more cement and water unless the grading
(sub 75µm) of the fine aggregate is increased to reduce the void content of the aggregate
combination used. Decreasing roundness or increasing angularity directly affects the percentage of
voids in the aggregate, and this in turn affects consistency or the mix proportions required. Concrete
made with non-spherical aggregates will have higher strength than concrete made with spherical
aggregate particles, since the former have a larger surface area, and therefore, greater adhesive forces
develop between aggregate particles and the cement matrix (Marek, 1995).
Several different methods have been developed and used to evaluate particle shape or produce a
particle shape index (Marek, 1995). These methods include, but are not limited to:
i. Visual comparison of particle silhouettes with standard shapes
ii. Measurement of percentage of voids of individual size fractions, or of standard gradings of
fine particles
iii. Measurement of the time of flow required for the material to pass through an orifice, as
outlined in BS EN 933 part 6, with reference to the New Zealand flow cone.
iv. Measurement of critical particle dimensions using laser technology or from photographs
Most methods are based on the principle that the volume of voids in the fine aggregate is a function
of particle shape and therefore packing ability. Research by Ahn (2001) shows a correlation between
flow rate and particle shape and presents a relationship between the average 28-day compressive
strength and the orifice flow rate. He noticed that the variations in strength meant that the orifice
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 9 of 45��
flow rate could not be used to predict the compressive strength, but there was a general improvement
in the compressive strength as the orifice flow rate decreased. Sands with more angular shaped
particles took longer to flow due to the interlocking of particles, as opposed to rounded sands which
moved past each other much more easily.
The classification of the surface texture is based on the degree to which the particles surfaces are
polished or dull, smooth or rough. The surface texture of an aggregate depends on the grain size,
hardness and pore characteristics of the parent material, as well as the result of external forces acting
on the aggregate surface. There is no recognised method of measuring the surface roughness,
however, engineers tend to use a range of approaches to tackle this problem, the most popular is
Wright's method: the interface is magnified between the particle and a resin in which it is set, the
difference between the length of the profile and the length of an unevenness line drawn as a series of
chords is determined and taken as a measure of roughness (Neville, 1995). Additionally, the NZFC
has been used as an indirect measure of surface texture.
In summary it is well documented that it is difficult to accurately quantify the shape of an aggregate
and determine the exact relationship between its shape and performance in a concrete mix. However,
it is apparent that without external influence in the form of superplasticisers there is a compromise
between an aggregate’s performance in the fresh concrete state and the resulting hardened concrete
properties. Whilst angular particles have a detrimental effect on slump and flow, they provide
enhanced compressive strength due to greater particle interlock and cement paste bonding.
Conversely rounded particles, which tend to have a smoother surface texture, have better flow
properties, yet result in lower compressive strength due to weaker interface bonds between the
aggregates and cement paste. It seems therefore that manufactured sands, with their isometric shapes
may prove beneficial in achieving high compressive strengths if measures are taken to manage their
performance in fresh concrete.
2.2 Grading
The suitability of a sand for concrete-making is governed by knowledge of its grading and its void
content (Marek, 1995). Aggregate grading has a significant influence on water requirement,
consistency, bleeding, segregation and finishing quality of concrete. Current grading specifications
for fine aggregate for use in concrete, however, may not define a sand that is suitable for use in
concrete. Some sands that comply with existing specifications produce concrete that is harsh and
unworkable, prone to bleeding and segregation, and difficult to finish, whilst sands which do not
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 10 of 45��
meet present grading specifications may produce concrete with satisfactory fresh and hardened
concrete properties. Hewlett (1998) reported that the particle size distribution of the fine aggregate
was found to have a greater influence on the properties of concrete than that of the coarse aggregate,
if working within permitted standard limits. This is confirmed by Teranishi and Tanigawa (2007)
who report that it is the fluidity and segregation resistance in particular that are most affected by the
fine aggregate grading. Gonçalves et al (2007) recognised that the crushing processes can also be
used to influence the grading of the MFA, particularly the proportion of filler (sub 75ȝm material).
This signifies that through careful selection of crushing and classification techniques it will be
possible to produce a sand, from virtually any rock type to meet almost any desired specification.
According to Neville (1995) grading requirements should depend on shape and surface texture of the
aggregates. For sharp and angular particles slightly finer grading should be employed to reduce the
interlocking possibility and compensate for the high friction between particles. Furthermore, a higher
volume of fine aggregate should be used if a crushed and angular coarse aggregate is present in the
mix. It follows that for a fine grading of fine aggregate the fine to coarse aggregate ratio should be
decreased.
Conventional crushed rock sands typically have a
significant number of large particles (~4mm) and an
abundance of filler material (<75ȝm) however, this is
normally accompanied by a lack of particles in the 1mm-
150ȝm range (as indicated schematically in Figure 2).
Whilst these crushed rock sands can be blended with natural
sands there are several factors to address: (i) BS-EN 12620
limits blends of crushed rock fines with natural sand to 50%
and (ii) the grading of crushed rock fines are highly
inconsistent and therefore it is difficult to establish “standard”
mix designs using aggregate from a designated source.
In summary it appears that there are general guidelines for grading of aggregates, however, the exact
grading and combination of aggregates should be estimated based on the properties of aggregates
such as shape, texture and packing density as well as on the experience of a particular aggregate’s
performance in concrete. The influence of aggregate grading on the performance of a concrete mix
appears to be the same regardless of the origin of the aggregate (i.e. natural or manufactured) and the
concrete industry state that achieving consistency in aggregate grading is one of the most important
factors in controlling and potentially reducing cement contents in concretes. Numerous studies
Figure 2. Schematic representation of
crushed rock fine grading compared to
standard grading envelopes
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 11 of 45��
indicate that it is the fines (<75µm) component (content and nature) of the fine aggregate that has a
greater influence on the fresh and hardened properties of the concrete than the grading alone and
therefore this will be explored in more detail in the next section.
2.3 Fines
Fines are defined as the material passing a 75µm sieve (BS EN 12620:2002). In European standards
sand and fines are separated at 63µm. These particles may be very fine sand, silt, clay or dust. The
presence of a limited quantity of fines is beneficial in a concrete mix as it fulfils a void-filling role,
and aids cohesion and finishability. Nevertheless, an excess of fines, especially fines comprising
clays, may harm the concrete properties as they increase water demand and reduce the aggregate-
cement paste bond both of which result in a reduction in hardened concrete strength (Newman and
Choo, 2003).
Research by Celik and Marar (1996) concluded that, as the percentage of fines in the concrete
increases, the consistency of the mix decreases, and this was observed via slump measurement with
the addition of fines. They also stated that as the fines content of fresh concrete increases, the
average air content of the fresh concrete decreases. This indicates that air entrainment can effectively
be used as a measurement of void content. The addition of dust also improves the impermeability of
concrete due to its pore blocking ability which impedes the movement of moisture and gas through
the matrix.
The quantity of filler or “dust” of crushed aggregate used in concrete mixes appears to be relatively
similar throughout a vast majority of the studies examined, which is of the order of 10-15%. Celik
and Marar (1996) showed in their research that a dust content of 0% to 5% resulted in a number of
voids between the cement paste and the aggregate particles, yielding lower compressive strength
values than specimens with 10% dust content. As the dust content exceeds 10%, the amount of fines
in the concrete increases until there is insufficient cement paste to coat all of the coarse and fine
aggregate particles, leading to a decrease in compressive strength. Similar results were also reported
by Li et al. (2009) as presented in Figure 3.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 12 of 45��
Figure 3. Effect of fines addition on a) low strength concrete and b) high strength concrete (figure reproduced
from Li et al., 2009)
Malhotra and Carette (1985) found that at a given water/cement ratio, concrete made with MFA
containing up to 7% microfines achieved compressive strengths equal to or higher than concrete
made with natural sand, reducing the void content of the aggregate, thereby lubricating the aggregate
system without increasing the water requirement of the mix.
In the case of natural sands, the requirements regarding the maximum amount of sub 75µm particles
are strictly related to controlling the presence of clays, but for MFAs/quarry fines, the significance is
quite different (Dumitru et al., 1999). The sub 75µm fraction resulting from the crushing process of
the quarry rocks is likely to have comparable composition with the parent rock. For good quality
hard rocks, the fines have the same mineralogy as the parent rocks, whereas for softer rocks, there
may be a certain tendency for “segregation” in which the “soft”/alteration components of the rocks
would be preferentially concentrated in the fines during the crushing process. It would seem
therefore that the type of processing and the rock mineralogy determines the level of fines which
may contain clays. Indeed Dumitru et al. (1999) stated that it is advisable to source supply of MFAs
from well established sources of aggregate and employ tests such as Methylene Blue Value (MBV)
for its performance. This also indicates that a high sub 75µm fraction for good quality manufactured
sands does not have to be restricted, and that mineralogical data is essential in assessing the
suitability of different aggregates and evaluating actual or potential durability problems (Dumitru et
al., 1999). Additionally Dumitru et al. recognised that fines levels up to 15% were possible and more
importantly that conventional concrete mixes may need some alterations to achieve the full benefits
of incorporating MFAs. These changes may be in the aggregate to sand ratio or admixture dosage.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 13 of 45��
It has been repeatedly demonstrated in the literature that it is possible to include a high level of filler
material within a mix, although it is understood that mix proportions may have to be changed and the
use of admixtures explored to compensate for the loss of consistency due to the higher particle
surface area and water demand associated with high fines contents.
2.4 Effects of absorption and water content of aggregate
Studies regarding the effect of water absorption of MFA on the fresh properties of a concrete mix
appear to focus exclusively on the use of coarse aggregates. However, it is suggested by the authors
that the findings of such studies can be equally applied to the use of manufactured fine aggregate in
concrete.
The water absorption of aggregate represents the water contained in aggregate in a saturated surface-
dry condition. Water content and water absorption are important for concrete mix design as they
influence the w/c ratio of concrete which, in turn, affects the consistency of the mix. Normally, it is
assumed that the aggregate is in a saturated and surface-dry state at the time of mixing concrete. For
aggregate which is in the air-dry or oven-dried condition, it is assumed that some water will be
absorbed from the concrete mix to bring the aggregate to a saturated state, decreasing the concrete
consistency in the process, therefore additional water is required to provide the necessary w/c ratio.
Moreover, when dry aggregate is used, the particles quickly become coated with cement paste
forming a barrier to the ingress of any mix water specifically added to the mix to ensure aggregate
saturation (Neville, 1995).
According to Poon et al. (2004) the moisture states of aggregate affect the change in slump of the
concrete in fresh condition. Oven-dried aggregates led to a higher initial slump than the aggregates in
the air-dried and saturated surface-dried state, as indicated in Figure 4. This was attributed to the
time dependent nature of aggregate absorption, resulting in mix water designated for absorption
remaining within the mix leading to higher values of consistency.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 14 of 45��
Figure 4. Changes of slump of concrete mixes with different type of coarse aggregate in different moisture
conditions (figure reproduced from Poon et al. 2004)
Typically, the absorption capacity between natural sand and MFA is different. This is due to the
higher specific surface area of the MFA which tends to be more angular with a rougher surface
texture, therefore more water is required to cover all particles in a concrete mixture. Also, the higher
absorption of MFA can be related to the process of its production, whereby as a result of the crushing
process particles may contain a high percentage of microcracks/fissures, therefore allowing
additional water to penetrate inside and, in turn, increase the total water content of the aggregate.
2.5 Aggregate Mineralogy
Aggregates with different mineralogy can produce concrete with various properties. The type of the
parent rock will influence the physical and chemical properties of the aggregate as well as particle
shape and texture if a crusher is employed to reduce its size. The mineralogical description of the
aggregates cannot be used alone to estimate whether it will produce a good concrete or not (Neville
1995). However, the chemical and mineralogical composition can be used as a tool to identify
minerals which might interfere with the hydration of cement or cause alkali-silica and alkali-
carbonate reactions. It can also be used to identify presence of clay minerals.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 15 of 45��
Aggregate particles might be covered by clay, silt or crushing dust coatings. These can inhibit the
bond between the aggregates and cement paste as well as increase the water demand. However, if the
coatings are physically and chemically stable and do not pose a threat to concrete properties, there is
no objection to using such aggregate (Neville 1995).
The effect of rock mineralogy upon concrete strength was examined in detail by Donza et al. (2002).
The study used granite, limestone and dolomite crushed sand with similar gradings at equal cement
content and water cement ratio in concrete mixes. They found that the compressive strength of
limestone and dolomite concretes was lower than concretes made with granite sand. This behaviour
was attributed to individual particle strength and to the different surface textures and shapes of
granite sand particles.
Results by Donza et al. (2002) also showed that concrete with crushed sand required an increase of
superplasticiser to obtain the same slump. It also presented a higher strength than the corresponding
natural sand concrete at all test ages, while its elastic modulus was lower at 28 days and was the
same after that. Studies on the development of hydration and mortar phase of concrete showed that
the increase of strength could be attributed to the improvement of the paste–fine aggregate transition
zone.
2.6 Specifications and tests for manufactured sands in UK
The current British European standard BS EN 12620:2002 for aggregate properties requires the
producer of the fine aggregate to declare the relevant aggregate test values and grading in prescribed
categories. This allows the customer to select aggregate for a particular application on the basis of its
physical characteristics. However, there are few specified limits included in the standard and as a
result PD 6682-1:2009 provides recommended limits for aggregates depending on the end use of
concrete in the UK.
Relevant tests for fine aggregates specified in BS EN 12620:2002 and recommended by PD6682-
1:2009 for use in UK are:
x Grading (BS EN 933-1).
x Fines content (BS EN 933-1).
x Particle density and water absorption (BS EN 1097-6).
x Bulk density (BS EN 1097-3).
x Chemical requirements (BS EN 1744-1).
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 16 of 45��
Sand Equivalency (SE) provides an indication of the percentage of fines (sub 63µm) contained
within a material whilst the Methylene Blue Test (MBV) gives an indication of the clay content of
these fines.
BS EN 12620:2002 specifies a number of methods by which fines can be assessed within fine
aggregate to be considered as non-harmful for use in concrete. Firstly, the total fines content of the
fine aggregate is less than 3 % or another predefined value according to the provisions valid in the
place of use of the aggregate. Secondly, the equivalence of performance with known satisfactory
aggregate is established or there is evidence of satisfactory use with no experience of problems.
Lastly there are country specific limits on the Sand Equivalent (SE) value and Methylene Blue test
value (MBV) when tested in accordance with their relevant BS EN standard. Additionally, PD 6682-
1:2009 recommends that crushed rock sands could contain up to 16% of fines and be considered non-
harmful provided that the materials have been processed. Another recommended option is evidence
of satisfactory use. No limits for SE and MBV are provided for the UK as these tests and their
interpretation are considered inaccurate.
With respect to grading there is no distinction between crushed and natural sand. Another point to
note is that there are no specifications for fine aggregate shape and texture in BS EN 12620:2002,
although limited provision is made in BS EN 933-6 for testing these characteristics. As discussed in
previous sections, these characteristics can influence the performance of concrete and some
guidelines would be beneficial in allowing quantitative evaluation of fine aggregate for expected
performance in a concrete mix.
3. Kayasand
In an attempt to reduce the undesirable and detrimental characteristics of MFA Japanese-based
KEMCO (Kotobuki Engineering & Manufacturing Co) have developed a new dry sand
manufacturing system. The KEMCO V7, illustrated in Figure 5, plant merges the conventional VSI
crusher with a centrifugal attrition chamber in order to produce Kayasand; a better shaped and
graded fine aggregate with controllable amounts of filler dust. There are two elements of the
KEMCO V7 that make it unique in comparison to other crushing machine available on the market.
Firstly, the quarry waste material is fed into a crusher chamber, containing a milling function
designed so that all particles are subjected to multiple impacts and to help ensure that particles within
the normally deficient range of 150ȝm-1mm are produced. The particles then move to a classifying
system using fans to separate particles based on their weight, which allows oversize particles to be
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 17 of 45��
recirculated back to the crusher to undergo further
processing. This facility also allows accurate control of
the particle grading, particularly of the larger particles at
the top end of the grading curve. From the air screen the
particles are moved either to the mixer (finished
product) or to the dust collector unit, with the potential
to return a proportion of fillers, of varying gradations
back to the mixer to create the final Kayasand product.
By altering various parameters, it is possible to produce
a consistent sand product to any reasonable
specification.
Compared to the product of conventional sand
manufacturing processes, Kayasand is, according to the
company, in the position of completely substituting natural sea or river bed dredged sand in concrete
and mortar, yielding similar or even higher mechanical properties (Pettingell, 2008). A number of
studies have been completed at Cardiff University that support this view for a range of different
concrete products, including mortar, self compacting concrete and extrudable concrete (Parton 2012,
Chiew 2012, Volodskojs 2012 and Kroh 2010). Furthermore, these studies demonstrated that
concretes made with Kayasand also had similar durability indices. According to Pilegis et al. (2012)
Kayasand MFA can be used as a replacement for natural sand in concrete. In this study Kayasand has
successfully replaced granite and basalt sands in concrete giving higher compressive strength at the
same water/cement ratio as natural sand but with a reduction in concrete consistency.
4. Laboratory Testing Programme
A description of the experimental procedures adopted for the studies is reported in this section. The
quality and preparation of the main materials used for each concrete mix, the mixing and casting
details and the curing regimes used during these studies are also described. Details of trial mixes are
reported in quarterly reports 1-4 which have been reproduced in Appendix 1. Industrial input was
sought when developing mix proportions and target slump ranges. The laboratory testing programme
is divided into two stages. The first stage uses a consistent w/c ratio for each sand which was
selected on the basis of obtaining an S2 slump in the –B (approximately 3%) Kayasand grading. The
Figure 5. V7 Dry Sand-Making System
(Figure reproduced from Pettingell 2008)
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 18 of 45��
second stage employs a consistent w/c ratio of 0.55 for all sands and achieving an S2 slump through
the use of a water reducing admixture.
4.1 Materials
The cement used was CEM I 52.5 N conforming to EN 197-1, supplied by CEMEX. The coarse
aggregate used was crushed limestone 4/20mm. In this study marine dredged natural sand was used
as a control and it is denoted by the letter N in the tables and figures in this report. The Kayasand
sand was processed from 0/8 mm crusher dusts (FEED) taken from four quarries located in the UK,
these were: Taff’s Well Limestone (L), Gilfach Gritstone (S), Duntilland Basalt (B) and Glensanda
Granite (G). Properties of the 0/4mm parts of the crusher dusts were determined via fine aggregate
classification tests. The crusher dust, or feed material, is referred to as X-FEED in this report where
X is the rock aggregate identifier previously given. From the crusher dusts a number of sands with
different particle size distributions (gradings) were produced. These gradings for each rock type are
denoted -A to -D (or -E where appropriate) depending on the sub 63 µm particle content. For
example, B-A is a basalt sand with the least fines content, whereas B-D is a basalt sand with the
highest fines content. The fines content of each of the mixes is reported in Table 1.
4.2 Fine aggregate classification tests
A series of characterisation tests were performed on the fine aggregate as outlined in the following
sections of this report.
4.2.1 Grading
Dry sieving was performed in the laboratories at Cardiff University according to standard BS EN
933-1 (2012) and the results compared to the KEMCO output reports. Dry sieving was also
completed for the coarse aggregates employed in the study. Research by Hudson (2011) indicates
that it is best to perform a wet sieve analysis for fine aggregates. Most specifications call for rigid
tolerances on the finest size fractions. If these size fractions are indeed important, which they are
with respect to sub 63um and the amount of deleterious fines, then wet sieve analysis has been
shown to better quantify this material in the sample. Therefore, additional wet sieving was performed
at the Hanson laboratories.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 19 of 45��
4.2.2 Methylene Blue Test, Rapid Methylene Blue Test and Sand Equivalence Test
MBV and SE tests were used to assess the presence of potentially deleterious fines e.g. clays in the
fine aggregate which could adversely affect the fresh and hardened properties of the concrete. The
MBV and SE tests were performed on the 0/2mm fine aggregate fraction according to BS EN 933-9
and BS EN 933-8 respectively, however a brief overview of the tests is provided in the following
paragraphs.
The MBV test was undertaken by adding methylene blue dye to a sample of sand in suspension and
measuring the quantity of dye absorbed via observing the excess released from the particle surface
when in contact with filter paper. The principle of the test is that clay minerals adsorb basic dyes
from aqueous solutions, therefore the greater the quantity of dye absorbed the greater the quantity of
potentially harmful fines present. However the interpretation of the test results is often subjective and
as a result significant variation in the results may be observed within the same sample set when
examined by a number of different researchers. The RMBV test, developed by Grace Construction
Products eliminates this problem as well as reducing the testing time. The test sample was mixed
with a methylene blue solution of known concentration, shaken for a fixed time and an aliquot of the
suspension was filtered. Afterwards a known volume of the filtrate was diluted with a set amount of
water and a pre-calibrated colorimeter was used to estimate the concentration of the solution. This
allowed direct estimation of the absorbed amount of methylene blue solution eliminating possible
errors due to human judgement. The RMBV test was used in this study to compare the results
obtained by the two methods and evaluate the feasibility of the new method.
The SE test provides a rapid assessment of the proportion of clay or plastic fines in the 0/2 mm
fraction of a fine aggregate. A small quantity of flocculating solution and a measured volume of oven
dried fine aggregate are poured into a measuring cylinder. Agitation loosens the clay like coatings
from the coarser particles and irrigation with an additional flocculating agent forces the clay-like
material into suspension above the fine aggregate. The sample is allowed to settle for a twenty-
minute period and the heights of the columns of clay and sand are measured. The sand equivalent is
reported as the ratio of the height of the sediment expressed as a percentage of the total height.
4.2.3 New Zealand Flow Cone (NZFC)
The NZFC (NZS 3111 Section 19) test evaluates sand flow and un-compacted voids ratio. It is
widely used within New Zealand and, to a lesser extent, in other countries as a measure of sand
characteristics. It involves a fixed volume of sand passing through a cone which is collected in a
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 20 of 45��
container of known volume whilst the flow time is measured. Using the density of the sand particles
the un-compacted voids ratio can be calculated. The test result is affected by the grading of the
sample, by the particle shape and by the surface texture of the particles. The flow of the material is
mostly affected by the shape and surface texture of the particles while the voids result is mostly
influenced by their grading and shape (Thomas et al. 2007). As such it is an indirect measure of
shape and texture and a standard envelope has been developed for natural sands based on the
experiences of the New Zealand authorities regarding the performance of various natural sands in
concrete. Although the British European Standards EN 933-6 and BS EN 1097-6 evaluate the flow
time and un-compacted voids ratio, they do not provide the opportunity to do that simultaneously, as
found in the NZFC test.
Figure 6. NZFC Flow time envelope (Figure reproduced from Goldsworthy, 2005)
The NZFC is a rapid test that does not require sophisticated equipment and experienced operator as
opposed to visual shape and texture estimation techniques. The results are plotted on the diagram
shown in Figure 6 with reference to a standard envelope developed in the 1980s by the New Zealand
Ministry of Works who tested a variety of sands and measured their influence on the properties of
fresh concrete. It was concluded that sand that lies within the prescribed envelope consistently
produces good results.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 21 of 45��
4.3 Mix Proportions
4.3.1 Mix proportions Stage 1
Mix proportions were established after a number of trial mixes and with consultation with industrial
collaborators. For each quarry a trial mix using 100% Kayasand with a fines content of 2.8% (X-B)
was made adjusting the water content to reach a slump of 50-90mm (industry designated S2 Slump).
Other mixes comprising the same quarry material were then made using the established w/c ratio and
the resulting slump for each mix recorded. Acknowledging the fact that the natural sand has a
significantly different water demand to the Kayasand for each quarry there were two control mixes,
the first with a 70±20mm slump and the second with the same w/c ratio as used in the Kayasand
mixtures. The slump control mixture in this report is denoted as N whereas the other controls are N-
X, where X again represents the aggregate identifier. Mixes were also cast using the FEED material
from each quarry. These mixes were again proportioned such that only the w/c ratio was adjusted to
obtain an S2 slump. The FEED mixes used 100% of the crusher dust as the replacement for natural
sand and therefore it should be highlighted that whilst this has been performed in this study to
demonstrate the benefits of the Kayasand processing technique the usual practice is to blend the
crusher dust material with natural sand for use in concrete. The mix proportions used in the first
stage of this study are presented in Table 1.
It is recognised that the cement content of 350kg/m3 is towards the upper end of the limits generally
used in industry. To maintain the same mix proportions throughout the study required this level of
cement together with a coarse to fine aggregate ratio of 1:0.72 in order to achieve workable mixes in
each of the different concrete mixes. Parallel work undertaken by industrial collaborators has used a
range of cement contents to demonstrate the effectiveness of Kayasand as a 100% replacement for
natural sand in concrete and the reader is directed to their investigations for further information.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 22 of 45��
Table 1. Stage 1 concrete mix proportions at SSD conditions
MIX CEM kg/m3
CA+ kg/m3
FA* kg/m3
WATER kg/m3
W/C FA/ CA
FINES CONTENT
% of FA N 350 1040 753 167 0.48 0.42 1.0
G-FEED 350 1040 753 231 0.66 0.42 10.0 N-G 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 1.0 G-A 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 2.0 G-B 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 2.8 G-C 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 5.1 G-D 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 6.5 G-E 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 9.0
B-FEED 350 1040 753 260 0.87 0.42 13 N-B 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 1.0 B-A 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 1.0 B-B 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 2.9 B-C 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 5.1 B-D 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 7.4
L-FEED 350 1040 753 215 0.61 0.42 12 N-L 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 1.0 L-A 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 2.8 L-B 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 4.9 L-C 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 7.1 L-D 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 9.0
S-FEED 350 1040 753 262 0.748 0.42 18 N-S 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 1.0 S-A 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 3.5 S-B 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 5.0 S-C 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 7.0 S-D 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 9.0
+CA – coarse aggregate; *FA – fine aggregate
4.3.2 Mix proportions Stage 2
In the second stage the w/c ratios were limited to 0.55 based on the maximum water cement ratio
recommend in BS EN 206-1 for a range of typical exposure classes for normal strength concrete (in
the range 30-60N/mm2). A mid-range water reducing admixture (WRDA 90 plasticiser) was then
used in the mix to target a 70mm slump (in the S2 slump range). Stage one demonstrated that the
limestone Kayasand mixes could achieve an S2 slump at 0.55 water/cement ratio without the use of
plasticiser, therefore in the second stage a lower water/cement ratio of 0.50 was employed for this
rock type alone. No mixes were cast using the FEED material in this stage and the natural sand
control was also made with a 0.55 water/cement ratio. The mix proportions used in the second stage
are presented in Table 2. Volumes of plasticiser were limited by the maximum dosage recommended
by the admixture manufacturer of 800ml per 100kg of cement (2.75l/m3). In some instances this was
exceeded in order to achieve an S2 slump. Again the reader is directed to the industrial collaborators’
investigations for additional mixes made with plasticiser.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 23 of 45��
Table 2. Stage 2 Table 2. Concrete mix proportions at SSD conditions
MIX CEM kg/m3
CA+ kg/m3
FA* kg/m3
WATER kg/m3
W/C FA/ CA
PLASTICISER l/m3
FINES CONTENT
% of FA N 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0 1.0
G-A 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0 2.0 G-B 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0 2.8 G-C 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 1.25 5.1 G-D 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0.62 6.5 G-E 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 1 9.0 B-A 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 1.0 B-B 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 2.9 B-C 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 3.3 5.1 B-D 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 3.3 7.4 L-A 350 1040 753 175 0.50 0.42 1.63 2.8 L-B 350 1040 753 175 0.50 0.42 1.1 4.9 L-C 350 1040 753 175 0.50 0.42 1.35 7.1 L-D 350 1040 753 175 0.50 0.42 1.1 9.0 S-A 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0.45 3.5 S-B 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 5.0 S-C 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 7.0 S-D 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 9.0
+CA – coarse aggregate; *FA – fine aggregate
4.4 Fresh Concrete Tests
Fresh concrete was tested for slump according to BS EN 12350-2:2009, air entrapment (BS1881:
Part 106) and plastic density, although this was limited to the Kayasand and natural mixes and not
the FEED mixes.
4.5 Hardened Concrete Specimen Numbers and Tests
In order to perform compressive strength tests ten 100mm cubes were cast in each mix (six for the
FEED mixes). These cubes were tested at 1, 7 and 28 days according to BS EN 12390-3:2009. For
flexural strength three 100mm x 100mm x 500mm beams were cast from each mix and tested at 28
days according to BS EN 12390-5:2009. The concrete specimens were de-moulded 16 to 20 hours
after casting and placed in water tanks at a constant temperature of 20qC until the test age was
reached.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 24 of 45��
5. Results and Discussion 5.1 Classification tests 5.1.1 Grading
Figure 7 (a) to (d) show the particle size distributions for manufactured sands and corresponding
crusher dust 0-4 mm fractions used in the sand production. It can be seen that all manufactured sands
irrespective of the parent rock yield similar particle size distributions with sub 63 ȝm particle content
ranging from 1% to 9 % and all fall within the grading envelope specified by BS EN 12620.
Furthermore, gradings that contain higher levels of fines have a greater number of particles in the
0.3mm to 1 mm range than the feed crusher dust fractions as indicated by steeper gradients of the
particle size distribution curves in that region. The 0.3mm to 1mm fraction is usually deemed to be
deficient in crusher dusts, therefore, requiring a blend with natural sand to comply with standards
and perform adequately in concrete mixtures, as identified previously in Section 2.2. The particle
size distribution results for the FEED materials indicate that the crusher dust gradings generally lie
towards the lower limit of the grading envelope. It should be highlighted here that these results were
obtained from small samples of crusher dust obtained from stockpiles at each of the quarries at a
different time to when the raw material was selected for shipment and due to this direct
improvements in grading as a result of the processing technique cannot be readily identified between
this material and the final product produced by KEMCO. However, during the processing of the sand
KEMCO did perform a series of grading tests on the FEED and resulting Kayasand and these tests
clearly showed an improvement in size distribution such that all results conformed to the BS EN
12620 grading envelope. KEMCO’s results will not be discussed further in this report but for
completeness, extracts of their test report results are provided in Appendix 2. Particle size
distribution tests were also performed in the Cardiff University laboratory for the coarse aggregate
and natural control sand as indicated in Figure 7(e).
The Kayasand product yield from the crushing processes is between 66% to 87% depending on the
rock mineralogy and level of fines (higher yield occurs when more fines are included in the final
sand product) and therefore significant levels of filler are still produced alongside the final Kayasand
product. The use of this filler in geoenvironmental applications is the subject of a parallel study
being undertaken in the Cardiff School of Engineering.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 25 of 45��
(a) Granite sand (b) Basalt sand
(c) Limestone sand (d) Gritstone sand
(e) Coarse aggregate and natural sand
Figure 7. Particle size distribution curves for Kayasand material
5.1.2 Methylene Blue and Sand Equivalence Test Results
Standard and rapid methylene blue results and sand equivalent results are presented in Table 3.
Marine dredged sand had the lowest MBV and highest SE value indicating a very clean sand. This is
as expected since natural sand from a dredged source typically has less than 1% fines as a result of
them being washed out of the sand during the dredging and screening process. The limestone has
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 26 of 45��
consistently low MBV across all sand gradings and FEED material, indicating a clean sand with
insignificant levels of deleterious fines.
Table 1 also demonstrates a distinct difference in the MBV between the FEED material and the final
Kayasand products, with the processing procedure reducing the MBV value by over 50% for the
granite, basalt and sandstone aggregates. It can therefore be concluded that during the processing a
proportion of clay sized particles (<2 µm) has been removed from the material as part of the filler
component lowering the MBV value of the sand, as previously reported by Dumitru et al. (1999).
This is beneficial for the Kayasand product and its potential use as 100% replacement for natural
sand particularly in instances in which there are limits placed on the MBV that may be met through
the Kayasand processing system. However, further investigation is recommended if the Kayasand
filler component of certain rock types is intended for use in concrete, especially since the MBV
associated with the filler may still be at elevated levels.
Table 3. Fine aggregate classification results
SAMPLE MBV GMBV SE NZFC Voids
NZFC Flow time
WA24 ȡssd ȡod ȡa
(g MB soln/kg
sand) (g MB soln/kg
sand) (%) (s) (%) (Mg/m3) (Mg/m3) (Mg/m3)
N 0.24 0.35 94 37.9 20.9 1.04 2.66 2.63 2.71 G-FEED 0.77 0.94 50 42.4 29.1 0.58 2.64 2.62 2.66
G-A 0.39 0.42 80 45.2 25.3
0.58 2.63 2.61 2.65 G-B 0.40 0.5 74 44.6 24.4 G-C 0.47 0.71 71 43.7 23.9 G-D 0.50 0.88 70 43.6 23.4 G-E 0.63 0.9 69 42.7 23.9
B-FEED 5.36 6.16 48 45.7 36.7 1.92 2.89 2.83 3 B-A 2.10 2.3 73 45.8 25.7
1.67 2.91 2.87 3.01 B-B 2.29 2.54 61 44.5 23.2 B-C 2.64 2.97 60 43.7 22.5 B-D 2.90 3.75 58 43.7 22.3
L-FEED 0.40 0.65 65 42.4 32.4 0.62 2.90 2.85 2.87 L-A 0.47 0.44 72 43.6 26.3
0.45 2.89 2.85 2.86 L-B 0.40 0.44 71 42.1 23.9 L-C 0.40 0.44 71 41.9 23.4 L-D 0.37 0.45 67 41.0 23.0
S-FEED 3.19 4.05 27 45.9 28.6 1.53 2.76 2.64 2.68 S-A 1.40 1.73 31 41.8 23.3
0.98 2.64 2.57 2.60 S-B 1.48 1.84 30 41.6 22.3 S-C 1.50 1.86 28 40.8 21.3 S-D 1.63 2.07 27 40.1 20.7
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 27 of 45��
y = 1.1618x + 0.0741R² = 0.9899
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Rap
id M
ethy
lene
Blu
e Va
lue
(g/K
g sa
nd)
Methylene Blue Value (g/Kg of sand ) Figure 8. Correlation between RMBV and MBV values for all samples
It can be seen in Table 3 that the sand equivalent (SE) values have increased for the processed quarry
dusts. The SE values are the highest for manufactured sands with the least fines and gradually
decrease with increasing fines content, a similar inverse trend to that observed in the MBV values,
which can be attributed to the removal of clay sized particles during the manufacturing process.
One objective of the project was to compare the Grace RMBV test with the MBV standard test. This
was done for each of the four rock mineralogies for all Kayasand gradations and crusher dust
material. It can be seen in Figure 8 that the test results obtained using the Rapid test have an
excellent correlation (R2 = 0.99) to the test results obtained via the standard method. The use of the
RMBV is therefore recommended for use in all future tests as it eliminates any inconsistency
associated with the interpretation of the end point of the standard test.
5.1.3 NZFC Test Results
Figure 9 and Table 3 presents the results from the NZFC test. New Zealand specification NZS 3121
has been used as the envelope as justified in Section 4.2.3. The control sand falls comfortably within
the specification envelope as anticipated. The FEED material for each aggregate type lies either on or
outside of the envelope suggesting that it suffers from either poor shape and/or grading physical
properties. The flow time has been greatly reduced for the Kayasands; at least 4 seconds for granite
sands, 11 seconds for basalt sands, 6 seconds for limestone sands and 5 seconds for sandstone sands.
This suggests that the particle shape for all aggregates has been modified and after processing it is
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 28 of 45��
less angular and flaky. Visual inspection suggested that the basalt and sandstone crusher dust
particles were mostly angular and flaky whereas the Kayasand particles were mostly rounded
without sharp edges, yielding a reduction in flow time and in voids content. Similarly granite and
limestone FEED particles were highly angular and flaky, however the Kayasand particles were
mostly cubical with sharp edges but without flaky particles, which resulted in a reduction in flow
time although there was associated reduction in voids content.
The general trends that can be observed in Figure 9 are (i) the voids content decreases as the quantity
of fines increases due to an increased degree of particle packing and (ii) the flow time decreases with
increasing fines content. The latter is an interesting result and it is suggested that this is due to the
lubricating effect of the fine particles, as reported previously by Jackson and Brown (1996).
In summary the processing of the sand via the KEMCO system has optimised the grading and shape
of the Kayasand particles and provides additional justification for their use as 100% natural sand
replacement in concrete.
B-FEED
G-FEED
G-A
G-BG-C
G-D
G-EB-A
B-BB-CB-D
L-A
L-BL-C
L-D S-A
S-B
S-CS-D
L-FEED
S-FEED
N
18.0
20.0
22.0
24.0
26.0
28.0
30.0
32.0
34.0
36.0
38.0
36% 38% 40% 42% 44% 46% 48% 50%
Flow
Tim
e (s
)
Voids (%)
Granite Sand
Basalt sand
Limestone sand
Sandstone sand
NZS 3121 specification envelope
Figure 9. NZFC voids and flow time results for all FEED and Kayasand material
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 29 of 45��
5.1.4 Water Absorption Results and Particle Density
The results from the water absorption tests are reported in Table 3. The test was performed on the
4mm to 63µm fraction of the sand and therefore any differences in the water absorption between the
FEED material and the Kayasand product are unlikely to be due to the difference in mass of the sub
63µm particles in the sample. It is acknowledged by the authors that although the FEED material was
washed over a 63µm sieve this may not have separated all of the sub 63µm particles from the sand
and therefore the FEED material for all aggregate may have contained sufficient levels of fines, some
containing clays, to influence the water absorption level. The water absorption tests on Kayasand
were performed on the product prior to incorporation of the preduster (additional filler) and therefore
the quantity of sub 63µm particles fines in the sand is significantly lower than that of the FEED
material. This alone may be responsible for the lower water absorption levels reported for the
Kayasand sands. Additionally, the V7 process may influence the water absorption in the following
ways (i) it air-scrubs the particles as well as rounds them therefore removing clay coatings and
reducing the specific surface area and that in turn yields lower absorption values and (ii) the crushing
process breaks particles via areas of weakness (internal pores and cracks) therefore reducing the
volume in the sand particles which can be occupied by water.
The basalt and sandstone aggregates had the highest water absorption values of all of the aggregates
due to the presence of water absorbing deleterious fines (clays etc) in the fines proportion of the
aggregate. The Granite aggregate had the lowest and most consistent water absorption between the
FEED and Kayasand materials perhaps due to the inherently low absorption of the parent rock and
the greater removal of the fines component during the processing procedure.
5.2 Fresh and Hardened Concrete Tests
5.2.1 Fresh Concrete Properties
The slump test was employed to give an idea of concrete consistency, i.e. its ability to be mixed,
placed and compacted. The results presented in Figure 10 and in Table 4 demonstrate a general trend
of decreasing slump as the fines content increases as a result of an associated increase in the specific
surface area of the sands. However, there are a number of exceptions to this trend, namely mixes B-
B, S-C and L-C in particular, where the slump values are higher than the expected trend. This may be
due to a lubricating effect of the fines, as observed previously by Malhotra and Carette (1985) in
fresh concrete mixes, that occurs as a result of the achievement of optimum void packing with
additional fines providing lubrication before a further addition of fines results in an excessive water
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 30 of 45��
demand and insufficient paste coverage and an associated reduction in slump. This effect may only
be apparent in some of the aggregate types due to their particle shape and gradation.
Natural sand required the least water to cement ratio (0.48) to reach the S2 slump, as a result of the
intrinsic roundness of the sand particles as well as lack of fines which have usually been washed out
during the dredging process. Basalt and sandstone sands required higher w/c ratio (0.67) than granite
and limestone sands (0.58 and 0.55 respectively) to achieve an S2 slump. This was due to presence
of clay particles in the sands as indicated by the MBV test discussed previously.
As a result of controlling the w/c ratio for each aggregate via the Kayasand grading –B several mixes
fell outside of the S2 slump range. This is not envisaged to be a concern however, and compressive
strength results will be reported with reference to the values of slump in the following section.
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Slum
p (m
m)
Percentage of sub 63 micron particles of Kayasand (%)
Granite sands w/c 0.58 Basalt sands w/c 0.67
Sanstone sands w/c 0.67 Limestone sands w/c 0.55
Figure 10. Influence of fines content on concrete consistency�
Fin
al R
epo
rt
Pa
ge
| 31
of 4
5��
Tab
le 4
. Sta
ge 1
and
sta
ge 2
fres
h an
d ha
rden
ed c
oncr
ete
resu
lts
Stag
e 1
Stag
e 2
Mix
w
/c
ratio
Sl
ump
(m
m)
Com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
(N
/mm
2 )
Flex
ural
st
reng
th
N/m
m2
w/c
ra
tio
Slum
p
(mm
)
Com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
(N
/mm
2 ) Fl
exur
al
stre
ngth
N
/mm
2
1 da
y 7
day
28 d
ay
28 d
ay
1 da
y 7
day
28 d
ay
28 d
ay
N
0.48
95
23
.8
48.0
58
.9
6.1
0.55
C
olla
pse
13.2
39
50
.5
5.3
G-F
EED
0.
66
80
12.5
30
.3
39.1
-
- -
- -
- -
N-G
0.
58
Col
laps
e 13
.5
36.0
48
.7
5.4
- -
- -
- -
G-A
0.
58
120
17.6
43
.5
52.2
5.
6 0.
55
65
16.4
44
.4
53
5.7
G-B
0.
58
80
17.0
40
.2
49.9
5.
6 0.
55
67.5
20
.1
46.1
59
.2
5.8
G-C
0.
58
80
17.9
40
.4
50.1
6.
0 0.
55
70
20.7
46
.1
55.2
5.
9 G
-D
0.58
60
19
.3
42.2
52
.3
5.8
0.55
60
19
.4
48.3
58
.6
5.5
G-E
0.
58
60
16.6
40
.6
48.1
5.
4 0.
55
85
16.6
47
.8
59.2
4.
7 B
-FEE
D
0.72
70
9.
3 25
.8
35.5
-
- -
- -
- -
N-B
0.
67
Col
laps
e 9.
6 26
.2
35.9
4.
6 -
- -
- -
- B
-A
0.67
70
11
.8
30.4
41
.7
5.3
0.55
60
14
.5
48.2
57
.6
6.1
B-B
0.
67
80
12.9
31
.3
43.7
5.
5 0.
55
30
14.6
49
.2
60.5
6.
4 B
-C
0.67
62
.5
13.0
33
.1
42.7
5.
4 0.
55
30
17.9
48
.4
59.4
6.
1 B
-D
0.67
47
.5
13.2
35
.2
45.6
5.
6 0.
55
25
16.5
48
.3
58.5
5.
9 L-
FEED
0.
61
60
18.5
38
.0
50.2
-
- -
- -
- -
N-L
0.
55
Col
laps
e 13
.2
39
50.5
5.
3 -
- -
- -
- L-
A
0.55
90
18
.0
44.3
55
.7
6.6
0.50
90
23
.9
52.5
64
.3
6.1
L-B
0.
55
70
21.2
47
.8
58.0
6.
7 0.
50
90
20
49.7
61
.1
6.4
L-C
0.
55
82.5
22
.7
46.2
56
.2
6.1
0.50
75
23
.2
51.1
63
6.
1 L-
D
0.55
65
21
.4
46.9
56
.6
6.0
0.50
65
20
47
.1
59.9
6.
8 S-
FEED
0.
75
80
8.2
23.3
31
.3
- -
- -
- -
- N
-S
0.67
C
olla
pse
8.1
24.4
34
.9
4.6
- -
- -
- -
S-A
0.
67
85
12.7
34
.5
41.4
5.
2 0.
55
60
14.8
44
.3
55
5.4
S-B
0.
67
75
14.9
31
.4
43.3
5.
6 0.
55
50
19.8
43
.8
55.3
6
S-C
0.
67
97.5
14
.7
32.8
42
.8
5.5
0.55
50
18
.4
43.2
55
.6
5.4
S-D
0.
67
75
12.1
30
.5
39.9
5.
2 0.
55
45
17.2
41
.7
53
5.9
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 32 of 45��
Several qualitative observations were recorded during the laboratory investigations. For the
Kayasand mixes with the lowest fines contents (-A mixes) and the lower water cement ratios (0.55
and 0.58) the concretes were particularly harsh and difficult to finish, primarily due to the lack of
fines. For the limestone and granite Kayasands the mixes became easier to finish and work with an
increasing fines content ( –B and –C gradings). The basalt and sandstone mixes were easy to finish,
but tended to be very cohesive at the high fines contents.
5.2.2 Hardened Concrete Properties
5.2.2.1 Stage 1 results
The compressive strength results presented in Table 4 are the mean of either 3 or 4 specimens. The
results are given in full in Appendix 3, along with the coefficient of variation for the mean results.
This coefficient of variation was a maximum of 4.5% for the 1 and 7 day Kayasand tests and 7.4%
for the 28 day Kayasand tests (7.4% is associated with the L-D result, else a maximum of 3.9%). The
coefficients of variation associated with the Kayasand tensile strength results did not exceed 8.2%.
These levels of variation are generally within the accepted limits for such tests.
The natural sand mix has the highest compressive strength of all mixes at all ages, as reported in
Table 4. It should be recognised that this mix is made of high quality fine aggregate, which has not
been blended with crusher dust as is usual practice in industry. Therefore, whilst it will be used as the
control mix in this study to which other mixes will be benchmarked, the focus will be on achieving
viable concrete mixes that can be mixed, placed, compacted and finished adequately through 100%
replacement of natural sand with Kayasand. On this note, the fact that the natural sand mix had the
lowest w/c ratio of all mixes then it is not surprising that this mix yielded the highest compressive
strength. Further control mixes made using the fixed w/c ratio for each aggregate assist in confirming
the performance of the Kayasand mixes. However, many of these control mixes suffered from a
collapse of slump due to the combination of spherical natural sand particles and higher water
contents (up to 40% higher in the most extreme case compared to the S2 natural sand mix) required
to achieve S2 slump in the –B Kayasand sands. These aggregate specific control mixes were still cast
in order to determine the compressive and tensile strengths, although the mixes performed only
marginally better than the FEED mixes in each instance and would in fact be discarded in industry
due to non compliance with consistency specifications with accompanying visual observations of
segregation and bleeding.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 33 of 45��
Granite Kayasand concretes at 28 days reached compressive strength of 48.1 to 52.3 N/mm2, lower
than the natural sand mix but still acceptable as viable normal strength concrete mixes. The G-D and
G-A mixes achieved the highest compressive strengths. This can be attributed to the moderately high
level of fines (6.5%) fines in the former and the good consistency (120mm) and dispersion of mix
components in the latter. However, if the granite sands are considered as one data set, the resulting
coefficient of variation is 3.5% which reflects the typical variation inherent in compressive strength
testing. Therefore, in this instance the evidence suggests that all granite Kayasand gradings perform
equally well although it would seem prudent in light of what has been reported in the literature
(Celik and Marar 1996) to recommend sands with higher fines contents (G-D and G–E) to aid a
reduction in permeability and enhance the durability properties of a concrete. The performance of the
granite Kayasand sands exceeds that of the G-FEED mix and demonstrates an improvement in
particle shape and size via the V7 process, enabling the use of lower w/c ratios to achieve the same
consistency. Comparable compressive strength was achieved by the N-G mix, although as noted
previously this result should be treated with caution as a result of slump collapse and segregation of
the mix during casting.
The compressive strength of the basalt Kayasand concretes was in the range of 41.7 N/mm2 for B-A
to 45.6 N/mm2 for the B-D mix. All basalt mixes surpassed the strength of the w/c ratio control N-B
mix and B-FEED mix, the latter having a w/c ratio 7% higher than the basalt Kayasand concretes but
a compressive strength 22% lower than the mean strength of the basalt Kayasand concretes. This
again provides a clear indication of the improvements afforded to the Kayasand from the V7 process,
allowing reductions in water content to compensate for improved particle shape and grading with an
associated enhancement in compressive strength. As reported for the granite Kayasands, the basalt
Kayasands, when considered as one data set have a compressive strength mean of 43.4N/mm2 and a
coefficient of variation of 3.8%. This is again within the 5% limit normally quoted as an acceptable
level of variation in the compressive strength of concrete. The basalt Kayasand concretes have
compressive strengths 35% lower than the natural sand mix and this can be attributed to the higher
w/c ratio required by the basalt mixes to achieve an S2 slump. There is again no clear evidence of
higher fines contents resulting in higher compressive strength values at 28 days. Whilst this may
imply that a basalt sand with any of the gradations may be suitable for a concrete mix, caution should
be exercised when recommending basalt Kayasands with high levels of fines. This is due to the
deterioration in the level of slump as a result of the increased water demand from the fines and the
associated detrimental effect the clay content of these fines may have on the hardened concrete. Such
an effect may explain the lower rate of gain in compressive strength between 1 and 7 days compared
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 34 of 45��
to the other Kayasand concretes. However, careful attention to mix proportioning together with
admixtures that address the presence of clays may be employed to achieve specified fresh and
hardened concrete properties.
Limestone Kayasand concretes yielded compressive strengths from 55.7 to 58.0 N/mm2 which are
comparable to the natural sand control mix with a strength of 58.9 N/mm2 and a 12% lower w/c ratio.
Furthermore, the limestone Kayasand concretes also performed better than the L-FEED and N-L
mixes again indicating that the shape of the Kayasand particles positively affects the compressive
strength of the concrete. When considered as one set of data the mean compressive strength of the
limestone Kayasand concretes is 56.6N/mm2 with a coefficient of variation of just 1.7%. Although
the slump values decrease with increasing fines content, they still lie within the S2 range and
therefore there are no apparent limitations in specifying the Kayasand mix with the highest fines
content (L-D). The results of the limestone Kayasand concretes provide encouraging evidence that at
the same w/c ratio and with the addition of consistency aids that the compressive strength of a
limestone Kayasand concrete mix could easily surpass that of a natural sand mix. Conversely to
target the same 28 day strength at equal w/c ratio, there is evidence that potential reductions in
cement content could be made in the Kayasand mix, the magnitude of which is suggested as an area
worthy of future investigation. It is believed that such conclusions can also be extended to the other
Kayasands employed in this study.
The concretes containing sandstone Kayasand had compressive strengths in the range 39.9-43.3
N/mm2, which is similar to the basalt Kayasand concretes. Such a result is not surprising since both
Kayasands had high MBV values, yielding a mix with a high water demand and a subsequent
reduction in compressive strength as a result of the need to provide sufficient water to meet the
slump range requirement. All Kayasand sandstone concretes surpassed the strength of the w/c ratio
control N-S mix and S-FEED mix, with the latter having a w/c ratio approximately 12% higher and a
compressive strength 34% lower than that of the sandstone Kayasand concretes. As observed in the
other mixes there was no significant influence of fines content on the compressive strength.
Moreover, there was no deterioration in consistency between the S-B mix, on which the water
cement ratio was based, and the S-D mix with 9% fines. The same concerns that were raised for the
basalt mixes regarding the potential presence of clays particles equally applies to the sandstone
sands, particularly as the fines content increases.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 35 of 45��
5.2.2.2 Stage 2 Results
The compressive strength results for stage 2 presented in Table 4 are again the mean of either 3 or 4
specimens. The results are given in full in Appendix 4, along with the coefficient of variation for the
mean results. This coefficient of variation was a maximum of 6.4% for the 1 and 7 day Kayasand
tests and 5.5% (L-A result) for the 28 day Kayasand tests. The coefficients of variation associated
with the Kayasand tensile strength results did not exceed 6.8%. These levels of variation are
generally within the accepted limits for such tests.
The granite Kayasand concretes at 28 days reached compressive strengths in excess of the Stage 2
natural sand control, although it is acknowledged that at w/c ratio of 0.55 the slump of the control
mixed was recorded as a collapse. However, the granite Kayasand concretes with higher levels of
fines (G-D and G-E) performed as well as the natural sand control mix for Stage 1 which did record
an S2 slump. This supports the use of Kayasands with the maximum level of fines as suggested in
the stage 1 results. The level of plasticiser used within these mixes is within the manufacturer’s
stated dosage limits, and therefore there may be potential to enhance the compressive strength further
by reducing the w/c ratio, or maintain the compressive strength level by reducing both the w/c ratio
and cement content in the mix.
Regarding the basalt Kayasand concretes, only the mix with the lowest quantity of fines satisfied the
slump requirement within the plasticiser dosage limits. The compressive strength of this mix was
higher than the Stage 2 control mix and comparable to the Stage 1 control mix. An increase in the
fines contents of the basalt Kayasand concretes had a detrimental effect on the slump of the mix,
even when the plasticiser dosage was exceeded by 20%. This indicates the clay absorbing
characteristics of the fines content of the Kayasand resulted in lower quantities of free water in the
mix, which could not be compensated for by the addition of plasticiser. In spite of this the
compressive strength of the basalt Kayasand concretes remained reasonably constant demonstrating
sufficient water for cement hydration in the mix and the potential to reduce cement contents to match
the compressive strength of the natural sand control mixes..
Limestone Kayasand concretes with a w/c ratio of 0.50 yielded compressive strengths in excess of
the control mix from stage 2. Although a deterioration in slump was observed with increasing fines
content, the slump values were still within the S2 slump range and the plasticiser dosage limits.
When compared to the compressive strength of the natural sand control in Stage 1 it is apparent that
the limestone Kayasand concretes performed better, even at a higher w/c ratio. This indicates the
potential to reduce the w/c ratio further, whilst increasing the plasticiser dosage or reduce the cement
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 36 of 45��
content at the same w/c ratio and plasticiser dosage to match the performance of the stage 1 control
mix.
Sandstone Kayasand concretes performed better than their stage 1 counterparts as a result of the
lower w/c ratio, and better than the stage 2 natural sand control, even though the slump collapse for
this mix is acknowledged. Slump values in the S2 slump range were achieved in the majority of the
sandstone Kayasand mixes, although S-D fell just below the lower S2 slump boundary. However,
unlike the basalt mixes the plasticiser dosage was kept within the manufacturers limits indicating that
absorption of the water from the mix by the fines was lower and this is perhaps a reflection of the
lower MBV values of the sandstone Kayasands when compared to basalt mixes with equal fines
content. Nevertheless, it has been demonstrated that viable mixes can be made with sandstone
Kayasands with the same cautionary statements related to the clay contents of the higher fines mixes
being made here. It is more difficult to suggest savings in cement for the sandstone Kayasand mixes
due to the compressive strength results being lower than a natural sand control mix with similar
slump characteristics. However, there are a number of structural applications which require lower
strength (C30/37 and C35/45) concretes that could be satisfied using sandstone Kayasand at a w/c
ratio and plasticiser dosage similar to that used in stage 2 but with a lower cement content.
Lastly, it should be acknowledged here that there is little variation difference between stage 1 and
stage 2 tensile strength results, with only marginal increases seen with the reduction of w/c ratio and
introduction of plasticiser.
6. Conclusions
The aim of this study was to explore the use of Kayasand as a complete replacement for natural sand
in concrete mixes. The results shown in Section 5 prove that while great care is required to ensure
that the mix design used is appropriate for the type and properties of the feed material, it is feasible
to produce workable concretes with satisfactory 28 day compressive and flexural strengths using
Kayasand as a complete replacement for natural marine dredged sand in concrete.
The fine aggregate test results showed the following:
• The processing of the FEED material improved the shape and grading as well as having
removed some deleterious clay sized particles as indicated by the MBV and SE tests. In cases
of high MBV in the FEED material the V7 process can reduce the MBV by up to 50%,
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 37 of 45��
although this will be reliant on the level of fines considered in the range of Kayasand
gradations compared to the FEED material.
• The test results also suggest that the RMBV test could be used as an alternative to the
standard MBV test in order to rapidly assess the presence of potentially deleterious fines.
• The enhanced shape and grading of Kayasand is indicated by the reduced flow times in the
NZFC results with a visual inspection revealing particles that were less angular and flaky
than the FEED material.
For the direct replacement of natural sand with Kayasand, with a target of an S2 slump range the
following conclusions can be drawn:
• The increase of fines content in the Kayasand mixes generally resulted in a reduction in the
slump of the mix. However, in the Stage 1 study only the B-D mix fell outside of the S2
slump range. There was some evidence of the fines acting as lubricants in Kayasand
concretes with medium fines contents.
• There was no apparent relationship between fines content and 28-day compressive strength in
any of the Kayasand concretes. This suggests that there are no negative effects of higher fines
contents on the compressive strength for the given mix compositions and range of fines
contents investigated in the study. However, it is important to assess the presence of clays in
the fines portion of the mix as it can dramatically affect the water demand for the same
consistency, as shown by the basalt sands in comparison to the granite sands.
• The 28 day flexural strength for all mixes is in the range 4.6 to 6.1 N/mm2 and seems to
follow the trends of compressive strength, with higher compressive strength resulting in
higher flexural strength.
• Only the 28 day compressive strengths of the limestone Kayasand concretes approached the
compressive strength of the natural sand control mix. This is encouraging because it would
seem possible to achieve comparable strength concrete using Kayasand at higher w/c ratios.
• Basalt and sandstone Kayasand concretes required higher w/c ratios than limestone and
granite Kayasand concretes to meet the S2 slump range due to the high MBV and the
probable presence of clay absorbing particles in the fines component of the former.
Nevertheless, these w/c ratios were smaller than those required for the respective FEED
material and yielded higher compressive strength values at all ages.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 38 of 45��
For the direct replacement of natural sand with Kayasand, with a target of an S2 slump range
achieved through a fixed w/c ratio and the use of a plasticiser the following conclusions can be
drawn:
• Use of plasticiser in limestone and granite mixes with w/c ratios of 0.5 and 0.55 respectively,
enabled compressive strengths in excess of the control mixes whilst still satisfying the slump
range and plasticiser dosage levels.
• For limestone and granite Kayasand concretes there is the potential to enhance the
compressive strength further by reducing the w/c ratio, or maintain the compressive strength
level by reducing both the w/c ratio and cement content in the mix. The exact reduction in
cement content cannot be quantified here.
• For all basalt Kayasand concretes the compressive strength was equivalent to that of the stage
1 control mix, although the S2 slump range could only be satisfied in the mix with the lowest
fines content. In the remaining mixes the S2 slump could not be achieved, even when
plasticiser dosages 20% higher than those recommended were used.
• For all sandstone Kayasand concretes the compressive strength was less than that of the stage
1 control but higher than that of the stage 2 control, although the latter reported a slump
collapse at the w/c ratio of 0.55. The S2 slump could not be satisfied in the mix with the
highest fines content whilst using the maximum plasticiser dosage recommended. It is
apparent that whilst improvements are seen between stages 1 and 2 sandstone Kayasand
concretes, further adjustment to the mix design is required to match the performance of the
other Kayasand rock types and this may include amending the w/c ratio, plasticiser type and
dosage.
• There was little difference in the flexural strength results between stage 1 and stage 2, even
though improvements in compressive strength for all Kayasand concretes was observed when
lowering the w/c ratio and introducing a plasticiser into the mix.
In summary, there is sufficient experimental evidence to justify the use of Kayasand as a 100%
replacement for natural sand in concrete. When considering sands with low MBV and SE values
there is the potential for the concrete mixes to outperform natural concrete mixes through further
reductions in w/c ratio. This may not hold true however, if the natural sand mixes are optimised
further through the use of plasticisers. With sands containing high MBV and SE values the V7
manufacturing process can significantly reduce the levels of deleterious fines in the sand to make
them acceptable for use in concrete. However, prudence is still required in controlling the fines
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 39 of 45��
portion in the resultant concrete mix, whether it be by minimising the fines content or using a
chemical admixture to deactivate the component of the fines that may be detrimental to the fresh and
hardened properties of concrete. Further work is suggested in this area to fully encompass the range
of rock mineralogies that are present in the UK. Moreover, there are numerous other properties that
would require further investigation in order to have full confidence in the use of Kayasand, namely
durability properties, chemical and chloride resistance and creep and shrinkage characteristics.
7. References
Ahn, N. Phelan, T. Fowler, D. Hudson, B. 2001. The Effects of High Fines on the Properties of
Cement Mortar and Concrete. In: International Center for Aggregates Research (ICAR) 2001 9th
Annual Symposium.
BGS, 2011 BGS, 2011 http://www.bgs.ac.uk/planning4minerals/Index.htm (accessed 6th August
2012).
British Standards Institution. 2008. BS EN 12620:2002 + A1: 2008 Aggregates for concrete.
Çelik T. and Marar K. 1996. Effects of Crushed Stone Dust on some properties of Concrete. Cement
and Concrete Research, Vol.26, No. 7, pages 1121-1130.
Chiew, H. 2012. Sustainable extrudable concrete. Cardiff School of Engineering MSc Dissertation,
Cardiff University.
Donza, H. Cabrera, O. Irassar, E.F. 2002. High-strength concrete with different fine aggregate.
Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 32, No. 11, pages 1755–1761.
Dumitru, I. Zdrilic, T. Smorchevsky, G. 1999. The Use of Manufactured Quarry Fines in Concrete.
In: International Center for Aggregates Research (ICAR) 1999 7th Annual Symposium.
Goldsworthy, S. 2005. Manufactured Sands in Portland Cement Concrete—The New Zealand
Experience, Proceedings of the 13th Annual ICAR Symposium.
Gonçalves, J.P. Tavares L.M., Toledo Filho, R.D., Fairbairn, E.M.R., Cunha, E.R. 2007. Comparison
of natural and manufactured fine aggregates in cement mortars. Cement and Concrete Research,
Vol. 37, No. 6, pages 924–932.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 40 of 45��
Harrison, D. J., Wilson, D., Henney, P. J., Hudson, J. M. 2000. Crushed Rock Sand In South Wales,
A Reconnaissance Survey. British Geological Survey Technical Report No. WF/00/3. �
Hewlett, P. LEA's Chemistry of Cement and Concrete, Fourth edition, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New
York, 1998.
Jackson, N.M. and Brown, R.H. 1996. Use of higher fines contents in portland cement concrete. In:
International Center for Aggregates Research (ICAR) 1996 4th Annual Symposium.
Kroh, T. 2010. Use of manufactured sand as a replacement material for dredged sand in mortar.
Cardiff School of Engineering MSc Dissertation, Cardiff University.
Li, B. Wang, J. Zhou, M. 2009. Effect of limestone fines content in manufactured sand on durability
of low- and high-strength concretes. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 23, No. 8, pages
2846-2850.
Malhotra, V. M., and Carette, G.G. 1985. Performance of Concrete Incorporating Limestone Dust as
Partial Replacement for Sand. ACI Journal, Proceedings Vol. 82, No. 3, pages 363-371.
Mankelow, J M Sen, M A Wrighton, C E. Idoine, N. 2011. Collation of the results of the 2009
aggregate minerals survey for England and Wales. British Geological Survey. Department for
Communities and Local Government and Welsh Assembly Government, Second edition.
Manning, D. 2004. Exploitation and Use of Quarry Fines, Mineral Solutions Ltd. Technical Report
No. 087/MIST2/DACM/01.
Marek, C.R. 1995. Importance of fine aggregate shape and grading on properties of concrete. In:
International Center for Aggregates Research (ICAR) 1995 3rd Annual Symposium.
Neville A.M. 1999. Properties of Concrete, 4th Edition, Essex-England, Pearson Education Ltd
Neville, A. 1995. Properties of concrete. 4th ed. Harlow: Longman Group.
Newman, J. and Choo, B.S. eds. 2003. Advanced concrete technology. 1st ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Parton, J. 2012. Sustainable extrudable concrete. Cardiff School of Engineering Year 3 Project,
Cardiff University.
F i n a l R e p o r t
P a g e | 41 of 45��
Pettingell H., 2008. Manufactured Sand: An Effective dry sand manufacturing process from Japan.
Quarry Management Magazine.
Pilegis, M, Gardner, D and Lark, B. 2012. Manufactured Sand for a Low Carbon Era. In 8th
International Conference: Concrete in the Low Carbon Era, Dundee, UK, 9-11 July 2012.
Poon, C.S. Shui, Z.H. Lam, L. Fok, H. Kou S.C. 2004. Influence of moisture states of natural and
recycled aggregates on the slump and compressive strength of concrete. Cement and Concrete
Research, Vol. 34, No. 1, pages 31–36.
Teranishi, K. Tanigawa, Y. 2007. Effect of Aggregate Grading on Fluidity of Concrete and Mortar.
Journal of Structures and Construction Engineering (Trans AIJ), No.614, pages 9-15 (in Japanese).
Thomas, T., Dumitru, I., van Koeverden, M., West. G., Basford, G., Lucas, G., James, W., Kovacs,
T., Clarke, P., Guirguis, S. 2007. Manufactured Sand National test methods and specification values.
Australia: Cement Concrete & Aggregates Australia.
Volodskojs, R. 2012. Design and testing of self-compacting concrete using manufactured sand.
Cardiff School of Engineering Year 3 Project, Cardiff University.
F i n a l R e p o r t
A p p e n d i x |1
Appendix 1. Quarterly Reports produced by Cardiff University
Sand
from
Sur
plus
Qua
rry
Mat
eria
l
Qua
rterly
Rep
ort
1
Nove
mbe
r 201
0Re
port
no: 0
QR1
-SC
9086
-CF
Quarterly�Rep
ort�1
�Novem
ber�2
010�
�
Page�2�of�6
�
1.0
Intr
oduc
tion
The�motivation�for�this�project�is�th
e�increasing
�miss�balance�be
tween�the�ne
ed�fo
r�
aggregates�in
�society�and
�the�availability�of�traditionally�suitable�geologic�sou
rces.�A
�
strong
�need�is�re
alised
�for�d
evelop
ing�and�im
plem
enting
�techno
logy�th
at�can
�enable�
the�use�of�alternative�resou
rces,�redu
ce�the
�need�for�transport�and�presen
t�zero�
waste�con
cepts�for�the�aggregate�and�concrete�in
dustry.�A
ggregate�produ
cers�are�
faced�with�constant�dem
ands�for�highe
r�qu
ality�aggregates�and
,�at�the�same�time,�
have�to
�take�environ
men
tal�issue
s�into�accou
nt.�T
he�m
ost�pressing
�issues�being
�the�
excess�amou
nts�of�fine
s�(<�63ʅ
m)�following�the�crushing
�process�fo
r�manufactured�
aggregates�and
�the�de
pletion�of�natural�aggregate�re
sources.�Excess�fin
es�were,�and
�
in�m
any�coun
tries�still�are,�considered
�waste�and
�are�dispo
sed�of�accordingly,�at�
great�costs�and
�with�risk�of�con
tamination.�Produ
cers�have�iden
tifie
d�an
�opp
ortunity�
to�develop
�a�m
anufactured�sand
�from�gravel�a
nd�crushed
�rock.�O
ne�advantage�is
�
that�the
�sand�has�a�sm
oother�surface�texture�than�most�conven
tion
al�crusher�dust�
prod
ucts�and
�the
�Particle�Size�Distribution�(PSD
)�curve�can�be
�accurately�adjusted
�
whe
n�the�material�is�manufactured�therefore�making�it�m
uch�more�suitable�fo
r�use�
in�con
crete.�A
�secon
d�advantage�is�the
�ability�to�sou
rce�bo
th�fine�and�
coarse�
aggregates�from�the
�sam
e�qu
arry,�and�
with�
know
ledge�
of�the
�effect�of�the
�
mineralogical�com
position
�of�such�aggregates�on�the�fresh�and�harden
ed�prope
rties�
of�con
crete,�quarries�can�be
�kep
t�in�the
�near�vicinity�to�their�place�of�end
Ͳuse,�
thereb
y�shortening
�transpo
rt�distances,�followed
�by�less�pollution
�and
�increased
�
employmen
t�opp
ortunities�fo
r�the
�local�pop
ulation.�
� Num
erou
s�research�p
rogram
mes�h
ave�
been
�perform
ed,�exam
ining�the�
physical�
prop
erties�of�manufactured�sand
�in�the
�con
text�of�its�use�in�con
crete.�The
�results�
have�in�
gene
ral�be
en�in�
favour�o
f�using�
manufactured�
sand
,�given�
the�
right�
cond
itions�con
cerning�parent�rock�type
�and
�produ
ction�process.� H
owever,�de
sign
�
parameters�for�m
anufactured�sand
�are�differen
t�from�th
ose�used
�for�n
atural�sand.�It�
is�anticipated
�that�in
�the�future�aggregate�produ
ction�from
�crushed
�rock�will�increase�
and�prod
uction
�from
�natural�sa
nd�and
�gravel�dep
osits�w
ill�decrease.�
��
Quarterly�Rep
ort�1
�Novem
ber�2
010�
�
Page�3�of�6
�
The�project�w
ill�explore�th
e�feasibility�of�u
sing
�Kayasand�as�a�com
plete�replacem
ent�
for�n
atural�sand�in�cem
entitiou
s�materials�and
�then
�go�on
�to�develop
�a�spe
cification�
for�
the�
material.�
�This�will�be
�achieved
�by
�making�
up�mixes�of�Kayasand
�
(manufactured�sand
)�at�variou
s�replacem
ent�levels,�to�de
term
ine�the�op
timum
�mix�
of�Kayasand�replacem
ent�in�terms�of�w
orkability,�com
pression
�&�ten
sile�stren
gth.�
The�
mixes�that�will�b
e�used
�are:�100%
�Natural�Sand�
concrete�(control);�1
00%�
Kayasand
�con
crete;�100%�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�A;�100%
�Kayasand�with�Pre�
Duster�B
;�100%�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�C
;�50%
�Natural�50%
�Kayasand;�50%
�Natural�
50%�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�A
;�50%
�Natural�50%
�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�B
�and
�
Natural�50%
�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�C
.�
�� Kayasand
�manufactured�from
�6�differen
t�qu
arries�across�the�UK�will�be�used
�in�the
�
expe
rimen
tal�programme.�Ro
ck�type
s�ob
tained
�from
�these�
quarries�includ
e�
Greyw
acke,�Limestone
,�And
ersite,�
Gritstone
,�Ba
salt,�
Granite�and�
Slate.�The�
mineralogy�of�the
�paren
t�rock�w
ill�b
e�taken�
into�con
side
ration
�whe
n�trying
�to�
establish�the�op
timum
�mix�propo
rtions�and
�particle�gradation�for�variou
s�concrete�
applications.��The�following�tests�are�planne
d�for�the�differen
t�Kayasand
�blend
s�to�
determ
ine�their�m
ineralogy�and�strength:�
xMethylene
�Blue�Test�
xXR
D�and
�elemen
tal�analysis��
xSand
�Equ
ivalen
cy�Test��
xCu
be�Com
pression
�Test��
xCylinde
r�Ten
sile�Test�
2.0�Work�pe
rformed
�to�date�
In�this�last�quarter�the
�main�thrust�of�work�has�be
en�con
centrated�on
�establishing
�
the�correct�b
atching�and�mixing�metho
ds�to
�be�used
�in�th
e�remaind
er�of�the
�study,�
as�w
ell�a
s�pe
rforming�some�prelim
inary�trials�on�a�lim
estone
�Kayasand�originating�
from
�Rathm
olyon�Quarry�in�Sou
thern�Ireland.��T
he�details�of�the
�mixes�cast�to�date�
are�given�in�Table�2.1.�For�each�mix,�3
�cub
es�were�cast�to
�establish�their�c
ompressive�
strength�at�2
4�ho
urs,�3�fo
r�7�days�a
nd�3�fo
r�28�days.�The
�remaining
�2�cub
es�were�kept�
for�p
oten
tial�56�day�compressive�strength�te
sts.��
�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�1
�Novem
ber�2
010�
�
Page�4�of�6
�
Table�2.1.�M
ixes�cast�to�date�
Mix�
Reference�
Date�
Rock�Type�
Replacem
ent�level�(%
)Pred
uster�
Type
�
No.�
Cube
�s�
No .
Cylinde
rs�
Kayasand
Natural�Sand
CRͲN1�
14/10/10
�Limestone
�Ͳ
100
Ͳ11
�1�
CRͲK1�
14/10/10
�Limestone
�100
ͲͲ
11�
2�
CRͲK2�
21/10/10
�Limestone
�100
ͲA
11�
1�
CRͲK3�
21/10/10
�Limestone
�100
ͲB
11�
1�
CRͲK4�
21/10/10
�Limestone
�100
ͲC
11�
1�
CRͲN2�
21/10/10
�Limestone
�Ͳ
100
Ͳ11
�1�
CRͲK5�
21/10/10
�Limestone
�50
50Ͳ
11�
1�
CRͲK6�
28/10/10
�Limestone
�50
50Ͳ
11�
1�
CRͲK7�
28/10/10
�Limestone
�50
50A
11�
1�
CFͲK8�
28/10/10
�Limestone
�50
50C
11�
1�
CRͲN3�
28/10/10
�Limestone
�Ͳ
100
Ͳ11
�1�
� Based�on
�the�prelim
inary�labo
ratory�work�5�mixes�are�sc
hedu
led�for�e
ach�week,�from
�
Octob
er�20101
�to�April�2011.�The�5�mixes�each�week�comprise�4�Kayasand
�mix�
designs�and�1�control�m
ix,�to�mon
itor�th
e�consistency�of�th
e�casting�process�and�any�
natural�s
and�resource�variation
�between�mixes�perform
ed� on�consecutive�weeks.�
The�prelim
inary�investigations�have�de
mon
strated�that�th
is�le
vel�o
f�laboratory�work�
is�achievable.�How
ever,�initial�setbacks�have�m
eant�th
at�th
e�first�Kayasand�blen
d�has�
taken�a�mon
th�to
�com
plete�all�of�the
�mix�designs�(d
iscussed
�in�m
ore�de
tailed�be
low).��
3.0�Tests�p
erform
ed�to
�date�Ͳ�n
umbe
r�and
�type
�Co
mpression
�stren
gth�tests�have�been�pe
rformed
�so�far�o
n�24hr�and
�7�day�cub
es�of�
the�
mixes�d
etailed�
in�T
able�2
.1�a
bove.�A�M
ethylene
�Blue�
trial�test�h
as�b
een�
cond
ucted�
on�the
�Rathm
olyon�
limestone
,�achieving�
a�successful�result.�S
lump�
retention�and�bleed�tests�have�also�be
en�perform
ed�on�the�mixes�cast �to�date,�but�
due�to�delays�du
ring
�the
�mixing�process�ne
ithe
r�test�has�yielded
�any�useful�d
ata.�
These�tests�ho
wever,�a
re�still�be
ing�considered
�for�the
�next�stage�of�casting.�The�
results�of�the
�com
pressive�stren
gth�tests�will�be�available�in�the
�next�Quarterly�
Repo
rt.�
4.0�Observatio
ns/issue
s�4.1.�Slump�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�1
�Novem
ber�2
010�
�
Page�5�of�6
�
In�order�to
�make�be
st�use�of�laboratory�time�the�mixing�proced
ure�chosen
�used�tw
o�
pan�mixtures�runn
ing�concurrently�w
ith�tw
o�differen
t�mix�designs.�H
owever,�w
hilst�
the�on
e�mix�was�being
�tested
�and
�sub
sequ
ently�cast,�the
�other�re
maine
d�in�th
e�pan�
and�started�to�stiffen
.�In�the�case�of�the
�latter, �an�extra�10mins�in�th
e�mixer�re
sulted
�
in�a�5mm�lo
ss�in
�slump,�which�th
en�signifie
d�that�add
itional�w
ater�was�add
ed�to
�the�
mix�to�achieve�the�de
sired�slum
p.�How
ever,�in�do
ing�so�the
�water/cem
ent�ratio�of�
the�mix�w
as�com
prom
ised
,�leaving�a�comparison�of�com
pression
�stren
gth�results�
betw
een�mixes� difficult�to�complete.�The
�desired
�slump�for�all�the
�mixes�w
as�set�at�
70�±5�mm.�How
ever�it�soo
n�be
came�apparent�that�such�a�tolerance�for�a�70m
m�
slum
p�was�unrealistic.�The
�tolerance�compo
unde
d�the�length�of�tim
e�to�m
ix�and
�the�
observations�of�the
�mix�stiffen
ing�made�earlier.�
� After� con
sultation�with�an
�indu
stry�spe
cialist,�it�w
as�determined
�that�a�to
lerance�of�
40mm�(min)�to�9
0mm�(max)�slum
p�was�u
sed�
widely�througho
ut�the
�con
crete�
indu
stry,�a
nd�th
e�mix�only�ne
eded
�to�be�in�th
e�mixer�fo
r�approxim
ately�2m
ins�after�
the�water�con
tent�of�the
�mix�design�had�be
en�add
ed.�A
fter�re
alising �this�inform
ation,�
two�concurrent�m
ixes�were�discon
tinu
ed�in
�favour�of�o
ne�m
ix,�altho
ugh�this�was�not�
done
�until�the�3r
d �week�of�casting
�(28
/10/10
).�Co
nseq
uently�only�mixes�CRͲK6
�and
�
CRͲK8�have�been�mixed
�according
�to�th
e�mix�design�sheets.�A
ll�the�othe
r�mixes�(C
R�–�
K1�throu
gh�CRͲK5
�and
�CRͲK7
)�had�excess�w
ater�add
ed�because�the
�mix�w
as�le
ft�in
�
the�mixers�for�too�long
�whilst�the�70mm�slump�was�targeted.�For�all�future�m
ixes�
cast�after�28/10/10,�only�the�water�con
tent�outlined
�in�the
�mix�design�will�be�used
�
and�the�slum
p�value�will�be�recorded
�for�that�m
ix.�If�the
�slump�is�not�within�40mm�–�
90mm�th
en�excess�w
ater�will�be�adde
d�and�no
ted �do
wn�on
�the�mix�design�sheet.�
� 4.2�Mou
ld�preparation
�and
�Dem
oulding�
There�have�been�a�nu
mbe
r�of�issue
s�with�the�cast�iron�100m
m�con
crete�cube
�
mou
lds.�The
�first�issue�concerns�the
�bolts�holding
�the
�cub
e�mou
lds�on
�its�platform
,�
which�had
�a�ten
dency�to�unscrew
�the
mselves�w
hen�placed
�on�the �vibrating�table.�
This�problem
�was�enh
anced�by
�surplus�oil�applied�to�the
�steel�m
oulds.�The
�mou
ld�
bolts�have�been�replaced
�and
�this�has�alleviated
�the
�problem
.��The
�secon
d�issue�
expe
rien
ced�with�these�mou
ld�w
as�during�de
Ͳmou
lding.�An�internal�screw
�in�the�
mou
lds�made�
demou
lding�
and�
rejoining�
the�
mou
lds�difficult,� d
elaying�
the�
deͲ
Quarterly�Rep
ort�1
�Novem
ber�2
010�
�
Page�6�of�6
�
mou
lding�process.�The
�internal�screw
s�inside
�all�of�the
�new
�mou
lds�have�now
�been�
removed
�which�has�helpe
d�speed�up
�the�de
Ͳmou
lding�process.�
� 4.3�Fresh�prop
erty�m
easuremen
ts�
Curren
tly�air�e
ntrapm
ent�tests�have�no
t�been�pe
rformed
�on�the�fresh�concrete.�It�is�
recognised
�that�th
is�is�so
mething
�that�can
�be�do
ne�at�a
�later�stage�ra
ther�th
an�delay�
the�missing
�program
me�that�has�currently�been�establishe
d.��
� �
Sand
from
Sur
plus
Qua
rry
Mat
eria
l
Qua
rterly
Rep
ort
2
Febr
uary
201
1Re
port
no: 0
QR2
-SC
9086
-CF
Quarterly�Rep
ort�2
�Janu
ary�2011
��
Page�1�of�6
�
1.0�In
troduction�
This�quarterly�rep
ort�covers�the�pe
riod�of�Novem
ber�2010
�to�Janu
ary�2011
.�It�rep
orts�
the�work�that�has�been�pe
rformed
�to�date�and
�presents�prelim
inary�results�from�a�
series�of�trial�m
ixes�cast�in�the�pe
riod
�of�O
ctob
er�to
�Novem
ber�2010.��
2.0�W
ork�perform
ed�to�date�
In�this�last�quarter�the
�main�thrust�of�work�has�be
en�con
centrated�on
�establishing
�
data�rep
ortin
g�and�recording�proced
ures,�mix�referen
ces�and�standard�ope
ratin
g�
proced
ures�for�a
ll�of�the
�anticipated
�tests.�Furthe
rmore,�con
sulta
tion�
with
�an�
indu
stry�spe
cialist�has�be
en�und
ertaken�and�is�rep
orted�in�m
ore�de
tail�in�sectio
n�2.2.
An�additio
nal� two�mixes�w
ere�cast�during�the�repo
rting�proced
ure,�nam
ely�a�100%
�
Kayasand
�mix�and
�a�C
ontrol�m
ix.�This�w
as�p
rimarily�d
one�to�trial�the
�new
�air�
entrainm
ent�de
vice;�ho
wever,�the�
mixes�a
lso�
served
�the
�purpo
se�o
f�providing�
additio
nal�com
pressive�stren
gth�results.�C
ompressive�stren
gth�tests�have�also�be
en�
completed
�on�all�m
aterial�cast�to�date,�the
�results�of�which�are�discussed
�in�sectio
n
3. 2.1�M
ix�Referencing�System�
The�mix�referen
cing
�system�ado
pted
�is�as�follows:�
� � � � Reference�back�to�the�data�she
ets�will�be�requ
ired
�to�de
term
ine�the�age�of�the
�
specim
en.�Co
ntrol�mixes�(100%
�natural�sand)�are�designated�“Con
trol”�and�have� a�
casting�date�attache
d.�This�is�because�a�num
ber�of�con
trol�m
ixes�are�to�be
�cast�
througho
ut�the
�duration�of�the
�project.�The
�mix�referen
ces�for�the�prelim
inary�work�
are�repo
rted
�in�Table�A.1�of�App
endix�A,�along
�with
�the
�original�m
ix�referen
ce�given
�
in�th
e�first�quarterly�rep
ort.��
2.2�In
dustry�specialist�consultation��
A�m
eetin
g�was�set�up�with
�Dr�Ko
nstantinos�Kou
tselas�at�the�Aggregate�Ind
ustries�
research�a
nd�d
evelop
men
t�concrete�laboratory�
in�Derbyshire�
was�a
rranged�
in�
Decem
ber�2010
�to�discuss�the�direction�of�the
�project,�alon
g�with
�the
�issue
s�with
�
Ireland�CE
MEX
�Moyne
�Quarry
Kayasand
�(predu
ster
A)�
at�100
%�re
placem
ent�
Specim
en�
numbe
r�1
ICMͲKA100Ͳ1�
Ireland�CE
MEX
Moyne
�Quarry
Kayasand
�(no�
pred
uster)�at�5
0%�
replacem
ent�level�
Specim
en�
numbe
r�2
ICMͲKS50/50
Ͳ2�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�2
�Janu
ary�2011
��
Page�2�of�6
�
certain�elem
ents�of�the�project�as�ide
ntified
�by�the�tw
o�stud
ents.�Th
e�following�
conclusion
s�have�been�draw
n�from
�the�meetin
g:�
xThere�is�no�ne
ed�to
�con
duct�Ten
sile�Stren
gth�Tests�on
�the�harden
ed�con
crete,�
as�the
�result�be
ars�no
�significance�u
nless�tests�to�d
etermine�the�elastic
�
mod
ulus�are�also�pe
rformed
.�To�do
�the
�latter�wou
ld�significantly
�increase�the
�
numbe
r�of�tests�req
uired�and�in�light�of�the�de
manding
�workload�from
�the
�
project�as�curren
tly�sche
duled�
it�has�therefore�
been
�de
cide
d�that�the�
introd
uctio
n�of�fu
rthe
r�tests�is�unn
ecessary.�This�will�allow�the
�researche
rs�to�
focus�on
�the�core�aim
s�of�th
e�project.�
xTh
e�Flexural�Stren
gth�Test�(4�po
int�testing)�w
ill�rep
lace�the
�Ten
sile�Stren
gth�
test,�and
�sho
uld�indicate�better�p
acking
�in�Kayasand�samples.�
xThere�is�no�ne
ed�to�test�for�shrinkage�of�fresh/harden
ed�con
crete.�This�is�
because�the�result�will�have�little
�impact�with
�the
�overall�aims�of�the
�project.�
Furthe
rmore,�the
�BS�EN
�stand
ard�written
�for�this�test�ou
tline
s�apparatus�that�
simply�cann
ot�be�foun
d�anyw
here�in
�the�UK.�
xTh
e�elem
ental�analysis�of�Kayasand
�was�que
stione
d,�as�this�w
ould�have�a�
very�small�impact�on�harden
ed�con
crete�results.�H
owever,�this�test�is�neede
d�
to�fully�characterize�the�sand
,�the
�results� of�which�will�be�of�ben
eficial�u
se�to�
the�Ph
D�stude
nts�and�the�future�directio
n�of�this�work�after�this�current�
project�h
as�been�completed
.��
xBleeding
�Tests�w
ill�be�carried�ou
t�qu
alita
tively�as�the
�mixes�are�being
�cast.�
Photos�w
ill�be�taken�using�a�digital�cam
era,�and
�notes�w
ill�be�made�on
�any
�
bleeding
�that�occurs�from
�each�mix.�
xThere�is�a�need�to�m
easure�Fresh�(P
lastic)�D
ensity�as�well�as�Cu
red�Den
sity,�as�
this�cou
ld�give�some�reason
ing�to�results�obtaine
d.�The
�metho
d�of�how
�this�is�
measured�will�need�to�be�exam
ined
�furthe
r.�
xWe�are�going�to�keep �to�an�S2�slump�(40m
mͲ90m
m),�a�value�common
ly�used�
in�th
e�concrete�indu
stry.�
xIt�is�im
portant�to�sou
rce�the�cemen
t�direct�from�the
�manufacturer.�This�
project�was�outlined
�as�using�CE
M�I,�ho
wever,�there�have�been�prob
lems�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�2
�Janu
ary�2011
��
Page�3�of�6
�
sourcing
�CEM
�I�from
�Cardiff�University’s�cem
ent�sup
pliers.�It�is�now
�envisaged
�
that�the
�CEM
�I�cemen
t�will�be�sourced�from
�a�CEM
EX�quarry�just�outside
�of�
Cardiff.�This�is�im
portant�be
cause�up
�to�5%
�of�fin
es�can
�be�includ
ed�in�the�
cemen
t�which�m
ay�not�be�de
clared
�to�the�bu
yer.�It�is�the
�level�o
f�fin
es�in
�the
�
cemen
t�which�cou
ld�have�an
�impact�on�the�compressive�stren
gth�results�with
�
regards�to�th
e�use�of�Pre�dusters.�
xTh
e�water/cem
ent�ratio
�must�stay�the
�sam
e�for�all�o
f�the�mixes.�T
he�current�
indu
stry�w
/c�ratio�is�arou
nd�0.59,�and
�the
refore�the
�aim
�is�to�m
aintain�the�
same�w/c�ratio�for�all�of�the
�mixes,�giving
�an�even
�platform�on�which�to�
compare�th
e�results.�It�w
as�noticed
�from
�the�results�of�the
�first�mixes�th
at�th
e�
w/c�ratio�w
as�very�differen
t�for�all�of�the
�mixes,�and�
this�u
ndou
bted
ly�
affected
�the
�com
pressive�stren
gth�results�that�were�ob
tained
.�It�is�now
�very�
hard�to�compare�the
se�results�w
ithou
t�having
�a�con
stant�on
�which�to�base�
the�theo
ries.�
xTh
e�mixer�w
ill�be�kept�dam
p�for�every�mix.�Dr�Ko
utselas�stated
�that�every�
time�a�mix�is�cast�in�the
�Aggregate�In
dustries�labo
ratory,�an�initial�m
ix�is�cast�
to�dam
pen�the�mixer�which�is�sub
sequ
ently
�throw
n�aw
ay.�The
�mixes�are�the
n�
started�in�earne
st.�The�full�scientific�reason
ing�be
hind
�this�practise�is�not�
know
n,�but�from�years�of�expe
rien
ce�in�concrete�m
ixing,�Dr�Ko
utselas�has�
noticed
�that�there�is�a�differen
ce�between�using�a�damp�(already
�mixed
)�
mixer�and
�a�dry�clean
�mixer.�
Following�the�discussion
�with
�Dr�Ko
utselas�a�list�of�Aggregate�testin
g,�Fresh�Con
crete�
testing�and�Harde
ned�Co
ncrete�testin
g�has�be
en�drawn�up
�which�will�be�cond
ucted�
on�all�of�th
e�research�m
aterial.�Th
is�can
�be�seen
�in�Table�2.1.�
From
�this,�a�sched
ule�of�testin
g�has�be
en�drawn�up
�over�the�ne
xt�9�m
onths.�W
hen�
the�material�com
es�back�from
�Japan
�1�week�will�be�spen
t�on
�aggregate�testin
g.�This�
will�give�an
�ind
ication�
of�how
�the
�aggregate�w
ill�beh
ave�in�the
�mix,�and�what�
prop
ertie
s�it�po
ssesses,�so�as�to�explain�the�results�from�any�of�the�mixes.�The
�fresh�
concrete�tests�will�be�cond
ucted�whe
n�casting�the�mixes�and
�it�will�take�on
e�day�to�
test�all�of�th
e�harden
ed�con
crete�
�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�2
�Janu
ary�2011
��
Page�4�of�6
�
Table�2.1.�Propo
sed�aggregate,�fresh�and�harden
ed�con
crete�testing�
Aggregate�Testing�
Fresh�Concrete�Testing�
Hardened�Concrete�Testing�
Grading
�Air�Entrainmen
t�Den
sity�
Water�Absorption�
Slum
p�Co
mpressive�Stren
gth�
Methylene
�Blue�
Fresh�(plastic)�D
ensity�
Flexural�Stren
gth�Test�(4
Ͳpoint�te
sting)�
Sand
�Equ
ivalen
cy�
Bleeding
��
New
�Zealand
�Flow�Con
e��
�
%�W
ater�Con
tent�(b
efore�
mixing)�
� 3.0
Expe
rimen
tal R
esul
ts a
nd D
iscu
ssio
n It�is�im
portant�to�no
te�th
at�th
e�target�com
pressive�stren
gths�of�the
�spe
cimen
s�cast�in
�
this�project�are�25N
/mm
2 �after�7�days�of�curing�and�30N/m
m2�after�2
8�days�of�curing.��
The�average�compressive�stren
gth�results,�togethe
r�with
�the
�coe
fficients�of�variatio
n�
for�the�specim
ens�cast�in
�the
�prelim
inary�stud
y�are�presen
ted�in�Table�3.1.�T
he�raw
�
data,�a
s�collected
�from�the
�labo
ratory�is�provide
d�in�App
endix�B.�It�sho
uld�be
�noted
�
here�that�all�tests�were�
performed
�in�
triplicate,�u
nless�stated
�otherwise.�It�is�
observed
�that�bo
th�control�
mixes�satisfy�the�
target�compressive�strength�
requ
irem
ents.�How
ever,�on
ly�two�
Kayasand
�mixes�(ICMͲKS50/50
�and
�ICR
KS10
0)�
approach�the
�req
uiremen
ts,�w
ith�the
�rem
aining
�Kayasand�mixes�fa
lling
�below
�both�7�
and�28
�day�ta
rget�stren
gths.��Th
e�coefficients�of�variatio
n�are�gene
rally�with
in�th
e�5%
�
limit�
used
�in�
the�
labo
ratory�w
hen�
considering�
compressive�stren
gth�
results�o
f�
concrete.��
From
�the�data�it�is�app
aren
t�that�for�the
�Kayasand�mixes�with
�the�ICM�m
ix�referen
ce,�
the�differen
ce�between�the�7�and�28
�day�com
pressive�stren
gth�results�is�unu
sually�
small.�
The�
control�mix�cast�on
�the�
18th�Novem
ber�indicates�that�the�
7�day�
compressive�stren
gth�is�app
roximately�75
%�of�the
�28Ͳday�compressive�stren
gth,�and
�
this�ratio�between�the�compressive�stren
gth�at�the
�two�ages�is�gen
erally�accep
ted�as�
the�standard�whe
n�working
�with
�normal�stren
gth�concrete�m
ixes�in
�the
�labo
ratory�at�
Cardiff�U
niversity.�The�
reason
s�for�the�
slow
�stren
gth�
gain�o
f�Kayasand
�will�b
e�
explored
�fully�during�the�testing�programme�and�it�is�m
erely�highlighted
�here�as�an�
interesting�
outcom
e�of�the�
prelim
inary�
stud
y.�Alth
ough
�the�
results�from
�the�
prelim
inary�stud
y�give�an�indicatio
n�of�the
�expected�pe
rformance�of�concrete�m
ade�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�2
�Janu
ary�2011
��
Page�5�of�6
�
form
�Kayasand,�the
�main�focus�was�to�establish�correct�working
�procedu
res�and�mix�
calculation�proced
ures�to�use�in�the
�full�study.�Ind
eed,�it�is�im
portant�to�note�he
re�
that�the
�water/cem
ent�ratio
s�for�the�ICM�and
�first�two�control�m
ixes�were�no
t�kept�
constant�a
nd�the
refore�this�may�h
elp�
to�e
xplain�the
�variatio
n�in�com
pressive�
strength�observed�be
tween�mixes.��
Table�3.1.�C
ompressive�Stren
gth�results�from
�prelim
inary�tests�
�Compressive�Strength�(N
/mm
2)�
�Coefficient�of�V
ariation�(%
)�Age
�(Days)�
1�
7�
28�
Mix�Reference�
��
�ICMͲCon
trolͲ14/10
�6.10
�24.49�
Ͳ��
5.87
�0.74
�Ͳ�
ICMͲCon
trolͲ21/10
�7.44
�27.05�
Ͳ��
6.17
�1.40
�Ͳ�
ICMͲKS100
�5.45
�20.36�
22.41�
�2.92
�3.07
�0.77
�ICMͲKA100�
5.32
�18.38�
21.08�
�6.04
�1.07
�0.60
�ICMͲKB1
00�
4.76
�19.66�
21.87�
�4.89
�0.75
�0.95
�ICMͲKC1
00�
6.02
�21.68�
22.87�
�0.38
�1.09
�0.16
�ICMͲKS50/50
�6.68
�25.29�
28.01�
�4.12
�3.06
�0.79
�ICMͲKA50/50�
Ͳ�21.58�
23.23�
�Ͳ�
0.623�
1.422�
ICMͲKB5
0/50
�Ͳ�
20.74�
23.14�
�Ͳ�
3.42
�2.40
�ICRͲCo
ntrol�–�18/11
�Ͳ�
23.99�
32.80�
�Ͳ�
N/A
1�N/A
2�
ICRͲKS100�
Ͳ�14.87�
30.07�
�Ͳ�
N/A
1�N/A
2�
1 One
�spe
cimen
�only�
2 Average�of�2
�spe
cimen
s�
The�results�from
�the
�con
trol�m
ix�cast�on
�the
�18t
h �Nov
�201
1�and�the�ICR�Kayasand
�mix�
refle
ct�im
provem
ents�that�were�made�to�the
�mixͲcalculatio
ns�(w/c�and
�den
sitie
s)�as�
a�result�
of�the
�ICM
�studies.�Similar�28
�day�stren
gth�
compressive�results�w
ere�
achieved
�for�the
se�m
ixes�alth
ough
�the
�Kayasand�ICRͲKS100�mix�failed�to�m
eet�the�7�
day�compressive�stren
gth�target.�This�initially�sho
ws�that�100
%�Kayasand�can�replace�
tradition
al�m
arine�dred
ged�sand
�in�con
crete�mixes�because�it�can
�achieve�the
�28�day�
compressive�stren
gth�target�set�out�by�the�mix�design.��
It�is�interesting�to�note�he
re�that�100%
�marine�dred
ged�sand
,�which�is�used
�as�a�
control�in�the
�study,�is�con
side
red�un
represen
tative�of�ind
ustry�practice.�This�is�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�2
�Janu
ary�2011
��
Page�6�of�6
�
because�the�use�of�100%�m
arine�sand
�in�a�m
ix�is�not�cost�effective�and�therefore�a�
blen
d�of�m
arine�sand
�and
�(lim
estone
)�filler�is�com
mon
ly�used,�the
�filler�con
tent�
gene
rally�com
prising�10%�of�the�total�sand
�con
tent.�Th
e�main�differen
ce�between�
natural�and
�Kayasand�is�th
e�shape�of�the
�sand�particles,�and
�this�is�believed�to�be�the�
reason
�why
�the
�100
%�natural�sand�achieves�such�a�higher�com
pressive�stren
gth.�It�is�
anticipated
�that�if�a�more�realistic
�con
trol�had
�been�used
�in�the�prelim
inary�stud
y�
then
�the
�differen
ces�be
tween�the�Kayasand
�and
�the
�Con
trol�after�28�days�curing�
wou
ld�be�less�prono
unced.�How
ever,�the�main�goal�of�this�project�is�to�prove�that�
Kayasand
�can
�rep
lace�natural�dredged
�sand�in�con
crete,�with
out�a�de
trim
ental�effect�
on�the
�com
pressive�stren
gth.�The
�achievemen
t�of�this�goal�w
ill�be�of�particular�
impo
rtance�to�indu
stry,�no
t�on
ly�because�Kayasand�has�significant�environ
men
tal�
bene
fits,�but�because�con
sisten
t�particle�shape
�and
�gradatio
n�can�be
�achieved�and�
according�to�a
�num
ber�of�ind
ustry�contracts,�it�is�this�consistency�in�m
aterial�
prop
ertie
s�which�is�m
uch�de
sired�in�th
e�concrete�indu
stry.��
Quarterly�Rep
ort�2
�Janu
ary�2011
��
Page�A1�of�1�
Appendix�A.�U
pdated�M
ix�Referencing�System�
Table�A1.�Revised
�mix�referen
cing
�system��
Mix�Reference�adopted�in
�
Quarterly�Report�1�
Mix�Reference�adopted�in
�the�laboratory�and�
presentation�of�results�(to�be�used�in
�all�future�work)�
CRͲN1�
ICMͲCon
trolͲ14/10
�
CRͲK1�
ICMͲKS100
�
CRͲK2�
ICMͲKA100�
CRͲK3�
ICMͲKB1
00�
CRͲK4�
ICMͲKC1
00�
CRͲN2�
ICMͲCon
trolͲ21/10
�
CRͲK5�
ICMͲKS50/50
�
CRͲK6�
ICMͲKA50/50�
CRͲK7�
ICMͲKB5
0/50
�
CFͲK8�
ICMͲKC5
0/50
�
CRͲN3�
ICMͲCon
trolͲ04/11
�
�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�2
�Janu
ary�2011
��
Page�B1�of�B14
�
Appendix�B.�C
oncrete�M
ix�and�Data�Sh
eets�
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
07.
57.
5015
.00
00
0.00
0.00
0.2
1073
0.0
26.8
26.8
353
.66
00.
00.
00.
000.
001.
078
019
.519
.50
39.0
00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
176
0.4
4.4
4.40
9.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
00.
4058
.23
58.2
311
6.86
0.00
0.00
SSD
Act
ual
0.00
W/C
0.2
0.00
Fine
s (%
) =0.
00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
752
Nor
mal
1 2
11
15-O
ct-1
060
.12
115
-Oct
-10
64.9
31
15-O
ct-1
057
.94
721
-Oct
-10
246.
65
721
-Oct
-10
245.
26
721
-Oct
-10
243
728
828
928
1056
1156 56
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
Cor
rect
edkg
/m³
Tria
lTa
rget
Tria
lA
ctua
l
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Test
ed B
y
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :Po
t Num
ber :
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-5
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-8
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Labo
rato
ry N
ame
:
Air
Test
Air
Met
er N
umbe
r
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-12
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-6
Test
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-9IC
M-C
ontro
l-14/
10-1
0IC
M-C
ontro
l-14/
10-1
1
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :
Plas
tic D
ensi
ty
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
io
Yiel
d (%
) =
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)
Com
men
ts:
Bal
ance
Num
ber :
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:A
ir C
onte
nt (%
)
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-1
Stre
ngth
N/m
m²)
Failu
reM
ode
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-7
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Slum
p Te
st
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-4
Adm
ixw
eigh
t
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
Litr
es) =
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (%
) =
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)W
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
eM
ax L
oad
(KN
)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Tria
l Mix
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
t
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
Sol
ids
(kg)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)C
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(2)
MA
TER
IALS
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
0 m
l0
ml
0 m
l
Tarm
ac
PC
4/20
mm
Gra
vel
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)
0/4m
m N
atur
al S
and
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
14-O
ct-1
0C
emen
t (kg
/m³)
:
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Con
trol
300
Dat
e of
Tria
l :M
ater
ial C
ode
:
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-3
Tria
l Mix
Ref
:B
atch
Tim
e :
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)A
dmix
ture
(1)
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-2
Cem
ent
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
07.
507.
500
0.00
0.00
0.20
%10
730.
12.
126
.83
26.7
70
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
1.00
%78
00.
27.
819
.50
19.3
10
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
176
0.5
20.0
4.40
5.15
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
00.
7529
.95
58.2
358
.73
0.00
0.00
SSD
Act
ual
0.00
W/C
0.2
0.00
Fine
s (%
) =0.
00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
852
Nor
mal
1 2
11
22-O
ct-1
079
.62
122
-Oct
-10
70.8
31
22-O
ct-1
072
.94
728
-Oct
-10
266.
15
728
-Oct
-10
272.
56
728
-Oct
-10
272.
87
288
289
2810
5611
56 56
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
ICM
-Con
trol-2
1/10
-10
ICM
-Con
trol-2
1/10
-11
ICM
-Con
trol-2
1/10
-5
ICM
-Con
trol-1
4/10
-12
ICM
-Con
trol-2
1/10
-7IC
M-C
ontro
l-21/
10-8
ICM
-Con
trol-2
1/10
-9
ICM
-Con
trol-2
1/10
-6
Test
ed B
y
ICM
-Con
trol-2
1/10
-1IC
M-C
ontro
l-21/
10-2
ICM
-Con
trol-2
1/10
-3IC
M-C
ontro
l-21/
10-4
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Stre
ngth
N/m
m²)
Failu
reM
ode
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
e
Air
Test
Pot N
umbe
r :
Air
Con
tent
(%)
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:A
ir M
eter
Num
ber
Bal
ance
Num
ber :
Slum
p Te
stPl
astic
Den
sity
Test
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (Li
tres
) =D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d (%
) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Com
men
ts:
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
MA
TER
IALS
Tria
l Mix
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Tar g
etTr
ial
Act
ual
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
l
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0
ml
0/4m
m N
atur
al S
and
Tarm
ac
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
l
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Cem
ent
PC
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Rep
lace
men
t
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:30
0Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Dat
e of
Tria
l :21
-Oct
-10
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:C
ontro
l
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
07.
507.
500
0.00
0.00
0.20
%10
730.
12.
126
.83
26.7
70
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
3.10
%78
00.
624
.219
.50
18.9
00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
176
0.5
20.0
4.40
5.56
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
01.
1646
.33
58.2
358
.73
0.00
0.00
SSD
Act
ual
0.00
W/C
00
0.00
Fine
s (%
) =0
0.00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
652
Nor
mal
1 2
11
15-O
ct-1
056
.32
115
-Oct
-10
53.6
31
15-O
ct-1
053
.54
721
-Oct
-10
196.
45
721
-Oct
-10
207.
76
721
-Oct
-10
206.
77
2822
6.1
828
223
928
223.
210
5611
5612
56
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
ICM
-KS
100-
12
ICM
-KS
100-
10IC
M-K
S10
0-11
ICM
-KS
100-
8IC
M-K
S10
0-9
Test
ed B
y
ICM
-KS
100-
1IC
M-K
S10
0-2
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Stre
ngth
(N/m
m²)
Failu
reM
ode
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
e
Air
Met
er N
umbe
rB
alan
ce N
umbe
r :A
ir C
onte
nt (%
)M
ean
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
:
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :A
ir Te
stPo
t Num
ber :
Slum
p Te
stPl
astic
Den
sity
Test
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (%
) =Yi
eld
(%) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
Litr
es) =
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Com
men
ts:
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)A
dmix
wei
ght
Wat
er
Tria
lA
ctua
lC
emen
tR
epla
cem
ent
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)
0 m
l
MA
TER
IALS
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Tar g
et
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(2)
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(1)
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Kay
asan
dIC
MFi
ne A
ggre
gate
(2)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
lR
epla
cem
ent
Cem
ent
PC
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Tria
l Mix
Ref
:R
epla
cem
ent (
%) :
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:30
0
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Dat
e of
Tria
l :14
-Oct
-10
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:K
ayas
and
100%
ICM
-KS
100-
6IC
M-K
S10
0-7
ICM
-KS
100-
5
ICM
-KS
100-
3IC
M-K
S10
0-4
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
0.00
7.50
7.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.20
%10
73.0
00.
12.
126
.83
26.7
70.
000.
00.
00.
000.
003.
80%
748.
020.
728
.418
.70
17.9
93.
40%
31.9
80.
01.
10.
800.
7717
6.00
0.5
20.0
4.40
5.69
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
01.
2951
.66
58.2
358
.73
0.00
0.00
SSD
Act
ual
0.00
W/C
00
0.00
Fine
s (%
) =0
0.00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
742
Nor
mal
1 2
11
15-O
ct-1
056
.92
115
-Oct
-10
50.9
31
15-O
ct-1
051
.94
721
-Oct
-10
185.
95
721
-Oct
-10
183.
56
721
-Oct
-10
182
728
212.
28
2821
0.3
928
209.
810
5611
5612
56
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
ICM
-KA
100-
8
ICM
-KA
100-
12
ICM
-KA
100-
10IC
M-K
A10
0-11
ICM
-KA
100-
9
ICM
-KA
100-
4IC
M-K
A10
0-5
ICM
-KA
100-
6IC
M-K
A10
0-7
ICM
-KA
100-
2
Failu
reM
ode
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Stre
ngth
(N/m
m²)
Test
ed B
y
ICM
-KA
100-
1
Air
Test
Pot N
umbe
r :
ICM
-KA
100-
3
Air
Con
tent
(%)
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
e
Air
Met
er N
umbe
rB
alan
ce N
umbe
r :
Slum
p Te
stPl
astic
Den
sity
Test
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (Li
tres
) =D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d (%
) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Com
men
ts:
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
MA
TER
IALS
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Tar g
etTr
ial
Act
ual
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
l
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0
ml
Kay
asan
dIC
M
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)P
redu
ster
AIC
M
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
l
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Cem
ent
PC
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Rep
lace
men
t
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:30
0Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Dat
e of
Tria
l :14
-Oct
-10
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:K
ayas
and
+ P
erdu
ster
A 1
00%
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
0.00
7.50
7.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.20
%10
73.0
00.
12.
126
.83
26.7
70.
000.
00.
00.
000.
003.
70%
748.
020.
727
.718
.70
18.0
10.
90%
31.9
80.
00.
30.
800.
7917
6.00
0.5
20.0
4.40
5.65
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
01.
2550
.11
58.2
358
.73
0.00
0.00
SSD
Act
ual
0.00
W/C
00
0.00
Fine
s (%
) =0
0.00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
682
Nor
mal
1 2
11
15-O
ct-1
050
.12
115
-Oct
-10
47.2
31
15-O
ct-1
045
.54
721
-Oct
-10
197.
15
721
-Oct
-10
197.
76
721
-Oct
-10
194.
97
2822
08
2821
6.3
928
219.
810
5611
5612
56
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
ICM
-KB
100-
8
ICM
-KB
100-
12
ICM
-KB
100-
10IC
M-K
B10
0-11
ICM
-KB
100-
9
ICM
-KB
100-
4IC
M-K
B10
0-5
ICM
-KB
100-
6IC
M-K
B10
0-7
ICM
-KB
100-
2
Failu
reM
ode
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Stre
ngth
(N/m
m²)
Test
ed B
y
ICM
-KB
100-
1
Air
Test
Pot N
umbe
r :
ICM
-KB
100-
3
Air
Con
tent
(%)
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
e
Air
Met
er N
umbe
rB
alan
ce N
umbe
r :
Slum
p Te
stPl
astic
Den
sity
Test
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (Li
tres
) =D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d (%
) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Com
men
ts:
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
MA
TER
IALS
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Tar g
etTr
ial
Act
ual
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
l
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0
ml
Kay
asan
dIC
M
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)P
redu
ster
BIC
M
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
l
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Cem
ent
PC
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Rep
lace
men
t
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:30
0Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Dat
e of
Tria
l :14
-Oct
-10
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:K
ayas
and
+ P
erdu
ster
B 1
00%
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
0.00
7.50
7.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.20
%10
73.0
00.
12.
126
.83
26.7
70.
000.
00.
00.
000.
004.
20%
748.
020.
831
.418
.70
17.9
23.
80%
31.9
80.
01.
20.
800.
7717
6.00
0.45
18.0
4.40
5.72
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
01.
3252
.78
58.2
358
.68
0.00
0.00
SSD
Act
ual
0.00
W/C
00
0.00
Fine
s (%
) =0
0.00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
652
Nor
mal
1 2
11
22-O
ct-1
060
.32
122
-Oct
-10
59.9
31
22-O
ct-1
060
.34
728
-Oct
-10
216.
25
728
-Oct
-10
214.
86
728
-Oct
-10
219.
47
2822
8.6
828
228.
49
2822
9.1
1056
1156
1256
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
ICM
-KC
100-
8
ICM
-KC
100-
12
ICM
-KC
100-
10IC
M-K
C10
0-11
ICM
-KC
100-
9
ICM
-KC
100-
4IC
M-K
C10
0-5
ICM
-KC
100-
6IC
M-K
C10
0-7
ICM
-KC
100-
2
Failu
reM
ode
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Stre
ngth
(N/m
m²)
Test
ed B
y
ICM
-KC
100-
1
Air
Test
Pot N
umbe
r :
ICM
-KC
100-
3
Air
Con
tent
(%)
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
e
Air
Met
er N
umbe
rB
alan
ce N
umbe
r :
Slum
p Te
stPl
astic
Den
sity
Test
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (Li
tres
) =D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d (%
) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Com
men
ts:
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
MA
TER
IALS
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Tar g
etTr
ial
Act
ual
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
l
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0
ml
Kay
asan
dIC
M
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)P
redu
ster
CIC
M
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
l
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Cem
ent
PC
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Rep
lace
men
t
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:30
0Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Dat
e of
Tria
l :21
-Oct
-10
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:K
ayas
and
+ P
erdu
ster
C 1
00%
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
07.
507.
500
0.00
0.00
1073
0.0
0.0
26.8
326
.83
00.
00.
00.
000.
004.
20%
390
0.4
16.4
9.75
9.34
1.00
%39
00.
13.
99.
759.
6517
60.
04.
404.
910.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
00TO
TALS
2329
.00
0.51
20.2
858
.23
58.2
30.
000.
00SS
DA
ctua
l0.
00W
/C0
00.
00Fi
nes
(%) =
00.
00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
702
Nor
mal
1 2
11
22-O
ct-1
064
.12
122
-Oct
-10
66.7
31
22-O
ct-1
069
.64
728
-Oct
-10
247.
25
728
-Oct
-10
249.
86
728
-Oct
-10
261.
77
2827
9.3
828
278.
49
2828
2.6
1056
1156
1228
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-10
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-11
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-5
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-12
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-7
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-8
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-9
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-6
Test
ed B
y
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-1
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-2
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-3
ICM
-KS
50/5
0-4
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Stre
ngth
(N/m
m²)
Failu
reM
ode
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
e
Air
Test
Pot N
umbe
r :
Air
Con
tent
(%)
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:A
ir M
eter
Num
ber
Bal
ance
Num
ber :
Slum
p Te
stPl
astic
Den
sity
Test
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (Li
tres
) =D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d (%
) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Com
men
ts:
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
MA
TER
IALS
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Tar g
etTr
ial
Act
ual
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
l
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0
ml
Kay
asan
dIC
M
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)0/
4mm
Nat
ural
San
dTa
rmac
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
l
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Cem
ent
PC
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Rep
lace
men
t
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:30
0Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Dat
e of
Tria
l :21
-Oct
-10
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:K
ayas
and/
Nat
ural
San
d B
lend
50%
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
07.
507.
500
0.00
0.00
0.20
%10
730.
12.
126
.83
26.7
70
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
374
0.0
0.0
9.35
9.35
160.
00.
00.
400.
4039
00.
00.
09.
759.
7517
64.
404.
450.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
00TO
TALS
2329
.00
0.05
2.15
58.2
358
.23
0.00
0.00
SSD
Act
ual
0.00
W/C
00
0.00
Fine
s (%
) =0
0.00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
2N
orm
al1 2
11
21
31
47
216.
25
721
6.9
67
214.
37
2822
8.9
828
232.
49
2823
5.5
1056
1156
1228
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
Fine
Agg
rega
te (3
)
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Air
Con
tent
(%)
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
eM
ax L
oad
(KN
)St
reng
th(N
/mm²)
Failu
reM
ode
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-4
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-5
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-7
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-8
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-6
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-12
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-9
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-11
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-10
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-2
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-3
ICM
-KA
50/5
0-1
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :A
ir Te
stPo
t Num
ber :
Air
Met
er N
umbe
rB
alan
ce N
umbe
r :
Test
ed B
y
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (Li
tres
) =D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d (%
) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Slum
p Te
stPl
astic
Den
sity
Test
Com
men
ts:
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(3)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Sol
ids
(kg)
MA
TER
IALS
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Targ
etTr
ial
Act
ual
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
l
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(2)
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(1)
Pre
dust
er A
Kay
asan
dIC
M
0/4m
m N
atur
al S
and
ICM
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
l
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Cem
ent
PC
Rep
lace
men
t
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Kay
asan
d +
Pre
dust
er A
/Nat
ural
San
d B
lend
50%
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :30
0
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Dat
e of
Tria
l :M
ix D
escr
iptio
n :
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
0.0
7.50
7.50
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.20
%10
73.0
0.1
2.1
26.8
326
.77
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
364.
40.
00.
09.
119.
1125
.60.
00.
00.
640.
6439
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.75
9.75
176.
04.
404.
450.
00.
000.
000.
000.
00.
000.
000.
000.
00.
000.
00TO
TALS
2329
.00
0.05
2.15
58.2
358
.23
0.00
0.00
SSD
Act
ual
0.00
W/C
00
0.00
Fine
s (%
) =0
0.00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
2N
orm
al1 2
11
21
31
47
208.
25
721
46
719
9.9
728
225
828
234
928
235.
110
5611
5612
28
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-10
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-11
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-5
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-12
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-7
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-8
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-9
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-6
Test
ed B
y
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-1
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-2
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-3
ICM
-KB
50/5
0-4
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Stre
ngth
(N/m
m²)
Failu
reM
ode
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
e
Air
Test
Pot N
umbe
r :
Air
Con
tent
(%)
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Yiel
d (%
) =
Air
Met
er N
umbe
rB
alan
ce N
umbe
r :
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Slum
p Te
stPl
astic
Den
sity
Test
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)
Com
men
ts:
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
Litr
es) =
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (%
) =
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)S
olid
s (k
g)
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(3)
MA
TER
IALS
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Targ
etTr
ial
Act
ual
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
l
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(2)
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (3
)0/
4mm
Nat
ural
San
d
Kay
asan
dIC
MFi
ne A
ggre
gate
(2)
Pre
dust
er B
ICM
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
l
Cem
ent
PC
Rep
lace
men
t
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :30
0
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Dat
e of
Tria
l :M
ix D
escr
iptio
n :
Kay
asan
d +
Pre
dust
er B
/Nat
ural
San
d B
lend
50%
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
0.0
7.50
7.50
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.20
%10
73.0
0.1
2.1
26.8
326
.77
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
354.
40.
00.
08.
868.
8635
.60.
00.
00.
890.
8939
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.75
9.75
176.
04.
404.
450.
00.
000.
000.
000.
00.
000.
000.
000.
00.
000.
00TO
TALS
2329
.00
0.05
2.15
58.2
358
.23
0.00
0.00
SSD
Act
ual
0.00
W/C
00
0.00
Fine
s (%
) =0
0.00
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)1
Nor
mal
2N
orm
al1 2
11
21
31
47
57
67
728
828
928
1056
1156
1228
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-10
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-11
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-5
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-12
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-7
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-8
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-9
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-6
Test
ed B
y
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-1
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-2
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-3
ICM
-KC
50/5
0-4
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Stre
ngth
(N/m
m²)
Failu
reM
ode
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
e
Air
Test
Pot N
umbe
r :
Air
Con
tent
(%)
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Yiel
d (%
) =
Air
Met
er N
umbe
rB
alan
ce N
umbe
r :
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Slum
p Te
stPl
astic
Den
sity
Test
Con
cret
eM
ass
(g)
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)
Com
men
ts:
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
Litr
es) =
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (%
) =
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)S
olid
s (k
g)
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(3)
MA
TER
IALS
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Targ
etTr
ial
Act
ual
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
l
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(2)
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (3
)0/
4mm
Nat
ural
San
d
Kay
asan
dIC
MFi
ne A
ggre
gate
(2)
Pre
dust
er C
ICM
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
l
Cem
ent
PC
Rep
lace
men
t
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Bat
ch S
ize
(litr
es) :
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :30
0
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
M
Dat
e of
Tria
l :M
ix D
escr
iptio
n :
Kay
asan
d +
Pre
dust
er C
/Nat
ural
San
d B
lend
50%
Qu
arr
y:ICA
Qu
an
tity
Of
Fin
e A
gg
reg
ate
:**
*78
0
V7
Pro
du
ct (
wit
h P
re-D
ust
ers
):V
7 P
rodu
ct (B
efor
e P
re-D
uste
r):
68.0
0%V
7 P
rodu
ct A
(With
Pre
-Dus
ter A
)73
.60%
V7
Pro
duct
B (W
ith P
re-D
uste
r B)
75.6
0%V
7 P
rodu
ct C
(With
Pre
-Dus
ter C
)79
.70%
Mix
(kg
s)
Wit
h P
re D
ust
er
A:
Kay
asan
d:72
0.65
Pre
-Dus
ter
59.3
5
Wit
h P
re D
ust
er
B:
Kay
asan
d:70
1.59
Pre
-Dus
ter
78.4
1
Wit
h P
re D
ust
er
C:
Kay
asan
d:66
5.50
Pre
-Dus
ter
114.
50
V7
Mix
Pro
po
rtio
ns
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
030
0.0
3.00
3.00
00.
00.
000.
000.
200.
210
732.
110
75.1
10.7
510
.75
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
001.
001.
078
07.
878
7.8
7.88
7.88
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
0017
616
6.1
1.66
1.95
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
09.
9523
29.0
023
.29
23.5
823
57.7
520
4.75
SSD
Act
ual
28.7
5W
/C R
atio
0.58
70.
682
16.3
3Fi
nes
(%) =
42.1
101.
63
Slum
p Te
stSl
ump
Ret
entio
n
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)Te
stM
ode
Valu
e(m
m)
Con
cret
eD
ensi
ty
1N
orm
al60
1 H
our
Nor
mal
Mas
s (k
g)(k
g/m³)
2N
orm
al2
Hou
rsN
orm
alA
ctua
l23
.223
20M
ean
Slum
p Te
st60
Initi
al S
lum
p60
Cal
cula
ted
2357
.746
10A
ir Te
s tM
eter
Num
ber
Kay
aA
ir C
onte
nt (%
)0.
38%
2320
11
19-N
ov-1
045
.823
902
725
-Nov
-10
239.
922
403
2816
-Dec
-10
332.
524
204
2816
-Dec
-10
323.
524
10
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e of
Tria
l :M
ater
ial C
ode
:Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Bat
ch T
ime
:B
atch
Siz
e (li
tres
) :
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)A
dmix
ture
(1)
Cem
ent
10
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
R-A
ir Te
sts
Con
trol
300
Car
diff
Uni
vers
ityS
2
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
e
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)
0/4m
m N
atur
al S
and
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
PC
4/20
mm
Gra
vel
Tarm
ac
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)
MA
TER
IALS
Cem
ent
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
0 m
l0
ml
0 m
l
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Rep
lace
men
t
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Cor
rect
ed
Tria
lTa
rget
Tria
lA
ctua
l
Com
men
ts:
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Age
at
Test
Test
Dat
eM
ax L
oad
(KN
)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Adm
ixw
eigh
t
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
Litr
es) =
Failu
reM
ode
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Bal
ance
Num
ber :
Mea
n D
ensi
ty (k
g/m³)
:
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :
S.S.
D.
kg/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ion
Labo
rato
ry N
ame
:
DL
Plas
tic D
ensi
tyTe
st
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Test
ed B
y
Yiel
d (%
) =
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (%
) =
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)W
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
DL
Pot N
umbe
r :
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Stre
ngth
N/m
m²)
DL
MP
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
030
0.0
3.00
3.00
00.
00.
000.
000.
200.
210
732.
110
75.1
10.7
510
.75
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
003.
003.
078
023
.480
3.4
8.03
8.03
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
0017
615
0.5
1.50
1.80
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
025
.55
2329
.00
23.2
923
.58
2358
.05
205.
05SS
DA
ctua
l29
.05
W/C
Rat
io0.
587
0.68
316
.50
Fine
s (%
) =42
.110
1.64
Slum
p Te
stSl
ump
Ret
entio
nTe
stM
ode
Valu
e(m
m)
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)C
oncr
ete
Den
sity
1N
orm
al65
1 H
our
Nor
mal
Mas
s (k
g)(k
g/m³)
2N
orm
al2
Hou
rsN
orm
alA
ctua
l23
.223
20M
ean
Slum
p Te
st65
Initi
al S
lum
p65
Cal
cula
ted
2358
.046
10A
ir Te
stM
eter
Num
ber
Kay
aA
ir C
onte
nt (%
)0.
29%
2320
11
19-N
ov-1
044
.724
202
725
-Nov
-10
148.
722
803
2816
-Dec
-10
305.
824
404
2816
-Dec
-10
295.
524
40
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
DL
Pot N
umbe
r :B
alan
ce N
umbe
r :M
ean
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
:
Stre
ngth
(N/m
m²)
Failu
reM
ode
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Lab
Ref
eren
ceM
ould
Num
ber
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heet
Cem
ex IC
R-a
ir te
sts
Dat
e of
Tria
l :18
-Nov
-10
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:K
ayas
and
100%
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
Cem
ent (
kg/m³)
:30
0Tr
ial M
ix R
ef :
Rep
lace
men
t (%
) :B
atch
Tim
e :
Labo
rato
ry N
ame
:B
atch
Siz
e (li
tres
) :10
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eC
emen
tP
CR
epla
cem
ent
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
lA
dmix
ture
Dos
age
(ml/5
0kg)
or S
olid
Mat
eria
ls(k
g)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Kay
asan
dC
R-C
-BS
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)A
dmix
ture
(1)
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(2)
0 m
lS
olid
s (k
g)0
ml
MA
TER
IALS
Agg
rega
teA
bsor
ptio
n%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ioC
orre
cte
dTr
ial
Targ
etTr
ial
Act
ual
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)A
dmix
wei
ght
Wat
erA
dmix
ture
(1)
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)S
olid
s (k
g)C
omm
ents
:C
orre
cted
Wei
ghts
(kg/
m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
Litr
es) =
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (%
) =Yi
eld
(%) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sa
ndy
/
Nor
mal
/
Sto
ney
Test
Plas
tic D
ensi
ty
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
DL
Age
at
Test
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Test
Dat
e
Test
ed B
y
DL
MP
Sand
from
Sur
plus
Qua
rry
Mat
eria
l
Qua
rterly
Rep
ort 3
May
201
1Re
port
no: 0
QR3
-SC
9086
-CF
Quarterly�Rep
ort�3
�May�2011�
Page�1�of�5
�
1.0�In
troduction�
This�quarterly�rep
ort�covers�the
�period�of�Feb
ruary�2011
�to�April�2011.�It�repo
rts�the�
work�that�has�been�pe
rformed
�to�date�and
�presents�results�from�a�series�of�m
ixes�
cast�using
�V7�feed
�material�in�the�same�pe
riod
.��
2.0�W
ork�perform
ed�to�date�
In�this�last�quarter�the
�main�thrust�of�work�has�be
en�con
centrated�on
�establishing
�
and�pe
rforming�characterizatio
n�proced
ures�for�the
�fine�aggregate.�Trial�tests�have�
been
�pe
rformed
�on
�existin
g�Kayasand
�samples�and�
form
al�tests�
have�be
en�
performed
�on�a�range�of�the
�crusher�dust�samples�from�the
�quarries�participating�in�
the�project.�The
�crusher�dust�material�rep
resents�V7
�feed�material�and
�the
�purpo
se�
of�using
�the
�feed�material�is�to�id
entify�the�effect�the
�manufacturing
�process�has�on�
the�fresh�and�harden
ed�prope
rties�of�con
crete.�The
�activities�perform
ed�in�this�
period
�are�outlined
�in�fu
rthe
r�de
tail�be
low.�
2.1�New�coarse�and�fine�aggregate�
New
�stocks�of�coarse�and�fin
e�aggregate�were�de
livered
�and
�stored�in�the
�Schoo
l�of�
Engine
ering�to�ensure�the�availablility�of�sufficient�quantities�of�aggregate�from
�the
�
same�source�fo
r�the�du
ratio
n�of�the
�who
le�project.�This�redu
ces,�whe
re�possible,�any
�
variation�in�the
�con
trolled�parameters.�The
�coarse�aggregate�is�crushed
�lim
estone
�
4/14
�mm�w
ith�grading
�provide
d�in�App
endix�A.�It�is�sup
plied�by�Tarmac,�the�same�
supp
lier�as�the
�one
�used�previously�in
�the
�trial�m
ixes�detailed�in�Quarterly�Rep
orts�1�
and�2.�The
�fine�aggregate�is�0/4mm�dredged
�natural�sand�from
�the
�sam
e�supp
lier�as�
the�aggregate�previously�used�in�trial�m
ixes.�How
ever,�the�grading�of�the
�sand�has�
changed�since�the�trial�m
ixes,�p
robably�du
e�to�the
�change�in�dredging�site.�T
he�new
�
sand
�is�coarser�than
�the
�one
�used�previously�and
�its�grading
�is�also�provide
d�in�
App
endix�A.�
� 2.2�New�cement�
The�cemen
t�used
�in�previou
s�trial�m
ixes�was�bagged�32.5N�CEM
�II�w
ith�up�to�7%�of�
fly�ash�add
ition
�manufactured�by�Lafarge.�T
he�con
cern�was�that�the�fly
�ash�con
tent�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�3
�May�2011�
Page�2�of�6
�
could�be
�variable�therefore�affecting�the�harden
ed�and
�fresh�prop
ertie
s�of�con
crete.�
It�w
as�decided
�that�in�order�to�elim
inate�this�poten
tial�variation�CE
M�I�sho
uld�be
�
used
.�An�agreem
ent�with
�CEM
EX�w
as�m
ade�for�CE
M�I�52.5N
�cem
ent�de
liveries�in�
sealed
�buckets�in�shipmen
ts�of�15
0kg�according�to�the
�cem
ent�de
mand�for�the�
project.��
2.3�Control�trials�with�new�aggregate�and�cement�
Forty�litre�con
trol�m
ixes�were�made�with
�the
�new
�aggregate,�cem
ent�and�Taff’s�W
ell�
crushe
r�du
st.�It�was�observed�that�the
�usage�of�CE
M�I�and�ne
w�coarse�aggregate�in�
the�control�mix�yielded
�a�slump�of�50�mm�instead
�of�70mm�as�expe
cted
�from�the
�
slum
p�values�obsevred�du
ring
�the
�previou
s�trial�mixes.�Th
e�crushe
r�du
st�con
crete�
had�0m
m�slump�and�was�unw
orkable.�Two�po
tential�causes�were�iden
tified:�
1.Highe
r�fin
eness�and�lack�of�fly
�ash�particles�in�the
�CEM
�I�cem
ent�increased�
water�dem
and�and�de
creased�workability,�
2.The�absorptio
n�capacity�and
�moisture�conten
t�of�coarse�aggregate�was�not�
taken�into�accou
nt�in
�mix�design.�
In�order�to�address�the�first�point,�the
�impact�of�the�change�in
�cem
ent�on
�the
�fresh�
concrete�prope
rties�was�verified
�using
�two�10
�litre�mixes.�Th
e�CE
M�II�cemen
t�mix�
yielde
d�a�slightly�highe
r�slum
p�value�than
�the
�CEM
�I�cem
ent�mix.�How
ever,�it�was�
eviden
t�that�the
�loss�in
�the
�workability�of�the
�mix�cou
ld�not�be�attributed
�solely�to�
the�change�in
�cem
ent�type.��
In�the
�trial�m
ixes�the
�water�con
tent�and
�absorption�capacity�of�coarse�aggregate�was�
not�accoun
ted�for.�D
ue�to�the�storage�of�the
�coarse�aggregate�in�the
�con
crete�
labo
ratory�w
here�it�is�w
arm�and
�with
�sufficient�air�circulatio
n�the�aggregate�had�
become�extrem
ely�dry.�The
refore,�d
uring�mixing�a�significant�amou
nt�of�water�w
as�
absorbed
�by�the�aggregate�from
�the
�mix,�low
ering�the�effective�w/c�ratio.�T
his�was�
iden
tified�as�the
�cause�of�the�un
expe
cted
ly�lo
w�workability.�Thu
s,�it�was�decided
�to �
keep
�the
�aggregate�m
oist�and
�covered
�with
�a�jute�cloth�as�w
ell�as�determine�the�
water�con
tent�of�the
�aggregates�be
fore�m
ixing�and�accoun
t�for�the�moisture�conten
t�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�3
�May�2011�
Page�3�of�6
�
and�the�absorptio
n�capacity�of�the
�aggregate�by�adjusting�the�am
ount�of�w
ater�to�be
�
adde
d�to�th
e�mix.�
2.4�Aggregate�characterization�tests�
As�the�processed�material�from�Japan
�has�not�yet�been�de
livered
,�it�was�decided
�to�
use�crushe
r�du
sts�(0/4mm�feed�for�V7
�process)�from
�the
�quarries�involved
�in�the�
project.�The
se�w
ould�serve�as�controls�to�compare�the
�material�be
fore�and
�after�
processing
�as�well�as�bu
ild�up
�a�
database�of�variou
s�materials�and�
their�
correspo
nding�characteristics.�The
�crusher�dusts�and
�con
trol�sand�tested
�with
�the
ir�
correspo
nding�mix�designatio
ns/cod
es�are�sho
wn�be
low.�
Table�2.1.�Sou
rce�and�material�w
ith�correspon
ding
�cod
e.�
Source�
Code�
Tarm
ac,�Con
trol�dredged
�sand�
Control�
Cemex,�Taff’s�W
ell�crusher�dust�
CTͲBSͲC�
Cemex,�G
ilfach�crushe
r�du
st�
CGͲBSͲC�
AI,�Dun
tilland
�crusher�dust�
ADͲBSͲC�
AI,�Glensanda
�crusher�dust�
AGͲBSͲC�
� The�following�tests�were�pe
rformed
�on�the�crushe
r�du
sts�and�control�sand
,�the�
results�of�w
hich�are�given
�in�Table�2.2:�
1.Wet�sieving
�–(perform
ed�in�
the�
Hanson�
labo
ratory)�(graph
ical�results�in�
App
endix�A)�
2.Sand
�Equ
ivalen
t�test�
3.Absorption�capacity�and
�density�
4.Methylene
�Blue�test�according
�to�BS�EN
�933
Ͳ9�
5.Methylene
�Blue�test�–�m
etho
d�de
velope
d�by
�GRA
CE�
6.New
�Zealand
�flow
�con
e�(graph
ical�results�in
�App
endix�A)�
The�MBV
�test�is�a�test�indicatin
g�the�presen
ce�of�clay�m
ineralogy�in�a�given
�sam
ple.�
There�are�tw
o�differen
t�MBV
�tests.�O
ne�is�a�Europ
ean�Standard�test,�the
�other�has�
been
�develop
ed�by�GRA
CE�adm
ixtures.�The
�principle�of�ho
w�the
y�work�is�sim
ilar�–�
measuring
�the
�methylene
�blue�dye�absorptio
n�on
�a�m
aterial�surface.�How
ever,�the�
way�in�which�this�measuremen
t�is�perform
ed�is�differen
t.�The
�stand
ard�test�uses�
titratio
n�and�
human
�jud
gemen
t�is�involved�
in�the
�determination�
of�the
�test’s�
endp
oint,�w
hereas�the
�GRA
CE�test�calorimetrically�determines�the
�con
centratio
n�of�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�3
�May�2011�
Page�4�of�6
�
methylene
�blue�dye�which�is�left�after�the
�particle�surface�h
as�absorbe
d�it.�A
�
comparison�of�th
e�results�from
�the�tw
o�metho
ds�will�m
ade�at�th
e�en
d�of�th
e�project.�
Table�2.2�Sum
mary�of�characterization�test�results
Grading�
Control�
CTͲBSͲC�
AGͲBSͲC�
CGͲBSͲC�
ADͲBSͲC�
Coarse�
Sieve�size�(m
m)�
(%�
passing)�
(%�
passing)�
(%�
passing)�
(%�
passing)�
(%�
passing)�
(%�
passing)�
31.5�
100�
100�
100�
100�
100�
100�
20�
100�
100�
100�
100�
100�
100�
16�
100�
100�
100�
100�
100�
100�
14�
100�
100�
100�
100�
100�
100�
10�
100�
100�
100�
100�
100�
91�
8�10
0�10
0�10
0�10
0�10
0�37
�
6.3�
99�
100�
99�
100�
100�
8�
4�93
�94
�87
�99
�94
�3�
2�80
�71
�66
�81
�73
�2�
1�60
�54
�49
�64
�54
�2�
0.5�
37�
39�
35�
51�
41�
2�
0.25
�13
�28
�24
�38
�29
�1�
0.12
5�1�
19�
16�
26�
20�
1�
0.06
3�0�
12�
10�
18�
13�
1��
��
��
��
Sample�
Control�
CTͲBSͲC�
AGͲBSͲC�
CGͲBSͲC�
ADͲBSͲC�
Coarse�
Sand�Equivalen
t�test�
Awaitin
g�result�
65�
50�
27�
48�
Ͳ�
��
��
��
�
Sample�
Control�
CTͲBSͲC�
AGͲBSͲC�
CGͲBSͲC�
ADͲBSͲC�
Coarse�
Water�ab
sorption�W
A24,�
%�
1.04
�1.09
�0.58
�1.53
�1.92
�0.79
�
Particle�density�on�SSD
�basis,�M
g/m
3�
2.66
�2.83
�2.64
�2.68
�2.89
�2.70
�
Particle�density�on�an�
ovenͲdried�basis,�M
g/m
3�
2.63
�2.79
�2.62
�2.64
�2.83
�2.68
�
Apparan
t�particle�
den
sity,�M
g/m
3 �2.71
�2.88
�2.66
�2.76
�3.00
�2.73
�
��
��
��
�
NZ�Flow�Cone�
Control�
CTͲBSͲC�
AGͲBSͲC�
CGͲBSͲC�
ADͲBSͲC�
Coarse�
Voids,�%�
37.89%
�41.19%
�42.40%
�45.94%
�45.73%
�Ͳ�
Flow�time,�sec�
20.9�
32.4�
29.1�
28.6�
36.7�
Ͳ��
��
��
��
Sample�
Control�
CTͲBSͲC�
AGͲBSͲC�
CGͲBSͲC�
ADͲBSͲC�
Coarse�
BS�EN
�933Ͳ9�M
B�value,�
gram
s�of�d
ye�per�
kilogram
�of�the�0/2�m
m�
fraction�
0.34
�0.43
�0.77
�2.58
�5.36
�Ͳ�
GRACE�MBV�TEST�RESULT�
0/2�m
m�fraction�
0.35
�0.67
�0.94
�3.9�
6.16
�Ͳ�
�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�3
�May�2011�
Page�5�of�6
�
2.5
Control�m
ixes�with�crusher�dust
Concrete�m
ade�with
�crusher�dust�as�a�rep
lacemen
t�for�natural�sand
�resulted�in�
unworkable�and�zero�slump�mixtures.�The
refore,�it�was�decided
�to�prep
are�mixtures�
with
�add
ition
al�w
ater�w
hich�w
ould�give�70
�±10
�mm�slump,�the
�sam
e�as�for�the
�
control�natural�sand�mixture.��
The�additio
nal�water�req
uiremen
t�was�determined
�in�sm
all�10
�litre�mixes�to�avoid�
the�longer�m
ixing�tim
es�associated�with
�the
�40�litre�batches.�In�the
se�m
ixtures�the�
water�con
tent�and
�absorption�capacity�of�fin
e�and�coarse�aggregate�w
as�taken
�into�
accoun
t,�allowing�w/c�ratios�to�be�precisely�calculated
.�This�signifie
d�that�a�tim
e�
consuiming�trial�a
nd�error�app
roach�to�prepare�40�litre�batches�w
ith�the
�sam
e�w/c�
ratio
s�and�workability�could�be
�avoided
.��
The�acqu
ired
�data�will�be�used
�later�to�com
pare�and
�evaluate�the�influ
ence�of�the
�V7�
process�on
�spe
cific�rock�type
s.�M
ix�designs�and
�correspon
ding
�fresh�and
�harde
ned�
prop
ertie
s�can�be
�fou
nd�in
�App
endix�B.�The
�following�tests�were/will�be�carried�ou
t�
on�fresh�and�harden
ed�con
crete�prop
ertie
s:�
1.Slum
p�2.
Air�entrapm
ent��
3.Fresh�de
nsity
�4.
Compressive�stren
gth�–�1,7,28
�days�
5.Flexural�stren
gth�–�28
�days.�
� Three�mixes�have�be
en�perform
ed�using
�the
�crusher�dust�from
�Taffs�W
ell�(CT
ͲBSͲC),�
Glensanda
�(AGͲBSͲC)�and
�Dun
tiland�(ADͲBSͲC)�quarries.�All�three�mixes�are�awaitin
g�
final�results�and
�an�additio
nal�tw
o�mixes�w
ill�be�cast�in�ne
ar�future�to�include
�the
�
control�mix�and
�the
�Gilfach�qu
arry.�The�mix�propo
rtions�used�in�the
�mixes,�alon
g�
with
�the
�results�obtaine
d�to�date�are�provided
�in�full�in�App
endix�B.�It�is�difficult�at�
this�stage
�to�draw
�any�com
parisons�between�the�results�from�the
�mixes�as�in�order�
to�con
trol�the
�workability�of�the
�mix,�the�water/cem
ent�ratio
�is�altered�for�each�
crushe
r�du
st�m
aterial.�The�magnitude
�of�this�alte
ratio
n�will�be�highly�dep
ende
nt�on�
the�absorptio
n�characterisics�of�the
�crusher�dust,�the
�grading
�of�the
�crusher�dust�and�
on�the
�shape
�of�the�crushe
r�du
st�particles�which�in
�turn�is�highly�de
pend
ent�on
�the
�
behaviou
r�of�ind
ividual�rock�types�during�the�qu
arry�crushing�process.�The
�most�
useful�com
parison�to�m
ake�will�be�be
tween�the�crushe
r�du
st�m
ix�results�and
�the
�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�3
�May�2011�
Page�6�of�6
�
results�from�the
�mixes�m
ade�with
�the
�sam
e�rock�type�V7�prod
uct.�This�will�only�be
�
possible�once�the�V7
�material�for�each�qu
arry�has�been�de
livered
�and
�processed
�in�
the�Cardiff�Schoo
l�of�E
ngineering.��
� 3.Future�work�
The�plan
�for�the
�next�qu
arter�is�to�carry�ou
t�all�the
�crusher�dust�testing�be
fore�the
�
Kayasand
�V7�material�arrives.�O
nce�the�V7
�material�has�arrived
�it�will�be�processed�in�
the�Scho
ol�of�E
ngineering
�using
�the�characterisatio
n�tests�that�have�be
en�establishe
d�
and�mixed
�using
�con
stant�w
/c�ratios�as�iden
tified�in�th
e�prelim
inary�mixes.�
�
Quarterly�Report�3�May�2011�
Page�A1�of�2�
Appendix�A�–�Characterisation�Results�
�
Figure�A1.�Aggregate�particle�size�distribution�and�recommended�grading�envelopes�for�UK�by�PD�6682Ͳ1:2009�in�GF85�category
Quarterly�Report�3�May�2011�
Page�A2�of�2�
�
Figure�A2.�NZ�Flow�cone�results�and�specification�envelope
Quartely�Re
port�3�M
ay�201
1
Appendix�B�M
ix�Details�and�Compressive�Strength�Results
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
030
0.0
12.0
012
.00
00.
00.
000.
000.
791.
700.
910
739.
810
82.8
43.3
143
.31
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
001.
923.
501.
678
012
.379
2.3
31.6
931
.69
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
0017
615
3.9
6.16
9.53
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
022
.09
2329
.00
93.1
696
.53
2413
.34
260.
34SS
DA
ctua
l84
.34
W/C
Rat
io0.
587
0.86
947
.92
Fine
s (%
) =42
.198
.21
Slum
p Te
st
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)C
oncr
ete
Den
sity
1N
orm
al60
Mas
s (k
g)(k
g/m³)
2N
orm
al60
Act
ual
18.9
615
2370
.188
22.9
04M
ean
Slum
p Te
st60
Cal
cula
ted
19.3
124
13.3
388
Air
Test
3.94
25M
eter
Num
ber
Kay
a23
70.1
88A
ir C
onte
nt (%
)0.
19%
11
26-M
ay-1
163
.26.
32N
orm
al23
612
126
-May
-11
64.5
6.45
Nor
mal
2369
.53
126
-May
-11
616.
1N
orm
al23
534
75
76
77
288
289
2810 11 12 13 14 15
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
MP
MP
Lab
Ref
eren
ce
Pot M
ass
:M
ean
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
:
Mou
ldN
umbe
rA
ge a
tTe
stTe
stD
ate
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Test
ed B
y
MP
Stre
ngth
N/m
m²)
Plas
tic D
ensi
tyTe
stP
ot +
co
ncre
te(k
g)
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Failu
reM
ode
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (Li
tres
) =D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d (%
) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Com
men
ts: H
igh
wat
er d
eman
dC
orre
cted
Wei
ghts
(kg/
m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
0 m
l
Cor
rect
edk g
/m³
Tria
lTa
rget
Tria
lA
ctua
lM
ATE
RIA
LSA
ggre
gate
Abs
orpt
ion
%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ion
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(2)
0 m
l
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Dun
tilan
d
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(2)
Cru
sher
Dus
tA
I
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
lC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(2)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eC
emen
tP
CR
epla
cem
ent
Tria
l Mix
Ref
:R
epla
cem
ent (
%) :
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Car
diff
Uni
vers
ityB
atch
Siz
e (li
tres
) :40
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
S2
Con
cret
e M
ix W
orks
heet
Dat
e of
Tria
l :19
-May
-11
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:C
rush
er D
ust 1
00%
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
AD
-BS
-CC
emen
t (kg
/m³)
:30
0
Page�B1�of�3
Qua
rterly
Rep
ort 3
May
201
1
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
030
0.0
12.0
012
.00
00.
00.
000.
000.
791.
150.
410
733.
910
76.9
43.0
743
.07
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
001.
091.
190.
178
00.
878
0.8
31.2
331
.23
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
0017
617
1.4
6.85
8.58
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
04.
6423
29.0
093
.16
94.8
923
72.1
421
9.14
SSD
Act
ual F
re43
.14
W/C
Rat
io0.
587
0.73
124
.51
Fine
s (%
) =42
.110
1.30
Slum
p Te
st
Test
Mod
eVa
lue
(mm
)C
oncr
ete
Den
sity
1N
orm
al80
Mas
s (k
g)(k
g/m³)
2N
orm
al80
Act
ual
19.2
2424
0323
.166
5M
ean
Slum
p Te
st80
Cal
cula
ted
18.9
823
72.1
438
Air
Test
3.94
25M
eter
Num
ber
Kay
a24
03A
ir C
onte
nt (%
)0.
70%
11
20-M
ay-1
110
510
.5N
orm
al23
942
120
-May
-11
100.
110
.01
Nor
mal
2391
31
20-M
ay-1
198
.69.
86N
orm
al23
834
726
-May
-11
273.
227
.32
Nor
mal
2420
57
26-M
ay-1
126
6.9
26.6
9N
orm
al24
156
726
-May
-11
273.
127
.31
Nor
mal
2421
728
828
928
10 11 12 13 14 15
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
SD
SD
MP
SD
MP
Lab
Ref
eren
ce
Pot M
ass
:M
ean
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
:
Mou
ldN
umbe
rA
ge a
tTe
stTe
stD
ate
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Test
ed B
y
MP
Stre
ngth
N/m
m²)
Plas
tic D
ensi
tyTe
stP
ot +
co
ncre
te(k
g)
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Failu
reM
ode
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (Li
tres
) =D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d (%
) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e:
Sto
ney
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Com
men
ts:M
ix a
ppea
rs w
ater
y, li
ttle
blee
ding
in m
olds
, wor
kabi
lity
ok, f
inis
hing
w
ell
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
0 m
l
Cor
rect
edk g
/m³
Tria
lTa
rget
Tria
lA
ctua
lM
ATE
RIA
LSA
ggre
gate
Abs
orpt
ion
%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
k g/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ion
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(2)
0 m
l
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Taff'
s W
ell
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(2)
Cru
sher
Dus
tC
EM
EX
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
lC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(2)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eC
emen
tP
CR
epla
cem
ent
Tria
l Mix
Ref
:R
epla
cem
ent (
%) :
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Car
diff
Uni
vers
ityB
atch
Siz
e (li
tres
) :40
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
S2
Con
cret
e M
ix W
orks
heet
Dat
e of
Tria
l :19
-May
-11
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:C
rush
er D
ust 1
00%
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
CT-
BS
-CC
emen
t (kg
/m³)
:30
0
Pag
e B
2 of
3
Quarterly�Rep
ort�3
�May�201
1
S.G
Tota
lFr
ee%
%30
030
0.0
12.0
012
.00
00.
00.
000.
000.
791.
700.
910
739.
810
82.8
43.3
143
.31
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
000.
582.
001.
478
011
.179
1.1
31.6
431
.64
0.0
00.
00.
00.
000.
0017
615
5.2
6.21
8.70
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
TOTA
LS23
29.0
020
.84
2329
.00
93.1
695
.65
2391
.34
238.
34SS
DA
ctua
l62
.34
W/C
Rat
io0.
587
0.79
535
.42
Fine
s (%
) =42
.197
.77
Slum
p Te
st
Test
Mod
eVa
lue(
mm
)C
oncr
ete
Den
sity
1N
orm
al60
Mas
s (k
g)(k
g/m³)
2N
orm
al70
Act
ual
18.7
0523
38.1
2522
.647
5M
ean
Slum
p Te
st65
Cal
cula
ted
19.1
323
91.3
48
Air
Test
3.94
25M
eter
Num
ber
Kay
a23
38.1
25A
ir C
onte
nt (%
)0.
50%
11
27-M
ay-1
186
.48.
64N
orm
al23
15.5
21
27-M
ay-1
185
8.5
Nor
mal
2301
31
27-M
ay-1
187
.68.
76N
orm
al22
974
75
76
77
288
289
2810 11 12 13 14 15
Wor
ked
Car
ried
Out
By
:-W
orke
d C
heck
ed O
ut B
y :-
Dat
e :-
Dat
e :-
AG
-BS
-C 3
MP
AG
-BS
-C 2
MP
Lab
Ref
eren
ce
Pot M
ass
:M
ean
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
:
Mou
ldN
umbe
rA
ge a
tTe
stTe
stD
ate
Max
Loa
d(K
N)
Den
sity
(kg/
m³)
Test
ed B
y
AG
-BS
-C 1
MP
Stre
ngth
N/m
m²)
Plas
tic D
ensi
tyTe
stP
ot +
co
ncre
te(k
g)
Pot V
olum
e (li
tres
) :
Failu
reM
ode
Diff
eren
ce fr
om T
arge
t (Li
tres
) =D
iffer
ence
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d (%
) =
Con
cret
e A
ppea
ranc
e: R
ocky
Adm
ixw
eigh
tW
ater
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)A
dmix
ture
(2)
Sol
ids
(kg)
Com
men
ts: h
ard
to fi
nish
Cor
rect
ed W
eigh
ts (k
g/m³)
=C
orre
cted
Wat
er (L
/m³)
=
Cem
ent
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(1)
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (2
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (2
)
0 m
l
Cor
rect
edkg
/m³
Tria
lTa
rget
Tria
lA
ctua
lM
ATE
RIA
LSA
ggre
gate
Abs
orpt
ion
%
Agg
rega
te M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
S.S.
D.
kg/m
³M
oist
ure
Cor
rect
ion
Sol
ids
(kg)
0 m
lA
dmix
ture
(2)
0 m
l
Adm
ixtu
reD
osag
e (m
l/50k
g)or
Sol
id M
ater
ials
(kg)
Gle
nsan
da
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(2)
Cru
sher
Dus
tA
I
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te (1
)4/
20m
m G
rave
lC
oars
e A
ggre
gate
(2)
Fine
Agg
rega
te (1
)
Bas
ic M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eC
emen
tP
CR
epla
cem
ent
Tria
l Mix
Ref
:R
epla
cem
ent (
%) :
Bat
ch T
ime
:La
bora
tory
Nam
e :
Car
diff
Uni
vers
ityB
atch
Siz
e (li
tres
) :40
Targ
et C
onsi
sten
ce :
S2
Con
cret
e M
ix W
orks
heet
Dat
e of
Tria
l :26
-May
-11
Mix
Des
crip
tion
:C
rush
er D
ust 1
00%
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
AG
-BS
-CC
emen
t (kg
/m³)
:30
0
Page�B3�of�3
Sand
from
Sur
plus
Qua
rry
Mat
eria
l
Qua
rterly
Rep
ort 4
Augu
st 2
011
Repo
rt no
: 0Q
R4-S
C90
86-C
F
Quarterly�Rep
ort�4
�August�2
011�
Page�2�of�3
�
1.0�In
troduction�
This�quarterly�rep
ort�covers�the
�period�of�M
ay�2011�to�August�2011.�It�repo
rts�the�work�that�has�
been
�perform
ed�to�date�on�a�series�of�m
ixes�cast�using�basalt�and�granite
�Kayasand�received
�from
�
Japan�du
ring
�the�pe
riod
�of�this�qu
arterly�repo
rt.��
2.0�W
ork�perform
ed�to�date�
In�this�last�quarter�the
�main�thrust�of�work�has�concerne
d�the�full�scale�testing�of�basalt�and�
granite
�Kayasand�received
�from
�Japan.�M
oreo
ver,�crusher�dusts�from
�all�qu
arries�that�form
�part�of�
this�research�project�have�been�characterised�and�cast�in�concrete�to�en
able�the
�effect�of�the
�
Kayasand
�manufacturing
�process�on�the�fresh�and�harden
ed�prope
rties�of�the
�con
crete�to�be�
establishe
d.�All�mixes�were�cast�using
�cem
ent�conten
ts�of�30
0�kg/m
3 �with
�con
stant�workability�of�
S2�slump.
The�initial�delay�in
�Kayasand�material�d
elivery�to�Cardiff�University
�allowed
�the
���literature�review
�
of�usage�of�manufactured�sand
s�in�con
crete�to�be�completed
�(see�App
endix�A).�This�lite
rature�
review
�will�fo
rm�one
�of�the
�chapters�of�th
e�Ph
D�th
esis.�
Upo
n�de
livery�of�Glensanda
�(granite
) �and�Dun
tilland
�(basalt)�Kayasands�a�full�range�of�plann
ed�
aggregate�characterisatio
n�tests�were�pe
rformed
.�Fine
�aggregate�particle�size�distribu
tions�w
ere�
determ
ined
�by�wet�sieving
�in�the�Hanson�labo
ratory�w
hereas�the
�rem
aind
er�of�the�tests�were�
carried�ou
t�in�Cardiff�University
’s�con
crete�labo
ratory.�Th
e�results�w
ill�be�presen
ted�in�the
�next�
quarterly�repo
rt.��
One
�of�the�initial�objectiv
es�of�the�expe
rimen
tal�w
ork�was�to�de
term
ine�the�effect�of�the�use�of�
Kayasand
�on�the�strength�of�con
crete�whilst�maintaining
�the�same�mix�propo
rtions�fo
r�all�con
crete�
mixes�cast.�This�involved
�maintaining
�the
�sam
e�water/cem
ent�ratio
�whilst�simply�repo
rting�the�
resulting
�workability�of�the
�con
crete.�H
owever,�after�a�nu
mbe
r�of�Kayasand�and�natural�sand
�
(con
trol)�mixes�were�made�with
�300
�kg/m3�cemen
t�it�was�quickly�evide
nt�that�the�water�dem
and�
for�each�of�the�Kayasand
s�was�highe
r�than
�for�natural�sand�as�w
ell�as�differing�be
tween�the�
Kayasand
s,�w
ith�basalt�sand
�displaying�a�the�highest�water�dem
and�of�all�sand
s.�This�suggested�
that�it�w
as�going
�to�extrem
ely�difficult�to�obtain�workable�concrete�m
ixtures�maintain�the�same�
w/c�ratios�with
out�introdu
cing
�som
e�changes�in�th
e�mix�design.�
Expe
rt�con
sulta
tion�was�sou
ght�from
�AI�a
nd�Grace,�w
ho�suggested
�changes�in
�mixture�design�by
�
increasing
�the
�cem
ent�conten
t�and�changing
�the
�fine�to�coarse�aggregate�ratio
.�After�ano
ther�set�
Quarterly�Rep
ort�4
�August�2
011�
Page�3�of�3
�
of�trial�m
ixes�and
�a�visit�to�the
�Grace�R&D�lab�in�UK�the�mix�design�was�changed
�and
�the
�existing�
mostly
�single�sized�14mm�coarse�aggregate�replaced
�with
�a�con
tinuo
usly�grade
d�4�to�20�mm.�The
�
change�in�aggregates�w
as�justified�by
�a�trial�w
ith�plasticizer�–�the
�con
crete�mixture�w
ith�single�
sized�aggregate�resulte
d�in�a�m
ixture�w
hich�w
as�“harsh”�and
�difficult�to�w
ork�with
.�Therefore,�a�
coarse�aggregate�of�continuo
us�particle�size�distribu
tion�was�con
side
red�to�be�more�suita
ble�for�
the�
programme�
keep
ing�in�m
ind�
that�the
�secon
d�ph
ase�
of�con
crete�
testing�wou
ld�include
�
admixtures.�
The�changes�in� m
ix�design�and�ne
w�coarse�aggregate�lowered
�the
�water�dem
ands�for�all�sand
s,�
but�it�was�clear�that�it�wou
ld�be�im
possible�to�achieve�eq
ual�w
/c�ratios�for�all�sands,�the
refore,�a
�
new�app
roach�was�con
side
red�as�sum
marised
�below
:�
1.For�each�quarry�a�concrete�m
ixture�with
�350
�kg/m
3 �cem
ent�con
tent�and
�Kayasand�+�pred
uster�
A�(u
sually�2Ͳ�3
%�fine
s)�is�m
ade�with
�target�slump�of�70�mm.�The
�w/c�ratio�of�that�m
ix�is�
recorded
.�
2.The�rest�of�the
�Kayasand�mixes�fo
r�that�quarry�are�mixed
�with
�the�recorded
�w/c�ratio�and
�
tested
�for�fresh�and�harden
ed�prope
rties.�
3.A�natural�sand�mix�(con
trol�m
ix�1)�w
ith�th
e�recorded
�w/c�is�m
ade�and�tested
.�
4.An�additio
nal�natural�sand�mix�(con
trol�m
ix�2)�w
ith�a�ta
rget�slump�of�70�mm�is�m
ade�and�
tested
.�
� 3.0�Future�work�
The�plan
�for�the
�next�qu
arter�is�to�process�all�of�the
�fresh�and
�harde
ned�concrete�results�for�
presen
tatio
n�in�a�con
ference�pape
r.��
� �
Sand
from
Sur
plus
Qua
rry
Mat
eria
l
Qua
rterly
Rep
ort 5
Dece
mbe
r 201
1Re
port
no: 0
QR5
-SC
9086
-CF
Quarterly�Rep
ort�5
�Decem
ber�2011
�
Page�2�of�3
�
1.�Introduction�
This�quarterly�rep
ort�covers�the
�period�of�Sep
tembe
r�2011
�to�Novem
ber�2011.�It�rep
orts�the
�
results�of�the
�work�that�has�been�pe
rformed
�to�date�on�basalt�and�granite
�Kayasand�received
�from
�
Japan�du
ring
�the�pe
riod
�of�Q
R4.��
2.�W
ork�perform
ed�to�date�
2.1�Conference�Pap
er�
� In�this�last�quarter�the
�main�thrust�of�work�has�be
en�con
cerned
�with
�the
�processing�of�the
�fresh�
and�harden
ed�con
crete�results�from�the
�Granite�and
�Basalt�Kaysand�mixes.�These�have�been�
incorporated
�into�a�conferen
ce�paper�entitled
�“Manufactured�sand
�for�a�low
�carbo
n�era”�to�be
�
presen
ted�
at�the
�201
2�Co
nferen
ce�o
n�“Con
crete�for�a�low�C
arbo
n�Era”,�on
e�of�the
�largest�
international�con
crete�conferen
ces�ho
sted
�by�the�Co
ncrete�Techn
ology�Unit�at�the
�University
�of�
Dun
dee.�The
�con
ference�pape
r�in�App
endix�A�provide
s�a�succinct�sum
mary�of�the
�testin
g�and�
results�to
�date.�
2.2�Further�Laboratory�Tests �
The�differen
ces�in�the
�water�dem
and�that�were�highlighted
�in�the
�last�quarterly�rep
ort�have�been�
attributed
�to�the�clay�con
tent�of�Dun
tilland
�basalt�sand
�as�indicated�by�high�MBV
�value
s�from
�the
�
aggregate�
testing�
results�a
s�well�as�d
ifferen
ces�in�shape
�of�the�
aggregates.�A�n
umbe
r�of�
exploratory�labo
ratory� tests�have�be
en�perform
ed�to�investigate�de
activation�of�the
�clay�conten
t�
and�these�are�still�ongoing.��
2.3�Visits�to�Project�Partners�
A�num
ber�of�site
�visits�have�be
en�con
ducted
�since�the
�con
crete�testing�work�was�com
pleted
�in�
August�2
011:�
xVisit�to�CEM
EX�Rugby�plant�to�familiarize�with
�cem
ent�manufacturing
�and
� meet�with
�
peop
le�working
�in�th
e�particular�field.�
xVisit�to�Aggregate�In
dustries�R&D�lab�in�Derby�to�discuss�and�share�op
inions�and
�results�on�
the�progress�of�the
�project,�testin
g�and�mixing�metho
ds.�
xVisit�to�Grace�Con
struction�Prod
ucts�R&D�lab�in�Poland,�Poznan.�Aim
ed�as�an
�introd
uctio
n�
into�adm
ixtures�and �their�usage�in�con
crete,�te
sting,�quality�control,�do
sages�etc.��
Quarterly�Rep
ort�5
�Dec�2011�
Page�3�of�3
�
The�know
ledge�gained
�from
�the�visit�to�the�Grace�labo
ratory�will�allow�th
e�use�of�adm
ixtures�to�be�
explored
�with
in�this�project.�It�is�evide
nt�from�the
�results�presented
�in�the
�con
ference�pape
r�that�
Kayasand
�can
�be�successfully�used�in�con
crete�with
out�the�use�of�adm
ixtures,�how
ever,�it�is�rare�in
�
practice�that�con
crete�wou
ld�be�made�with
out�admixtures.�It�is�the
refore�impo
rtant�for�future�
commercial�viability�to�u
nderstand�
and�
iden
tify�the�po
tential�interaction�
betw
een�
the�sand
,�
admixtures�and�clay�deͲactiv
ators.�
3.�Future�Plans��
The�plan
�for�the
�next�qu
arter�is�to�repe
at�the
�establishe
d�labo
ratory�procedu
res�and�tests�on
�the
�
Gilfach�and�Taffs�Well�K
ayasand�samples�w
hen�they�are�received�midͲJanuary�2012.�Further�lo
ng�
term
�plans�which�will�enable�additio
nal�acade
mic�pub
lication�of�th
e�work�also�includ
e:
1.Co
ncrete�m
ixes�with
�adm
ixtures:�testin
g�all �available�sand
s�and�preͲdu
sters�with
�w/c�ratio�
of�0.55�with
�various�W
ater�Red
ucing�Agents�(W
RDA)�9
0�do
sages�to�obtain�S2�slump�aiming�
at�70�mm.�
2.Shape�and�texture�stud
y:�analysis�of�differen
t�gradings,�shape
s�and�textures�using
�optical�
microscop
e,�New
�Zealand
�flow
�con
e,�and
�Mini�m
ortar�slum
p�tests�with
� con
stant�w
/c�ratio.�
3.MBV
�and
�clay�inhibitor�stud
y:�te
sting�MBV
�and
�mini�m
ortar�slum
p�of�treated�and�un
treated�
sand
s.�
� � � � � � � � � � � � � �
Quarterly�Rep
ort�5
�Dec�2011�
Appendix�A�–�Conference�Pap
er�Dundee�2012�
MA
NU
FAC
TUR
ED S
AN
D F
OR
A L
OW
CA
RBO
N E
RA
M
. Pile
gis*
, D.R
. Gar
dner
and
R.J
. Lar
k,C
ardi
ff U
nive
rsity
Key
wor
ds: m
anuf
actu
red
sand
, con
cret
e, sa
nd re
plac
emen
t, w
orka
bilit
y, st
reng
th
Abs
trac
t
In 2
000
the
Wel
sh A
ssem
bly
ackn
owle
dged
the
need
to fi
nd a
sust
aina
ble
use
for t
he g
row
ing
stoc
k pi
les
of c
rush
er f
ines
in
Wal
es,
and
com
mis
sion
ed r
esea
rch
into
the
ir us
e as
a
repl
acem
ent f
or n
atur
al s
and
in c
oncr
ete.
Thi
s st
udy
conc
lude
d th
at c
rush
er fi
nes
wer
e no
t a
suita
ble
repl
acem
ent f
or n
atur
al s
and
in c
oncr
ete
due
to th
eir i
ncon
sist
ent g
radi
ng a
nd a
lack
of
par
ticle
s in
the
0.3
to 1
mm
rang
e. N
ew m
etho
ds o
f man
ufac
turin
g sa
nd a
re n
ow a
vaila
ble
whi
ch c
an m
ore
accu
rate
ly c
ontro
l th
e sa
nd p
artic
le s
ize,
sha
pe a
nd g
rada
tion
incl
udin
g pa
rticl
es in
the
usua
lly d
efic
ient
rang
e. T
here
fore
a st
udy
has b
een
laun
ched
to in
vest
igat
e th
e su
itabi
lity
of th
is m
anuf
actu
red
sand
for u
se in
con
cret
e ap
plic
atio
ns.
Con
cret
e th
at in
corp
orat
es s
and
man
ufac
ture
d fr
om q
uarr
y w
aste
is a
maj
or d
evel
opm
ent i
n ac
hiev
ing
a su
stai
nabl
e co
nstru
ctio
n m
ater
ial.
How
ever
, the
cha
ract
eris
tics
of m
anuf
actu
red
fine
aggr
egat
es a
re d
iffer
ent t
o th
ose
of n
atur
al s
ands
and
thei
r eff
ects
on
the
perf
orm
ance
of
conc
rete
are
not
ful
ly u
nder
stoo
d. T
he m
ost
com
mon
iss
ues
asso
ciat
ed w
ith m
anuf
actu
red
sand
s ar
e po
or s
hape
, gra
datio
n, a
nd th
e qu
antit
y an
d qu
ality
of f
iller
mat
eria
l. To
inve
stig
ate
the
effe
cts o
f the
se a
nd o
ther
par
amet
ers a
test
pro
gram
me
has b
een
unde
rtake
n.
Labo
rato
ry te
sts
have
bee
n us
ed to
eva
luat
e th
e m
iner
alog
ical
and
phy
sica
l cha
ract
eris
tics
of
a ra
nge
of q
uarr
y w
aste
san
ds. C
oncr
ete
mix
es w
ith 1
00%
repl
acem
ent o
f nat
ural
san
d ha
ve
been
use
d to
com
pare
and
cor
rela
te th
e ch
arac
teris
tics
of th
ese
sand
s w
ith th
e be
havi
our
of
fres
h an
d ha
rden
ed c
oncr
ete.
Thi
s pap
er d
escr
ibes
the
met
hodo
logy
of t
his s
tudy
, pre
sent
s the
re
sults
and
dis
cuss
es th
e si
gnifi
canc
e of
the
findi
ngs
in th
e co
ntex
t of m
anuf
actu
red
sand
for
a lo
w c
arbo
n er
a.
INT
RO
DU
CT
ION
As
natu
ral r
esou
rces
of c
oncr
ete
aggr
egat
es a
re b
eing
dep
lete
d or
a re
sist
ance
to th
e us
age
of
dred
ged
sand
due
to e
nviro
nmen
tal c
once
rns
is m
et, a
n al
tern
ativ
e so
urce
of
fine
aggr
egat
e ha
s to
be
foun
d. O
ne s
uch
sour
ce is
cru
shed
rock
mat
eria
l fro
m s
tone
qua
rrie
s. H
owev
er, t
he
mat
eria
l pr
oduc
ed d
iffer
s in
cha
ract
eris
tics
from
nat
ural
san
ds.
The
maj
or d
iffer
ence
s ar
e sh
ape
and
text
ure,
gra
ding
and
am
ount
of
fine
fille
r. Th
ese
char
acte
ristic
s ca
n de
trim
enta
lly
affe
ct c
oncr
ete,
ther
efor
e m
anuf
actu
red
fine
aggr
egat
es a
re o
nly
relu
ctan
tly a
ccep
ted
with
in
the
indu
stry
[1].
The
man
ufac
ture
d fin
e ag
greg
ate
(MFA
) sha
pe is
typi
cally
hig
hly
angu
lar,
elon
gate
d or
flak
y.
This
cha
ract
eris
tic g
reat
ly in
fluen
ces
the
fres
h an
d th
eref
ore
hard
ened
pro
perti
es o
f con
cret
e.
MFA
shap
e de
pend
s on
the
pare
nt ro
ck a
nd to
larg
e ex
tent
on
the
crus
hing
met
hod
[2],
[3].
Typi
cal
parti
cle
size
di
strib
utio
n of
M
FA
or
“qua
rry
dust
” ra
rely
co
nfor
ms
to
the
requ
irem
ents
of n
atio
nal s
tand
ards
. The
se ty
pes
of a
ggre
gate
can
pro
duce
“ha
rsh”
mix
es w
ith
blee
ding
pro
blem
s if
it is
was
hed
and
scre
ened
to fa
ll w
ithin
the
pres
crib
ed li
mits
[1].
This
is
mai
nly
due
to a
n ex
cess
of
fine
parti
cles
pas
sing
the
63
mic
ron
siev
e an
d a
defic
ienc
y of
pa
rticl
es in
the
size
ran
ge 0
.3m
m to
1m
m. T
hus
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nds
are
com
mon
ly u
sed
in
blen
ds w
ith f
ine
natu
ral
sand
s to
ove
rcom
e th
ese
shor
tcom
ings
and
min
imis
e th
e ne
gativ
e ef
fect
s on
fres
h an
d ha
rden
ed c
oncr
ete
prop
ertie
s.
An
alte
rnat
ive
to w
ashi
ng a
nd b
lend
ing
is re
proc
essi
ng th
e qu
arry
fine
s by
empl
oyin
g an
othe
r cr
ushe
r to
ref
ine
the
parti
cle
shap
e an
d si
ze d
istri
butio
n. F
urth
erm
ore,
if
the
clas
sific
atio
n pr
oces
s of t
he p
rodu
ct e
mpl
oys a
dry
inst
ead
of a
wet
syst
em th
en e
nviro
nmen
tal b
enef
its c
an
be g
aine
d. K
otob
uki
Engi
neer
ing
& M
anuf
actu
ring
Com
pany
(K
emco
), Ja
pane
se q
uarr
y in
dust
ry s
uppl
ier
has
deve
lope
d a
plan
t whi
ch in
corp
orat
es th
ese
feat
ures
, kno
wn
as th
e V
7 dr
y sa
nd m
anuf
actu
ring
syst
em.
Acc
ordi
ng to
Lus
ty, i
n 20
08 th
ere
wer
e ap
prox
imat
ely
50 V
7 pl
ants
in J
apan
acc
ount
ing
for
20%
of
Japa
n’s
sand
sup
ply
[4].
The
sand
has
bee
n no
ted
as “
exhi
bitin
g ex
celle
nt
char
acte
ristic
s in
con
cret
e as
a c
ompl
ete
repl
acem
ent f
or n
atur
al s
and.
Mor
eove
r it h
as b
een
repo
rted
that
the
shap
e of
the
parti
cles
is c
ubic
le e
ven
in th
e fin
e si
zes,
and
the
grad
atio
n ca
n be
adj
uste
d an
d he
ld a
t a
leve
l w
ithin
any
of
the
stan
dard
s se
t by
Am
eric
an S
ocie
ty f
or
Test
ing
and
Mat
eria
ls (A
STM
), Ja
pane
se S
tand
ards
(JIS
) or B
ritis
h St
anda
rds (
BS)
.”
In 2
000
the
Wel
sh A
ssem
bly
ackn
owle
dged
the
need
to fi
nd a
sust
aina
ble
use
for t
he g
row
ing
stoc
k pi
les
of c
rush
er f
ines
in
Wal
es,
and
com
mis
sion
ed r
esea
rch
into
the
ir us
e as
a
repl
acem
ent f
or n
atur
al sa
nd in
con
cret
e [1
]. Th
is st
udy
conc
lude
d th
at c
rush
er fi
nes w
ere
not
a su
itabl
e re
plac
emen
t for
nat
ural
sand
in c
oncr
ete
due
to th
eir i
ncon
sist
ent g
radi
ng a
nd a
lack
of
par
ticle
s in
the
0.3
to 1
mm
rang
e. N
ew m
etho
ds, i
nclu
ding
Kem
co’s
V7,
of m
anuf
actu
ring
sand
are
now
ava
ilabl
e w
hich
can
mor
e ac
cura
tely
con
trol t
he s
and
parti
cle
size
, sha
pe a
nd
grad
atio
n in
clud
ing
parti
cles
in
the
usua
lly d
efic
ient
ran
ge.
Ther
efor
e th
is s
tudy
has
bee
n la
unch
ed t
o in
vest
igat
e th
e su
itabi
lity
of t
his
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd f
or u
se i
n co
ncre
te
appl
icat
ions
in W
ales
and
the
UK
as a
100
% re
plac
emen
t for
nat
ural
sand
.
In th
is s
tudy
two
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nds
of d
iffer
ent m
iner
alog
y pr
oduc
ed u
sing
the
V7
plan
t w
ere
cons
ider
ed. T
he re
sulti
ng c
onsi
sten
cy a
nd c
ompr
essi
ve s
treng
th o
f con
cret
e w
hen
sand
s w
ere
used
as 1
00%
repl
acem
ent f
or n
atur
al sa
nd is
pre
sent
ed.
V7
PLA
NT
Figu
re 1
V7
plan
t sim
plifi
ed d
iagr
am
The
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd u
sed
in th
is s
tudy
was
pro
duce
d us
ing
the
V7
plan
t. Fi
gure
1 s
how
s a
sim
plifi
ed s
etup
of
the
plan
t. Th
e fe
ed m
ater
ial f
or m
anuf
actu
ring
sand
is u
sual
ly a
0/8
mm
cr
ushe
r du
st w
ith a
wat
er c
onte
nt le
ss th
an 1
.5%
. It i
s fe
d to
a v
ertic
al s
haft
impa
ct (
VSI
) cr
ushe
r and
afte
rwar
ds s
epar
ated
usi
ng a
n ai
r scr
een.
Ove
rsiz
e an
d so
me
coar
ser p
artic
les
are
re-c
ircul
ated
, whi
le th
e re
quire
d pa
rticl
e si
zes,
are
deliv
ered
as
a pr
oduc
t whe
reas
mos
t of t
he
dust
is fe
d to
a “
skim
mer
”. T
he “
skim
mer
” se
para
tes
coar
ser p
artic
les
as w
ell a
s so
me
fille
r fr
om th
e du
st. T
he s
epar
ated
par
ticle
s kn
own
as a
pre
-dus
ter a
re a
dded
into
the
final
pro
duct
in
crea
sing
the
yie
ld,
allo
win
g co
ntro
l of
the
fin
es c
onte
nt a
s w
ell
as p
rovi
ding
usu
ally
de
ficie
nt 0
.3 to
1 m
m p
artic
les i
n th
e m
anuf
actu
red
sand
.
For t
he p
roje
ct a
t lea
st fo
ur sa
nd g
rada
tions
wer
e pr
oduc
ed fr
om e
ach
crus
her d
ust.
The
sand
s sl
ight
ly d
iffer
with
par
ticle
size
dis
tribu
tions
as s
how
n in
Tab
les 2
-4.
MA
TER
IALS
Cem
ent
The
cem
ent u
sed
was
CEM
I 52
.5 N
con
form
ing
to E
N 1
97-1
.
Coa
rse
Agg
rega
te
The
coar
se a
ggre
gate
use
d w
as c
rush
ed li
mes
tone
4/2
0mm
and
its
parti
cle
size
dis
tribu
tion
is
show
n in
Tab
le 4
.
Fine
Agg
rega
te
In th
is st
udy
mar
ine
dred
ged
sand
was
use
d as
a c
ontro
l and
it is
den
oted
by
the
lette
r N in
the
tabl
es a
nd fi
gure
s in
this
pap
er.
The
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd w
as p
roce
ssed
fro
m 0
/8 m
m c
rush
er d
usts
take
n fr
om tw
o qu
arrie
s lo
cate
d in
UK
. O
ne q
uarr
y pr
oduc
es b
asal
t w
here
as t
he o
ther
pro
duce
s gr
anite
agg
rega
te.
Prop
ertie
s of t
he 0
/4m
m p
arts
of t
he c
rush
er d
usts
are
incl
uded
in T
able
s 1 -
3 fo
r com
paris
on
purp
oses
. In
all
tabl
es a
nd f
igur
es t
he b
asal
t cr
ushe
r du
st i
s de
note
d as
B-F
EED
and
the
gr
anite
as G
-FEE
D.
From
the
crus
her
dust
s fo
ur b
asal
t san
ds a
nd f
ive
gran
ite s
ands
with
diff
eren
t par
ticle
siz
e di
strib
utio
ns w
ere
prod
uced
. Bas
alt
sand
s ar
e de
note
d by
let
ter
B i
n th
e ta
bles
and
fig
ures
w
here
as g
rani
te s
ands
are
den
oted
by
lette
r G
. Fo
llow
ing
the
lette
r B
or
G i
ndic
atin
g th
e qu
arry
, the
sand
s are
furth
er d
enot
ed w
ith a
lette
rs A
to D
E (E
for g
rani
te sa
nd) d
epen
ding
on
the
sub
63 m
icro
n pa
rticl
e co
nten
t. Fo
r ex
ampl
e, B
-A i
s a
basa
lt sa
nd w
ith t
he l
east
fin
es
cont
ent,
whe
reas
B-D
is a
bas
alt s
and
with
the
high
est f
ines
con
tent
. Par
ticle
size
dis
tribu
tions
ar
e sh
own
in T
able
s 2 a
nd 3
.
The
fine
aggr
egat
e us
ed in
the
stud
y w
as c
hara
cter
ized
usi
ng th
e fo
llow
ing
stan
dard
test
s:- M
ethy
lene
blu
e te
st (M
BV
) acc
ordi
ng to
BS
EN 9
33-9
on
0/2m
m fr
actio
n - S
and
equi
vale
nt te
st (S
E) a
ccor
ding
to B
S EN
933
-8 o
n 0/
2mm
frac
tion
- Par
ticle
size
dis
tribu
tion
acco
rdin
g to
BS
EN 9
33-1
- P
artic
le d
ensi
ty a
nd w
ater
abs
orpt
ion
acco
rdin
g to
BS
EN 1
097-
6.
MB
V a
nd S
E te
sts
are
inte
nded
to a
sses
s if
ther
e ar
e po
tent
ially
del
eter
ious
fine
s e.
g. c
lays
in
the
fine
aggr
egat
e w
hich
cou
ld a
dver
sely
aff
ect
the
fres
h an
d ha
rden
ed p
rope
rties
of
the
conc
rete
.
In a
dditi
on to
the
abov
emen
tione
d te
sts t
he fo
llow
ing
fine
aggr
egat
e te
sts w
ere
also
use
d:
- New
Zea
land
Flo
w c
one
(NZF
C) a
ccor
ding
to N
ZS 3
111-
1986
-
Rap
id M
ethy
lene
blu
e te
st (
RM
BV
) de
velo
ped
by G
race
on
the
0/2m
m f
ract
ion
of t
he
sand
s.
The
NZF
C t
est
eval
uate
s sa
nd f
low
and
the
un-
com
pact
ed v
oids
rat
io. A
fix
ed v
olum
e of
sa
nd is
pas
sed
thro
ugh
a co
ne a
nd c
olle
cted
in a
con
tain
er o
f kno
wn
volu
me
whi
lst m
easu
ring
the
flow
tim
e. U
sing
the
dens
ity o
f the
san
d pa
rticl
es a
llow
s th
e un
-com
pact
ed v
oids
ratio
to
be c
alcu
late
d. T
he te
st r
esul
t is
affe
cted
by
the
grad
ing
of th
e sa
mpl
e, b
y th
e pa
rticl
e sh
ape
and
by th
e su
rfac
e te
xtur
e of
the
parti
cles
. The
flow
of t
he m
ater
ial i
s m
ostly
aff
ecte
d by
the
shap
e an
d su
rfac
e te
xtur
e of
the
par
ticle
s w
hile
the
voi
ds r
esul
t is
mos
tly i
nflu
ence
d by
gr
adin
g an
d sh
ape
[5].
Alth
ough
the
Brit
ish
Euro
pean
Sta
ndar
ds E
N 9
33-6
and
BS
EN 1
097-
6 ev
alua
te th
e flo
w ti
me
and
un-c
ompa
cted
voi
ds, t
hey
do n
ot p
rovi
de th
e op
portu
nity
to d
o th
at si
mul
tane
ousl
y.
The
NZF
C i
s a
rapi
d te
st t
hat
does
not
req
uire
sop
hist
icat
ed e
quip
men
t an
d ex
perie
nced
op
erat
or a
s op
pose
d to
vis
ual s
hape
and
text
ure
estim
atio
n te
chni
ques
. The
resu
lts a
re p
lotte
d on
the
diag
ram
sho
wn
in F
igur
e 2
with
refe
renc
e to
a s
tand
ard
enve
lope
ado
pted
by
the
New
Ze
alan
d au
thor
ities
, the
refo
re, t
he N
ZFC
test
was
ado
pted
in th
e st
udy.
The
RM
BV
test
eva
luat
es th
e sa
me
prop
ertie
s as t
he B
S EN
933
-9 M
BV
test
, how
ever
, usi
ng
a di
ffer
ent a
ppro
ach.
The
Brit
ish
Euro
pean
sta
ndar
d pr
oced
ure
dete
rmin
es th
e ab
sorp
tion
of
met
hyle
ne b
lue
dye
by c
onse
cutiv
ely
addi
ng a
dro
p of
the
dye
and
che
ckin
g fo
r th
e te
st’s
en
dpoi
nt.
The
endp
oint
of
the
test
is
dete
rmin
ed b
y dr
oppi
ng a
sm
all
amou
nt o
f th
e su
spen
sion
on
a fil
ter
pape
r un
til a
ligh
t blu
e ha
lo a
roun
d a
cent
ral d
epos
it is
obs
erve
d an
d th
is e
ndpo
int i
s ofte
n op
en to
inte
rpre
tatio
n.
The
RM
BV
test
elim
inat
es th
is p
robl
em a
s w
ell a
s re
duci
ng th
e te
stin
g tim
e. T
he te
st p
ortio
n is
mix
ed w
ith a
met
hyle
ne b
lue
solu
tion
of k
now
n co
ncen
tratio
n, s
hake
n fo
r a fi
xed
time
and
an a
liquo
t of t
he s
uspe
nsio
n is
filte
red.
Afte
rwar
ds a
kno
wn
volu
me
of th
e fil
trate
is d
ilute
d w
ith a
set
am
ount
of
wat
er a
nd a
pre
-cal
ibra
ted
colo
rimet
er i
s us
ed t
o es
timat
e th
e co
ncen
tratio
n of
the
sol
utio
n. T
his
allo
ws
dire
ct e
stim
atio
n of
the
abs
orbe
d am
ount
of
met
hyle
ne b
lue
solu
tion
elim
inat
ing
poss
ible
err
ors d
ue to
hum
an ju
dgem
ent.
The
RM
BV
test
was
use
d in
this
stu
dy to
com
pare
the
resu
lts o
btai
ned
by th
e tw
o m
etho
ds
and
eval
uate
the
feas
ibili
ty o
f the
new
met
hod.
Tabl
e 1
Fine
agg
rega
te te
st re
sults
SAM
PLE
MB
V,
g of
MB
so
lutio
npe
r kg
of sa
nd
RM
BV
, g
of M
B
solu
tion
per k
g of
sand
SEN
ZFC
VO
IDS,
%
NZF
CFL
OW
TIM
E,se
c
WA
24,
%U s
sd,
Mg/
m3
U rd,
Mg/
m3
U a,
Mg/
m3
N
0.24
0.
35
94
37.9
20
.9
1.04
2.
66
2.63
2.
71
G-F
EED
0.
77
0.94
50
42
.4
29.1
0.
58
2.64
2.
62
2.66
G
-A
0.39
0.
42
80
45.2
25
.3
0.58
2.
63
2.61
2.
65
G-B
0.
40
0.50
74
44
.6
24.4
G
-C
0.47
0.
71
71
43.7
23
.9
G-D
0.
50
0.88
70
43
.6
23.4
G
-E
0.63
0.
90
69
42.7
23
.9
B-F
EED
5.
36
6.16
48
45
.7
36.7
1.
92
2.89
2.
83
3.00
B
-A
2.10
2.
3 73
45
.8
25.7
1.67
2.
91
2.87
3.
01
B-B
2.
29
2.54
61
44
.5
23.2
B
-C
2.64
2.
97
60
43.7
22
.5
B-D
2.
90
3.75
58
43
.7
22.3
*
BS
EN 1
097-
6 te
st w
as c
arrie
d ou
t on
ly f
or m
anuf
actu
red
sand
s w
ith t
he l
owes
t fin
es
cont
ent a
s the
sub-
63 m
icro
n pa
rticl
es a
re w
ashe
d ou
t of t
he sa
mpl
e pr
ior t
o te
stin
g.
** W
A24
- w
ater
abs
orpt
ion
***U
ssd–
parti
cle
dens
ity o
n sa
tura
ted
surf
ace
dry
basi
s **
**U r
d - p
artic
le d
ensi
ty o
n ov
en d
ry b
asis
**
***U
a- ap
pare
nt p
artic
le d
ensi
ty
Tabl
e 2
Agg
rega
te p
artic
le si
ze d
istri
butio
n
SAM
PLE
D-F
EED
B-A
B
-B
B-C
B
-D
N
SIEV
E SI
ZE
mm
PER
CEN
T PA
SSIN
G B
Y M
ASS
8 10
0.0
100.
010
0.0
100.
010
0.0
100.
0 6.
3 10
0.0
100.
010
0.0
100.
010
0.0
98.0
4
94.0
10
0.0
100.
010
0.0
100.
093
.0
2.8
86.0
99
.0
99.2
99
.3
99.3
87
.0
2 73
.0
88.0
90
.3
91.0
91
.4
82.0
1
54.0
56
.0
64.2
66
.4
67.7
61
.0
0.5
41.0
34
.0
44.9
48
.7
50.8
37
.0
0.25
29
.0
16.0
27
.1
32.2
34
.7
12.0
0.
125
20.0
4.
0 10
.9
15.9
18
.8
1.0
0.06
3 13
.0
1.0
2.9
5.1
7.4
1.0
Tabl
e 3
Agg
rega
te p
artic
le si
ze d
istri
butio
n co
ntin
ued
SAM
PLE
G
-FEE
DG
-A
G-B
G
-C
G-D
G
-E
SIEV
E SI
ZE
mm
PE
RC
ENT
PASS
ING
BY
MA
SS
8
100.
0 10
0.0
100.
010
0.0
100.
010
0.0
6.3
99
.0
100.
010
0.0
100.
010
0.0
100.
0 4
87
.0
100.
010
0.0
100.
010
0.0
100.
0 2.
8
77.0
99
.0
99.1
99
.2
99.2
99
.2
2
66.0
90
.0
90.8
91
.8
92.1
92
.3
1
49.0
63
.0
65.7
69
.4
70.2
71
.1
0.5
35
.0
39.0
43
.2
48.9
50
.6
51.9
0.
25
24
.0
17.0
21
.9
29.1
31
.4
33.3
0.
125
16
.0
4.0
7.5
13.0
15
.6
17.8
0.
063
10
.0
2.0
2.8
5.1
6.5
9.0
Tabl
e 4
Agg
rega
te p
artic
le si
ze d
istri
butio
n co
ntin
ued
SAM
PLE
CA
SIEV
E SI
ZE m
mPE
RC
ENT
PASS
ING
BY
MA
SS
40
100
31.5
10
0 20
95
16
68
14
58
10
36
6.
3 16
4
6 2
5 0.
063
2
Figu
re 2
New
Zea
land
Flo
w C
one
resu
lts a
nd sp
ecifi
catio
n en
velo
pe
CO
NC
RE
TE
MIX
TU
RE
S
For e
ach
quar
ry a
tria
l mix
usi
ng 1
00%
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd w
ith a
fine
s con
tent
of 2
.8%
(G-B
or
B-B
) was
mad
e ad
just
ing
the
wat
er c
onte
nt to
reac
h a
slum
p of
80m
m. O
ther
mix
es o
f tha
t qu
arry
mat
eria
l wer
e m
ade
usin
g th
e es
tabl
ishe
d w
/c r
atio
. Ack
now
ledg
ing
the
fact
that
the
natu
ral s
and
has
diff
eren
t wat
er d
eman
d to
the
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd fo
r eac
h qu
arry
ther
e w
ere
two
cont
rol m
ixes
, the
firs
t with
80±
20m
m s
lum
p an
d th
e se
cond
with
the
sam
e w
/c ra
tio a
s us
ed in
the
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd m
ixtu
res.
The
slum
p co
ntro
l mix
ture
in th
is p
aper
is d
enot
ed
as N
whe
reas
the
othe
r con
trols
are
N-G
for t
he g
rani
te q
uarr
y an
d N
-B fo
r the
bas
alt q
uarr
y m
ixes
.
The
abso
rptio
n ca
paci
ty a
nd w
ater
con
tent
of
fine
and
coar
se a
ggre
gate
s w
ere
take
n in
to
cons
ider
atio
n an
d th
e m
ixtu
re’s
wat
er c
onte
nt w
as a
djus
ted
acco
rdin
gly
to m
aint
ain
the
w/c
ra
tio a
nd m
ixtu
re p
ropo
rtion
s, as
pre
sent
ed in
Tab
le 5
.
Tabl
e 5
Con
cret
e m
ixtu
re p
ropo
rtion
s at S
SD c
ondi
tions
MIX
CEM
kg/m
3C
Akg
/m3
FA kg/m
3W
ATE
Rkg
/m3
W/C
FA/
CA
FIN
ESC
ON
TEN
T %
of F
A
N
350
1040
75
3 16
7 0.
48
0.42
1.0
N-G
35
0 10
40
753
202
0.58
0.
421.
0 G
-A
350
1040
75
3 20
2 0.
58
0.42
2.0
G-B
35
0 10
40
753
202
0.58
0.
422.
8 G
-C
350
1040
75
3 20
2 0.
58
0.42
5.1
G-D
35
0 10
40
753
202
0.58
0.
426.
5 G
-E
350
1040
75
3 20
2 0.
58
0.42
9.0
N-B
35
0 10
40
753
234
0.67
0.
421.
0 B
-A
350
1040
75
3 23
4 0.
67
0.42
1.0
B-B
35
0 10
40
753
234
0.67
0.
422.
9 B
-C
350
1040
75
3 23
4 0.
67
0.42
5.1
B-D
35
0 10
40
753
234
0.67
0.
427.
4 *F
A –
fine
agg
rega
te, C
A –
coa
rse
aggr
egat
e
Fres
h C
oncr
ete
Test
s
Fres
h co
ncre
te w
as te
sted
for
slu
mp
acco
rdin
g to
BS
EN 1
2350
-2:2
009,
pla
stic
den
sity
and
ai
r ent
rapm
ent.
The
resu
lts o
f the
se te
sts a
re p
rese
nted
in T
able
6.
Har
dene
d C
oncr
ete
Test
s
Har
dene
d co
ncre
te w
as te
sted
for
com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
at 1
, 7 a
nd 2
8 da
ys a
ccor
ding
to B
S EN
123
90-3
:200
9, f
or f
lexu
ral s
treng
th a
t 28
days
acc
ordi
ng to
BS
EN 1
2390
-5:2
009.
The
co
ncre
te sp
ecim
ens w
ere
de-m
ould
ed 1
6 to
20
hour
s afte
r cas
ting
and
plac
ed in
wat
er ta
nks a
t a
cons
tant
tem
pera
ture
of
20qC
unt
il th
e te
st a
ge w
as r
each
ed.
Res
ults
of
thes
e te
sts
are
pres
ente
d in
Tab
le 6
.
RE
SUL
TS
AN
D D
ISC
USS
ION
In t
his
sect
ion
fres
h an
d ha
rden
ed c
oncr
ete
prop
ertie
s ar
e pr
esen
ted
and
disc
usse
d w
ith
refe
renc
e to
the
fine
aggr
egat
e pr
oper
ties s
how
n in
Tab
les 1
-4 a
nd F
igur
e 2.
Fine
Agg
rega
te T
est R
esul
ts
One
obj
ectiv
e of
the
proj
ect w
as to
com
pare
the
RM
BV
test
with
the
MB
V s
tand
ard
test
. It
can
be s
een
in F
igur
e 3
that
the
test
resu
lts o
btai
ned
usin
g bo
th m
etho
ds e
xhib
it a
very
goo
d lin
ear
corr
elat
ion
with
R2 =
0.99
sug
gest
ing
that
bot
h te
st m
etho
ds e
valu
ate
the
sam
e
prop
erty
, alth
ough
pro
vidi
ng d
iffer
ent n
umer
ical
val
ues.
This
sug
gest
s th
at th
e R
MB
V te
st
coul
d be
use
d as
an
alte
rnat
ive
test
to th
e st
anda
rd M
BV
test
.
Figu
re 3
Cor
rela
tion
betw
een
RM
BV
and
MB
V v
alue
s for
all
sam
ples
Tabl
e 1
show
s th
at th
ere
are
diff
eren
ces
betw
een
the
feed
mat
eria
l for
eac
h qu
arry
and
the
resu
lting
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nds.
B-F
EED
bas
alt
quar
ry d
ust
has
a hi
gh M
BV
of
5.36
g/k
g (R
MB
V 6
.16
g/kg
) w
here
as t
he h
ighe
st f
ines
bas
alt
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd B
-D p
osse
sses
an
MB
V o
f 2.
90 g
/kg
(RM
BV
3.7
5 g/
kg).
A s
imila
r tre
nd c
an b
e se
en w
ith t
he g
rani
te
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nds.
The
G-F
EED
MB
V is
0.7
7 g/
kg w
here
as th
e hi
ghes
t fin
es g
rani
te s
and
G-E
MB
V is
0.6
3 g/
kg. I
t can
be
conc
lude
d th
at d
urin
g th
e pr
oces
sing
a p
ropo
rtion
of
clay
si
zed
parti
cles
(<2
mic
ron)
has
bee
n re
mov
ed f
rom
the
mat
eria
l as
par
t of
the
fill
er
com
pone
nt lo
wer
ing
the
MB
V v
alue
of t
he sa
nd.
From
Tab
le 1
it
can
be s
een
that
the
san
d eq
uiva
lent
(SE
) va
lues
hav
e in
crea
sed
for
the
proc
esse
d qu
arry
dus
ts. T
he S
E va
lues
are
the
high
est f
or m
anuf
actu
red
sand
s w
ith th
e le
ast
fines
and
gra
dual
ly d
ecre
ase
with
incr
easi
ng fi
nes c
onte
nt. A
sim
ilar i
nver
se tr
end
to th
at w
as
obse
rved
in
the
MB
V v
alue
s th
at c
an b
e at
tribu
ted
to t
he r
emov
al o
f cl
ay s
ized
par
ticle
s du
ring
the
man
ufac
turin
g pr
oces
s.
The
SE v
alue
s fo
r gra
nite
san
ds a
re in
rang
e fr
om 8
0 to
69;
for b
asal
t san
ds th
ey a
re lo
wer
- fr
om 7
0 to
58.
Sim
ilarly
to th
e M
BV
val
ues
this
sug
gest
s th
at th
e ba
salt
sand
s co
ntai
n so
me
dele
terio
us fi
nes o
r cla
ys w
hich
may
adv
erse
ly a
ffec
t the
wat
er d
eman
d of
con
cret
e m
ixtu
res.
Figu
re 2
show
s the
resu
lts fr
om N
ZFC
. The
pro
cess
ed m
anuf
actu
red
sand
s lie
with
in th
e N
ew
Zeal
and
spec
ifica
tion
enve
lope
whe
reas
the
fee
d m
ater
ial
from
bot
h qu
arrie
s do
es n
ot
conf
orm
to th
e sp
ecifi
catio
n. It
sugg
ests
that
the
G-F
EED
and
B-F
EED
are
poo
rly sh
aped
and
gr
aded
.
The
flow
tim
e ha
s be
en g
reat
ly r
educ
ed f
or th
e m
anuf
actu
red
sand
s; a
t lea
st 4
sec
onds
for
gr
anite
san
ds a
nd 1
1 se
cond
s fo
r bas
alt s
ands
. Thi
s su
gges
ts th
at th
e pa
rticl
e sh
ape
has
been
m
odifi
ed a
nd a
fter p
roce
ssin
g it
is le
ss a
ngul
ar a
nd fl
aky.
The
voi
ds c
onte
nt o
f the
G-F
EED
is
42.4
% w
here
as f
or th
e m
anuf
actu
red
sand
s it
rang
es f
rom
45.
2% f
or th
e le
ast f
ines
san
d to
42
.7%
for t
he h
ighe
st fi
nes s
and
G-E
, whe
reas
the
void
s con
tent
of t
he B
-FEE
D is
45.
7% a
nd
it is
dec
reas
ing
for
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nds
with
mor
e fin
es. V
isua
l ins
pect
ion
sugg
ests
that
the
basa
lt cr
ushe
r du
st p
artic
les
are
mos
tly a
ngul
ar a
nd f
laky
whe
reas
the
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd
parti
cles
are
mos
tly ro
unde
d w
ithou
t sha
rp e
dges
. Sim
ilarly
gra
nite
cru
sher
dus
t par
ticle
s ar
e hi
ghly
ang
ular
and
fla
ky,
how
ever
the
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nds
are
mos
tly c
ubic
al w
ith s
harp
ed
ges b
ut w
ithou
t fla
ky p
artic
les.
Thes
e ob
serv
atio
ns s
ugge
st th
at a
ngul
ar a
nd f
laky
par
ticle
s re
sult
in a
hig
her
void
s co
nten
t an
d flo
w ra
te. S
imila
rly c
ubic
al p
artic
les
with
sha
rp e
dges
incr
ease
the
void
s co
nten
t but
to a
le
sser
ext
ent t
han
flaky
one
s. R
ound
ed p
artic
les
resu
lt in
the
low
est v
oids
con
tent
and
flo
w
rate
s. In
crea
sed
fines
con
tent
s low
er th
e vo
ids c
onte
nt a
nd g
ener
ally
impr
ove
the
flow
rate
.
Wor
kabi
lity
It w
as e
xpec
ted
from
the
fin
e ag
greg
ate
test
s th
at t
he n
atur
al s
and
wou
ld r
equi
re t
he l
east
w
ater
to a
chie
ve th
e 80
mm
slu
mp
due
to th
e in
trins
ic r
ound
ness
and
low
am
ount
of
fines
. Th
e gr
anite
san
d w
as e
xpec
ted
to h
ave
a hi
gher
wat
er d
eman
d th
an n
atur
al s
and
due
to s
hape
an
d hi
gher
am
ount
s of
fin
es, h
owev
er, l
ower
tha
n th
at o
f th
e ba
salt
sand
due
to
the
low
er
MB
V. T
he te
st re
sults
pro
ved
the
expe
cted
tren
d –
to re
ach
an 8
0 m
m s
lum
p th
e na
tura
l san
d m
ixtu
re (N
) req
uire
d a
w/c
ratio
of 0
.48,
the
gran
ite s
and
(G-B
) 0.5
8 an
d th
e ba
salt
sand
(B-
B) 0
.67.
Figu
re 4
Var
iatio
n of
slum
p w
ith fi
nes c
onte
nt
Figu
re 4
sho
ws
the
slum
p ve
rsus
the
amou
nt o
f fin
es fo
r the
gra
nite
and
bas
alt m
ixtu
res.
The
gene
ral
trend
is
that
the
hig
her
the
amou
nt o
f fin
es,
the
low
er t
he s
lum
p of
the
con
cret
e.
How
ever
, it h
as to
be
note
d th
at th
e m
anuf
actu
red
sand
mix
ture
s with
the
low
est f
ines
con
tent
w
ere
obse
rved
to b
e ha
rd to
wor
k an
d fin
ish
even
thou
gh th
e sl
ump
was
from
70
to 1
20 m
m.
Mix
ture
s w
ith h
ighe
r fin
es c
onte
nts
B-B
, B-C
and
G-B
, G-C
, G-D
wer
e ea
sier
to f
inis
h an
d
wor
k ev
en w
ith lo
wer
slum
p va
lues
. How
ever
, the
B-D
and
G-E
mix
ture
s wer
e ve
ry c
ohes
ive
due
to th
e am
ount
of f
ines
.
It w
as n
ot p
ossi
ble
to m
easu
re t
he s
lum
p fo
r th
e na
tura
l sa
nd w
/c r
atio
con
trols
for
bot
h qu
arrie
s (N
-G a
nd N
-B)
as t
he s
lum
ps c
olla
psed
. D
urin
g th
e ca
stin
g of
spe
cim
ens
the
mix
ture
s seg
rega
ted
and
blee
ding
was
obs
erve
d.
The
natu
ral s
and
slum
p co
ntro
l N m
ix w
as e
asy
to w
ork
and
finis
h.
Har
dene
d C
oncr
ete
Prop
ertie
s
Tabl
e 6
Fres
h an
d ha
rden
ed c
oncr
ete
prop
ertie
s
MIX
SLU
MP
mm
AIR %
FRES
HD
ENSI
TYkg
/m3
CO
MPR
ESSI
VE
STR
ENG
TH, N
/mm
2
FLEX
UR
AL
STR
ENG
TH,
N/m
m2
1 da
y 7
day
28 day
28 d
ay
N
95
0.5
2447
23
.8
48.0
58
.9
6.1
N-G
C
olla
pse
0.3
2405
13
.5
36.0
48
.7
5.4
G-A
12
0 0.
45
2393
17
.6
43.5
52
.2
5.6
G-B
80
1.
6 23
75
17.0
40
.2
49.9
5.
6 G
-C
80
0.9
2378
17
.9
40.4
50
.1
6.0
G-D
60
0.
65
2393
19
.3
42.2
52
.3
5.8
G-E
60
0.
78
2393
16
.6
40.6
48
.1
5.4
N-B
C
olla
pse
0.35
23
63
9.6
26.2
35
.9
4.6
B-A
70
0.
5 24
30
11.8
30
.4
41.7
5.
3 B
-B
80
0.5
2423
12
.9
31.3
43
.7
5.5
B-C
62
.5
0.45
24
34
13.0
33
.1
42.7
5.
4 B
-D
47.5
0.
65
2410
13
.2
35.2
45
.6
5.6
Tabl
e 6
show
s th
e co
mpr
essi
ve a
nd f
lexu
ral
stre
ngth
s of
all
conc
rete
mix
ture
s. Th
e co
mpr
essi
ve s
treng
th o
f th
e co
ntro
l m
ixtu
re N
is
the
high
est
at a
ll st
ages
of
test
ing
and
reac
hes 5
8.9
N/m
m2 a
t 28
days
.
The
com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
of b
asal
t mix
es is
in ra
nge
of 4
1.7
N/m
m2 fo
r B-A
to 4
5.6
N/m
m2
for
the
B-D
mix
. A
ll ba
salt
mix
ture
s su
rpas
s th
e st
reng
th o
f th
e w
/c r
atio
con
trol
N-B
m
ixtu
re. S
imila
rly to
the
basa
lt sa
nd m
ixes
, the
com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
of
gran
ite s
and
mix
es
surp
ass t
he w
/c ra
tio c
ontro
l N-G
and
are
in ra
nge
of 4
8.1
N/m
m2 to
52.
3 N
/mm
2 . How
ever
, it
has
alre
ady
been
not
ed th
at th
e sl
ump
of th
e N
-B a
nd N
-G m
ixtu
res
colla
psed
and
seg
rega
ted
durin
g ca
stin
g, a
nd th
eref
ore
it w
ould
seem
pru
dent
to tr
eat t
hese
resu
lts w
ith c
autio
n.
The
incr
ease
of
fines
con
tent
in
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nds
did
not
show
a c
orre
latio
n w
ith t
he
com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
s at
28
days
. It s
ugge
sts
that
ther
e ar
e no
neg
ativ
e ef
fect
s of
hig
her f
ines
cont
ents
on
the
com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
for
the
give
n m
ixtu
re c
ompo
sitio
n an
d ra
nge
of f
ines
co
nten
ts in
vest
igat
ed in
the
stud
y.
The
28 d
ay f
lexu
ral
stre
ngth
for
all
mix
es i
s in
the
ran
ge 4
.6 t
o 6.
1 N
/mm
2 and
see
ms
to
follo
w t
he t
rend
s of
com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
, w
ith h
ighe
r co
mpr
essi
ve s
treng
th r
esul
ting
in
high
er fl
exur
al st
reng
th.
CO
NC
LU
SIO
NS
The
resu
lts s
how
tha
t th
e m
anuf
actu
red
sand
mix
ture
s at
the
sam
e w
/c r
atio
s su
rpas
s th
e st
reng
th o
f na
tura
l san
d co
ncre
te, h
owev
er, t
hey
exhi
bit l
ower
wor
kabi
lity.
How
ever
the
28
day
stre
ngth
of t
he s
lum
p co
ntro
lled
natu
ral s
and
conc
rete
sur
pass
es th
at o
f the
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd c
oncr
ete
due
to th
e lo
wer
w/c
ratio
. Th
e fin
e ag
greg
ate
test
res
ults
sho
wed
tha
t th
e pr
oces
sing
of
crus
her
dust
s im
prov
ed t
he
shap
e an
d gr
adin
g as
wel
l as
rem
oved
som
e de
lete
rious
cla
y si
zed
parti
cles
as
indi
cate
d by
th
e M
BV
and
SE
test
s. Th
e te
st re
sults
als
o su
gges
t tha
t the
RM
BV
test
cou
ld b
e us
ed a
s an
al
tern
ativ
e to
the
sta
ndar
d M
BV
tes
t in
ord
er t
o ra
pidl
y as
sess
the
pre
senc
e of
pot
entia
lly
dele
terio
us fi
nes.
It is
impo
rtant
to a
sses
s th
e ha
rm o
f fin
es in
fine
agg
rega
tes
as it
can
dra
mat
ical
ly a
ffec
t the
w
ater
dem
and
for
the
sam
e w
orka
bilit
y, a
s sh
own
by th
e ba
salt
sand
s in
com
paris
on to
the
gran
ite sa
nds.
Dur
ing
this
pha
se o
f th
e st
udy
it w
as o
bser
ved
that
it
is h
ard
or s
omet
imes
im
poss
ible
to
com
pare
the
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nds w
ith n
atur
al sa
nd a
t the
sam
e w
/c ra
tio a
nd c
oncr
ete
mix
ture
co
mpo
sitio
n du
e to
the
sha
pe a
nd t
extu
re,
and
pres
ence
of
dele
terio
us p
artic
les
in t
he
man
ufac
ture
d sa
nds.
Ther
efor
e, th
e ne
xt p
hase
of t
he s
tudy
will
be
aim
ed a
t inv
estig
atin
g th
e pe
rfor
man
ce o
f man
ufac
ture
d sa
nd c
oncr
ete
mix
ture
s con
tain
ing
adm
ixtu
res.
AC
KN
OW
LE
DG
EM
EN
TS
The
auth
ors
wou
ld li
ke to
ack
now
ledg
e th
e fin
anci
al a
nd te
chni
cal s
uppo
rt of
Kay
asan
d Lt
d.,
Agg
rega
te L
evy
Fund
for
Wal
es p
roje
ct c
onso
rtium
, K
emco
Ltd
., G
race
Con
stru
ctio
n Pr
oduc
ts, A
ggre
gate
Indu
strie
s and
Cem
ex.
RE
FER
EN
CE
S
1 H
AR
RIS
ON
, D J
, WIL
SON
, D, H
ENN
EY, P
J, H
UD
SON
, J M
. Cru
shed
Roc
k Sa
nd
In S
outh
Wal
es,
A Re
conn
aiss
ance
Sur
vey.
Brit
ish
Geo
logi
cal
Surv
ey T
echn
ical
R
epor
t No.
WF/
00/0
. 200
0.
2 A
HN
, N
, FO
WLE
R,
D W
. An
Exp
erim
enta
l St
udy
On
The
Gui
delin
es F
or U
sing
H
ighe
r Con
tent
s Of A
ggre
gate
Mic
rofin
es In
Por
tland
Cem
ent C
oncr
ete.
Inte
rnat
iona
l C
entre
For
Agg
rega
te R
esea
rch.
Res
earc
h re
port
No.
ICA
R 1
02-1
F, 2
001.
3 M
AN
NIN
G,
D.
Expl
oita
tion
and
Use
of
Qua
rry
Fine
s, M
iner
al S
olut
ions
Ltd
. Te
chni
cal R
epor
t No.
087
/MIS
T2/D
AC
M/0
1, 2
004.
4 LU
STY
, A. S
and
indu
stry
lead
s re
viva
l of J
apan
ese
aggr
egat
es. Q
uarr
y, 2
008/
10, p
p 90
-92.
5 C
EMEN
T C
ON
CR
ETE
&
AG
GR
EGA
TES
AU
STR
ALI
A.
Man
ufac
ture
d Sa
nd
Nat
iona
l tes
t met
hods
and
spec
ifica
tion
valu
es. R
esea
rch
repo
rt, 2
007,
pp
17-1
8
Sand
from
Surpl
us Q
uarry
Ma
terial
Quar
terly
Repo
rt 6Ma
y 201
2Re
port n
o: 0Q
R6- S
C90
86-C
F
Quarterly
!Rep
ort!M
ay!2012!
Page
!2!of!1
1!
1.!In
trod
uctio
n!This
!quarterly
!rep
ort!covers
!the
!period!of
!January
!201
2!to
!May
!2012.
!It!rep
orts
!the
!results
!of!the
!
work!that
!has
!been!
performed
!to!
date
!on!
the!partial!shipmen
t!of
!lim
estone
!and
!gritston
e!
Kayasand
!received!from
!Japan
!during!the!pe
riod!of
!QR5
!and
!add
ition
al!test!pe
rformed
!on!the!
granite
!and
!basalt!K
ayasand!discussed!in
!previou
s!qu
arterly
!repo
rts.
!
2.!W
ork!pe
rformed
!to!date!
2.1M
ixes
!incorporating!ad
mixtures!
A!serie
s!of
!tests
!were!pe
rformed
!using
!a!clay!inhibitor!EXP"CM
1!admixture
!provide
d!by
!GRA
CE!in
!
small!D
untilland
!con
crete!mixes
!incorporating!WRD
A!90
!plasticizer.!In
!order
!to!complete!these!
trials
!a!dosage!respon
se!curve
!was
!develop
ed!using
!100
!g!sand!samples
!(adjusted
!for
!moisture!
conten
t)!and
!treated
!with
!various
!dosages
!of!EXP"CM
1.!The
!dosages
!were!calculated
!from
!the
!
mass!of
!single!drop
s,!rathe
r!than
!percentage!values
!for!the!mix
!based
!on!the!available!measurin
g!
techniqu
es!in!the!lab.
!How
ever,!this
!had
!no!influ
ence
!on!the!fin
al!form
!of!the!respon
se!curve
!
graph.
!The
!sand!was
!treated!with
!the!EXP"CM
1!mixed
!with
!water
!to!re
ach!a!10%
!moisture!state!in
!
the!sand
,!mixed
!and
!after
!5!m
inutes
!drie
d!in
!the
!microwave!oven
.!The
!drie
d!sand
!particles!had!
become!slightly
!"cemen
ted"
!!
The!do
sage
!cho
sen!for!the
!10!litre
!con
crete!trials
!was
!the!maxim
um!used!in
!the!prod
uctio
n!of
!the!
respon
se!curve
!24.48
%.!T
wo!sets
!of!concrete
!mixes,!o
ne!w
ith!0.55!w/c
!ratio
!and
!the
!other
!with
!
0.60
!w/c
!ratio.!B
oth!were!adjusted
!for
!moisture!conten
t,!aggregate!absorptio
n!and!water
!in!the
!
admixtures!(M
ix!design!sheets
!are
!in!App
endix!A).!T
he!first!mix
!incorporated
!WRD
A!90
!with
out!
EXP"CM
1!to
!establish!initial
!slump!value,
!the
!secon
d!mix
!incorpo
ratin
g!same!am
ount
!of!water
!
(adjusted!for!50%
!water
!in!the
!EXP
"CM1)
!and
!WRD
A!90
!plus!the!clay
!deactivator.!T
he!following!
mixing!sequ
ence
!was
!followed
!for!a
ll!mixes:!
1)!Sand!and!Co
arse
!aggregate
!placed!in
!drum
!and
!mixed
!with
!half!o
f!mixing!water
!+!EXP
"CM1!for!1
!
minute!
2)!Covered
!and
!left
!for!5
!minutes
!
3)!m
ixed
!for!2
!minutes
!while
!add
ing!rest
!of!the
!water
!and
!plasticizer
!
4)!Tested!slum
p!tw
o!tim
es,!w
ith!brie
f!rem
ixing!in
!between!the!tests!
!
Quarterly
!Rep
ort!M
ay!2012!
Page
!3!of!1
1!
The!compressive
!stren
gth!results
!at!1
!and
!7!and
!28!days
!are
!sum
marised
!in!Table
!2.1.!!
Table!2.1!
Compressive
!stren
gth,
!N/m
m2 !
w/c
!Slum
p,!m
m!
1!day!
7!day!
28!day
!No!CM
"1!
0.55
!20
!20.08!
52.5
!65
.6!
With
!CM
"1!
0.55
!40
!17.23!
48.84!
62.5
!No!CM
"1!
0.6!
70!
15.36!
43.95!
53.4
!With
!CM
"1!
0.6!
75!
14.11!
43.3
!54
.2!
! An!in
crease
!in!slump!of
!20!mm
!was
!observed!for!0.55
!w/c
!ratio
!mixes
!but
!only!5!mm
!for!0.6!w/c
!
mix.!Furthermore,
!the!mixes
!incorporating!EXP"CM
1!seem
ed!wetter!a
nd!easier!to!work!and!fin
ish,
!
however,!the
!increase
!in!slump!was
!only!marginal.!CM
"1!m
ixes
!have!lower
!stren
gth!at
!1!and
!7!
days,!this!could!be
!explained
!by!more!free
!water
!in!th
e!mix
!due
!to!th
e!actio
n!of
!CM
"1!but
!there!is
!
very
!small!increase!in
!slump!which
!accom
panies
!it.!D
iscussions
!with
!GRA
CE!have!revealed
!that
!the!
clay
!deactivator
!works
!better!with
!an!S3
!con
sisten
cy!con
crete!incorporating!differen
t!type
!of!
plasticizer
!(sup
erplasticiser).!This
!may
!be!explored
!furthe
r!by!Cardiff
!or!b
y!Grace
!dep
ending
!on!the!
time!available!with
in!th
e!project.!
From
!the!results
!it!seems!that
!with
out!p
lasticizer
!to!obtain!S2
!slump!basalt!sand
!with
!clay!requ
ires!
more!water
!than!granite
!sand,
!con
firming!theo
retical
!predictions.!T
his!indicates!that
!clay!absorbs!
water,!the
refore,!m
ore!water
!is!req
uired!to
!com
pensate!for!this
!absorption!and!he
nce!the!fin
al!
strength
!is!com
prom
ised
!due
!to!th
e!higher
!free
!water/cem
ent!ratio
!if!only!absorptio
n!of
!the!sand
!
and!coarse
!aggregate
!is!ta
ken!into
!accou
nt!(to!test
!absorption!capacity
!according
!to!th
e!standard,!
the!fin
es!m
ust!be
!washe
d!ou
t!of
!the
!sam
ple).!T
hat!means
!the
!water
!absorbe
d!by
!clays
!doe
s!no
t!
contrib
ute!to
!workability,
!but
!con
tributes
!to!the!lower
!stren
gth!of
!the
!con
crete!at
!later!stages.!
This
!can
!be!confirm
ed!by!the!second
!set
!of!results
!of!0.55
!w/c
!ratio
!which
!yields!very
!sim
ilar!
strength
!at!2
8!days
!for!a
ll!granite
!and
!basalt!con
crete!mixes.!!
! 2.2Sand
!Cha
racterisation!tests!on
!Taff’s
!Well!and
!Gilfach!Ka
yasand
s!
Partial!shipm
ent!of
!the
!Taff’s
!Well!a
nd!Gilfach!sand
s!were!received
!in!April!2012.!T
he!following!
suite
!of!tests
!has
!been!pe
rformed
!on!the!sand
s!and!the!results
!presented
!in!Table
!2.2:!!
Quarterly
!Rep
ort!M
ay!2012!
Page
!4!of!1
1!
1)Methylene
!Blue!Va
lue!(M
BV)!
2)Methylene
!Blue!Va
lue!using!GRA
CE!m
etho
d!(GMBV
)!
3)Sand
!Equ
ivalen
t!(SE)!
4)New
!Zealand
!flow
!con
e!(uncom
pacted
!voids
!and
!flow
!time)
!(NZFC)
!
5)Water
!absorption!(W
A),!a
nd!relative!de
nsities:!d
ry!(r rd),!apparent
!(r a)!and!SSD
!
density
(rssd)
!
Table!2.2!Summary!of
!Characterisation!test
!results
!
SAMPLE!
MBV
,!GMBV
,!
SE!
NZFC!
Voids,
!%!
NZFC!
Flow
!tim
e,!
sec!
WA 2
4,!%
!r ss
d,!Mg/m
3 !r rd,!
Mg/m
3 !r a,!
Mg/m
3 !
g!of
!MB!
solutio
n!pe
r!kg!of
!0/2m
m!
sand
!
g!of
!MB!
solutio
n!pe
r!kg!of
!0/2!mm
!sand
!
Natural
!sand!
0.24
!0.35
!94
!37
.9!
20.9
!1.04
!2.66
!2.63
!2.71
!
Taff's
!Well!Feed!
0.40
!0.65
!65
!42
.4!
32.4
!0.62
!2.90
!2.85
!2.87
!
Taff's
!Well!!
0.47
!0.44
!72
!43
.6!
26.3
!
0.45
!2.89
!2.85
!2.86
!Taff's
!Well!PA!
0.40
!0.44
!71
!42
.1!
23.9
!
Taff's
!Well!PB!
0.40
!0.44
!71
!41
.9!
23.4
!
Taff's
!Well!PC!
0.37
!0.45
!67
!41
.0!
23.0
!
Gilfach!Feed
!3.19
!4.05
!27
!45
.9!
28.6
!1.53
!2.76
!2.64
!2.68
!
Gilfach!
1.40
!1.73
!31
!41
.8!
23.3
!
0.98
!2.64
!2.57
!2.60
!Gilfach!PA
!1.48
!1.84
!30
!41
.6!
22.3
!
Gilfach!PB
!1.50
!1.86
!28
!40
.8!
21.3
!
Gilfach!PC
!1.63
!2.07
!27
!40
.1!
20.7
!
In!order
!to!compare
!the
!GMBV
!test!with
!the
!MBV
!stand
ard!test,!test!results
!from
!all!4!Kayasand
s!
have
!been!considered
!(Dun
tilland
,!Glensanda,!Taff’s
!Well!and
!Gilfach).!It!c
an!be!seen
!in!Figure!2.1!
that
!the
!test!results
!obtaine
d!using!bo
th!m
etho
ds!exhibit!a!very
!goo
d!linear!correlation!with
!R2 !=
!
0.99
!suggesting!that
!both!test
!metho
ds!evaluate!the!same!prop
erty,!a
lthou
gh!providing
!differen
t!
numerical
!value
s.!This!suggests
!con
fiden
ce!in
!the!RM
BV!te
st!as!an
!alte
rnative!test
!to!th
e!standard
!
MBV
!test.!
Quarterly
!Rep
ort!M
ay!2012!
Page
!5!of!1
1!y!=!1.16
19x!+!0.07
38R#
!=!0.990
3
01234567
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Figure
!3!Correlatio
n!be
tween!GMBV
!and
!MBV
!value
s!for!a
ll!samples
!
2.3Co
ncrete
!Mixes
!with
!Taff’s
!Well!and
!Gilfach!Ka
yasand
s!
Concrete
!mixes,!ide
ntical
!in!nature!to
!tho
se!rep
orted!in
!0QR4
"!SC90
86"CF!for!the!Dun
tilland
!and
!
Glensanda
!sands
!were!prod
uced
!with
!Taff’s
!Well!and!Gilfach.
!The
!full!results
!are
!provide
d!in
!
Appe
ndix
!B!alth
ough
!they
!are
!sum
marised
!here!for!com
pleten
ess.
!!
! At!all!ages
!the
!Taff’s
!Well!lim
estone
!con
cretes
!sho
w!very!similar!strength
!results
!to!the!natural!
sand
!slump!control!m
ix!even!thou
gh!the
!w/c
!ratio
!for
!limestone
!con
crete!was
!0.55!whe
reas
!for
!
the!control!it!was
!0.48.
!This!im
plies!that
!it!shou
ld!be!po
ssible,!with
!the
!use
!of!admixtures!to
!
develop!a!Kayasand
!mix
!which
!yields!higher
!com
pressive
!stren
gth!values
!whe
n!compared!to
!the
!
natural!sand!slum
p!control!m
ix!at!e
qual
!w/c
!ratio
.!!
! The!Gilfach!sand
!perform
ed!in
!a!very!similar!manne
r!to
!the
!Dun
tilland
!sand,
!with
!an!S2
!slump!
value!be
ing!achieved
!at!a
n!iden
tical
!w/c
!ratio
.!Alth
ough
!slightly
!lower
!GMBV
!and
!MBV
!value
s!were!
repo
rted
!for!the
!form
er!in
!com
parison
!to!th
e!latter
!this
!differen
ce!had
!little
!effect!o
n!the!ob
served
!
compressive
!stren
gth!
and!
only
!marginal!effect
!on!
the!workability!of
!the
!mix.!This
!con
firms!
previous
!observatio
ns!that!whilst!it!is
!possible!to
!use
!Dun
tilland
!and
!Gilfach!sand
s!in
!a!con
crete!
mix,!the
!use
!of!adm
ixtures!may
!be!requ
ired!to
!achieve
!desire
d!fresh!and!harden
ed!prope
rties.
!
!
Quarterly
!Rep
ort!M
ay!2012!
Page
!6!of!1
1!
3.!Future!Plan
s!!
The!plan
!for!the!ne
xt!quarter
!is!to!complete!the!full!range!of
!tests
!on!the!Gilfach!and!Taff’s
!Well!
Kayasand
!sam
ples
!whe
n!the!remaind
er!of!the!Shipmen
t!is
!received!in
!July!2012
.!Th
ese!tests!
mainly!concern!concrete
!mixes
!using
!w/c
!ratio
!of!0.55
!including
!a!W
RDA!90
!plasticizer
!and
!a!
70mm
!(S2)
!slump.
!Add
ition
al!activities
!that
!are
!ongoing
!includ
e:!
!Finalise!shape!and!texture!stud
y!for!the!sand
s!using!New
"Zealand
!flow
!con
e,!m
ini"m
ortar!
slum
p!cone
!and
!optical
!microscop
y.!
!Investigate!mod
elling!of
!con
crete!prop
ertie
s!using!Artificial!N
eural!N
etworks.!
!Lastly
!the!results
!to!date!will
!be!presen
ted!at
!the!international!con
ference!“Con
crete!in
!the!
Low
!Carbo
n!Era”
!in!Dun
dee,
!July
!2012!
! ! !
Quarterly
!Rep
ort!M
ay!2012!
Page
!7!of!1
1!
App
endix!A!–!Adm
ixture
!Mix
!Design!Sheets
Con
cret
eTr
ialM
ixW
orks
heat
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heat
Date
of T
rial :
11-A
pr-1
2M
ix D
escr
iptio
n :
Kaya
sand
100
%
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
AD-A
DM
Cem
ent (
kg/m
!) :
350
pp
y(
g)
Tria
l Mix
Ref
:Re
plac
emen
t (%
) :Ba
tch
Tim
e :
Labo
rato
ry N
ame
:C
ardi
ff U
nive
rsity
p(
)y
yBa
tch
Size
(litr
es) :
10Ta
rget
Con
sist
ence
:(
)g
Basi
c M
ater
ial
Mat
eria
l Det
ails
S.G
Basi
c M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eS.
GC
emen
tPC
Cem
exR
ugby
Type
sTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eC
emen
tPC
Cem
exR
ugby
Rep
lace
men
tAd
mix
ture
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
eAg
greg
ate
(1)
4/20
mm
Cru
shed
Lim
esto
neAd
mix
ture
Dosa
ge(m
l/50k
g)C
oars
eAg
greg
ate
(2)
Coa
rse
Aggr
egat
e (1
)4/
20m
m C
rush
ed L
imes
tone
Dosa
ge (m
l/50k
g)or
Solid
Mat
eria
lsC
oars
e Ag
greg
ate
(2)
Fine
Aggr
egat
e(1
)Ka
yasa
ndD
until
and
or S
olid
Mat
eria
ls(k
g)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Kaya
sand
Dun
tilan
dFi
neAg
greg
ate
(2)
Adm
ixtu
re(1
)W
RD
A90
plas
ticiz
erG
race
0m
l(k
g)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(2)
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)W
RD
A 90
pla
stic
izer
Gra
ce0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re(2
)0
ml
Solid
s(k
g)0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0
ml
Solid
s (k
g)0
ml
Aggr
egat
eAg
greg
ate
Moi
stur
eM
ixDe
sign
Figu
res
Tota
lFr
eeM
ATER
IALS
Aggr
egat
eAb
sorp
tion
Aggr
egat
e M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
SS
DM
it
Ct
Ti
lT
il
Tota
lFr
ee%
%M
ATER
IALS
Abso
rptio
n%
S.S.
D.k
/!
Moi
stur
eC
tiCo
rrec
ted
Tria
lT
tTr
ial
At
l%
%35
035
00
350
350
Ct
%kg
/m!
Corr
ectio
nd
Targ
etAc
tual
350
350.
03.
503.
500
00
000
000
Cem
ent
Rl
t0
0.0
0.00
0.00
066
014
05
1040
54
1034
610
3510
35R
epla
cem
ent
CA
t(1
)0.
660.
14-0
.510
40-5
.410
34.6
10.3
510
.35
00
00
00
00
000
00C
oars
e Ag
greg
ate
(1)
CA
t(2
)0.
00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
167
435
27
753
202
773
27
737
73C
oars
e Ag
greg
ate
(2)
FiA
t(1
)1.
674.
352.
775
320
.277
3.2
7.73
7.73
00
00
00
00
000
00Ad
iFi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
FiA
t(2
)0.
00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
192
177
21
771
76Ad
mix
iht
WFine
Agg
rega
te (2
)19
217
7.2
1.77
1.76
wei
ght
Wat
er2.
752.
80.
030.
030.
03Ad
mix
ture
(1)
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0.
000.
00.
000.
00(
)So
lids
(kg)
TOTA
LS23
37.7
514
.77
2337
.75
23.3
823
.37
(g)
Com
men
ts:
2336
.52
Corr
ecte
d W
eigh
ts (k
g/m!)
=19
0.77
g(
g)
Corr
ecte
d W
ater
(L/m
!) =
190.
77SS
DAc
tual
-1.2
3Di
ffere
nce
from
Tar
get (
Litre
s) =
Corr
ecte
d W
ater
(L/m
)SS
DAc
tual
1.23
W/C
Ratio
0.54
90.
551
-0.6
4Di
ffere
nce
from
Tar
get (
Litre
s)
Diffe
renc
efro
mTa
rget
(%)=
W/C
Rat
io0.
549
0.55
1-0
.64
Fine
s(%
)=42
0-0
21Di
ffere
nce
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d(%
)=Fi
nes
(%) =
42.0
-0.2
1Yi
eld
(%) =
Conc
rete
Appe
aran
ce:
Conc
rete
App
eara
nce:
Slum
pTe
stPl
astic
Dens
itySl
ump
Test
Plas
tic D
ensi
tyT
tPo
t+Te
stM
ode
Valu
e(m
m)
Conc
rete
Dens
ityTe
stPo
t +
conc
rete
()
y
1N
orm
al20
Mas
s(k
g)(k
g/m
!)co
ncre
te(k
g)1
Nor
mal
20(k
g)(k
g/m
!)2
Nor
mal
20Ac
tual
394
2549
281
3(k
g)2
Nor
mal
20Ac
tual
-3.9
425
-492
.813
MSl
Tt
20C
ll
td
1869
2336
522
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
20C
alcu
late
d18
.69
2336
.522
88Ai
Tt
394
25Po
t Vol
ume
(litre
s) :
Air T
est
3.94
25Po
t Mas
s :
Met
er N
umbe
rKa
ya-4
92.8
13M
ean
Dens
ity (k
g/m
!) :
Air C
onte
nt (%
)(
)
Dens
ityLa
bM
ould
Age
atTe
stM
axSt
reng
thFa
ilure
ADe
nsity
(kg/
m!)
Test
ed B
yLa
bRe
fere
nce
Mou
ldNu
mbe
rAg
e at
Test
Test
Date
Max
Load
Stre
ngth
N/m
m")
Failu
reM
ode
Aver
age
(kg/
m!)
yRe
fere
nce
Num
ber
Test
Date
Load
(KN)
N/m
m")
Mod
e
10.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-1
(KN)
10.
00N
orm
al1
000
Nor
mal
00
ADAD
M1
AD-A
DM
-21
0.00
Nor
mal
0.0
10
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-3
AD-A
DM
-21
0.00
Nor
mal
70
00N
lAD
-AD
M-3
ADAD
M4
70.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-4
70.
00N
orm
al0.
0AD
-AD
M-5
70.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-6
280.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-7
280.
00N
orm
al28
000
Nor
mal
00
ADAD
M7
AD-A
DM
-828
0.00
Nor
mal
0.0
280
00N
orm
alAD
ADM
9AD
-AD
M-8
280.
00N
orm
al28
000
Nl
AD-A
DM
-9AD
ADM
1028
0.00
Nor
mal
AD-A
DM
-10
Fil
Lb
Mld
At
Tt
Real
Flex
ural
Failu
reM
dTe
sted
ByLa
bR
fM
ould
Nb
Age
atT
tTe
stD
t
Real
Load
Flex
ural
Stre
ngth
aver
age
Mod
eTe
sted
By
Refe
renc
eNu
mbe
rTe
stDa
teLo
ad(k
N)St
reng
thN/
mm
")g
280
Nor
mal
ADAD
M1
MP
(kN)
N/m
m)
280
Nor
mal
280
Nl
00
AD-A
DM
-1M
PAD
ADM
2M
P28
0N
orm
al0.
0AD
-AD
M-2
MP
280
Nor
mal
AD-A
DM
-3M
P
Con
cret
eTr
ialM
ixW
orks
heat
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heat
Date
of T
rial :
11-A
pr-1
2M
ix D
escr
iptio
n :
Kaya
sand
100
%
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
AD-A
DM
Cem
ent (
kg/m
!) :
350
pp
y(
g)
Tria
l Mix
Ref
:Re
plac
emen
t (%
) :Ba
tch
Tim
e :
Labo
rato
ry N
ame
:C
ardi
ff U
nive
rsity
p(
)y
yBa
tch
Size
(litr
es) :
10Ta
rget
Con
sist
ence
:(
)g
Basi
c M
ater
ial
Mat
eria
l Det
ails
S.G
Basi
c M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eS.
GC
emen
tPC
Cem
exR
ugby
Type
sTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eC
emen
tPC
Cem
exR
ugby
Rep
lace
men
tAd
mix
ture
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
eAg
greg
ate
(1)
4/20
mm
Cru
shed
Lim
esto
neAd
mix
ture
Dosa
ge(m
l/50k
g)C
oars
eAg
greg
ate
(2)
Coa
rse
Aggr
egat
e (1
)4/
20m
m C
rush
ed L
imes
tone
Dosa
ge (m
l/50k
g)or
Solid
Mat
eria
lsC
oars
e Ag
greg
ate
(2)
Fine
Aggr
egat
e(1
)Ka
yasa
ndD
until
and
or S
olid
Mat
eria
ls(k
g)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Kaya
sand
Dun
tilan
dFi
neAg
greg
ate
(2)
Adm
ixtu
re(1
)W
RD
A90
plas
ticiz
erG
race
0m
l(k
g)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(2)
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)W
RD
A 90
pla
stic
izer
Gra
ce0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re(2
)0
ml
Solid
s(k
g)0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0
ml
Solid
s (k
g)0
ml
Aggr
egat
eAg
greg
ate
Moi
stur
eM
ixDe
sign
Figu
res
Tota
lFr
eeM
ATER
IALS
Aggr
egat
eAb
sorp
tion
Aggr
egat
e M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
SS
DM
it
Ct
Ti
lT
il
Tota
lFr
ee%
%M
ATER
IALS
Abso
rptio
n%
S.S.
D.k
/!
Moi
stur
eC
tiCo
rrec
ted
Tria
lT
tTr
ial
At
l%
%35
035
00
350
350
Ct
%kg
/m!
Corr
ectio
nd
Targ
etAc
tual
350
350.
03.
503.
500
00
000
000
Cem
ent
Rl
t0
0.0
0.00
0.00
066
014
05
1040
54
1034
610
3510
35R
epla
cem
ent
CA
t(1
)0.
660.
14-0
.510
40-5
.410
34.6
10.3
510
.35
00
00
00
00
000
00C
oars
e Ag
greg
ate
(1)
CA
t(2
)0.
00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
167
435
27
753
202
773
27
737
73C
oars
e Ag
greg
ate
(2)
FiA
t(1
)1.
674.
352.
775
320
.277
3.2
7.73
7.73
00
00
00
00
000
00Ad
iFi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
FiA
t(2
)0.
00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
210
195
21
951
93Ad
mix
iht
WFine
Agg
rega
te (2
)21
019
5.2
1.95
1.93
wei
ght
Wat
er2.
752.
80.
030.
030.
03Ad
mix
ture
(1)
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0.
000.
00.
000.
00(
)So
lids
(kg)
TOTA
LS23
55.7
514
.77
2355
.75
23.5
623
.54
(g)
Com
men
ts:
2353
.52
Corr
ecte
d W
eigh
ts (k
g/m!)
=20
7.77
g(
g)
Corr
ecte
d W
ater
(L/m
!) =
207.
77SS
DAc
tual
-2.2
3Di
ffere
nce
from
Tar
get (
Litre
s) =
Corr
ecte
d W
ater
(L/m
)SS
DAc
tual
2.23
W/C
Ratio
0.60
00.
600
-1.0
6Di
ffere
nce
from
Tar
get (
Litre
s)
Diffe
renc
efro
mTa
rget
(%)=
W/C
Rat
io0.
600
0.60
0-1
.06
Fine
s(%
)=42
0-0
21Di
ffere
nce
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d(%
)=Fi
nes
(%) =
42.0
-0.2
1Yi
eld
(%) =
Conc
rete
Appe
aran
ce:
Conc
rete
App
eara
nce:
Slum
pTe
stPl
astic
Dens
itySl
ump
Test
Plas
tic D
ensi
tyT
tPo
t+Te
stM
ode
Valu
e(m
m)
Conc
rete
Dens
ityTe
stPo
t +
conc
rete
()
y
1N
orm
al70
Mas
s(k
g)(k
g/m
!)co
ncre
te(k
g)1
Nor
mal
70(k
g)(k
g/m
!)2
Nor
mal
70Ac
tual
394
2549
281
3(k
g)2
Nor
mal
70Ac
tual
-3.9
425
-492
.813
MSl
Tt
70C
ll
td
1883
2353
522
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
70C
alcu
late
d18
.83
2353
.522
88Ai
Tt
394
25Po
t Vol
ume
(litre
s) :
Air T
est
3.94
25Po
t Mas
s :
Met
er N
umbe
rKa
ya-4
92.8
13M
ean
Dens
ity (k
g/m
!) :
Air C
onte
nt (%
)(
)
Dens
ityLa
bM
ould
Age
atTe
stM
axSt
reng
thFa
ilure
ADe
nsity
(kg/
m!)
Test
ed B
yLa
bRe
fere
nce
Mou
ldNu
mbe
rAg
e at
Test
Test
Date
Max
Load
Stre
ngth
N/m
m")
Failu
reM
ode
Aver
age
(kg/
m!)
yRe
fere
nce
Num
ber
Test
Date
Load
(KN)
N/m
m")
Mod
e
10.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-1
(KN)
10.
00N
orm
al1
000
Nor
mal
00
ADAD
M1
AD-A
DM
-21
0.00
Nor
mal
0.0
10
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-3
AD-A
DM
-21
0.00
Nor
mal
70
00N
lAD
-AD
M-3
ADAD
M4
70.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-4
70.
00N
orm
al0.
0AD
-AD
M-5
70.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-6
280.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-7
280.
00N
orm
al28
000
Nor
mal
00
ADAD
M7
AD-A
DM
-828
0.00
Nor
mal
0.0
280
00N
orm
alAD
ADM
9AD
-AD
M-8
280.
00N
orm
al28
000
Nl
AD-A
DM
-9AD
ADM
1028
0.00
Nor
mal
AD-A
DM
-10
Fil
Lb
Mld
At
Tt
Real
Flex
ural
Failu
reM
dTe
sted
ByLa
bR
fM
ould
Nb
Age
atT
tTe
stD
t
Real
Load
Flex
ural
Stre
ngth
aver
age
Mod
eTe
sted
By
Refe
renc
eNu
mbe
rTe
stDa
teLo
ad(k
N)St
reng
thN/
mm
")g
280
Nor
mal
ADAD
M1
MP
(kN)
N/m
m)
280
Nor
mal
280
Nl
00
AD-A
DM
-1M
PAD
ADM
2M
P28
0N
orm
al0.
0AD
-AD
M-2
MP
280
Nor
mal
AD-A
DM
-3M
P
Con
cret
eTr
ialM
ixW
orks
heat
Con
cret
e Tr
ial M
ix W
orks
heat
Date
of T
rial :
11-A
pr-1
2M
ix D
escr
iptio
n :
Kaya
sand
100
%
Mat
eria
l Cod
e :
AD-A
DM
Cem
ent (
kg/m
!) :
350
pp
y(
g)
Tria
l Mix
Ref
:Re
plac
emen
t (%
) :Ba
tch
Tim
e :
Labo
rato
ry N
ame
:C
ardi
ff U
nive
rsity
p(
)y
yBa
tch
Size
(litr
es) :
10Ta
rget
Con
sist
ence
:(
)g
Basi
c M
ater
ial
Mat
eria
l Det
ails
S.G
Basi
c M
ater
ial
Type
sM
ater
ial D
etai
lsTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eS.
GC
emen
tPC
Cem
exR
ugby
Type
sTy
peSu
pplie
rM
ater
ial S
ours
eC
emen
tPC
Cem
exR
ugby
Rep
lace
men
tAd
mix
ture
Rep
lace
men
tC
oars
eAg
greg
ate
(1)
4/20
mm
Cru
shed
Lim
esto
neAd
mix
ture
Dosa
ge(m
l/50k
g)C
oars
eAg
greg
ate
(2)
Coa
rse
Aggr
egat
e (1
)4/
20m
m C
rush
ed L
imes
tone
Dosa
ge (m
l/50k
g)or
Solid
Mat
eria
lsC
oars
e Ag
greg
ate
(2)
Fine
Aggr
egat
e(1
)Ka
yasa
ndD
until
and
or S
olid
Mat
eria
ls(k
g)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
Kaya
sand
Dun
tilan
dFi
neAg
greg
ate
(2)
Adm
ixtu
re(1
)W
RD
A90
plas
ticiz
erG
race
0m
l(k
g)Fi
ne A
ggre
gate
(2)
Adm
ixtu
re (1
)W
RD
A 90
pla
stic
izer
Gra
ce0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re(2
)EX
P-C
M1
Gra
ce0
ml
Solid
s(k
g)0
ml
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)EX
P-C
M1
Gra
ce0
ml
Solid
s (k
g)0
ml
Aggr
egat
eAg
greg
ate
Moi
stur
eM
ixDe
sign
Figu
res
Tota
lFr
eeM
ATER
IALS
Aggr
egat
eAb
sorp
tion
Aggr
egat
e M
oist
ure
Mix
Des
ign
Figu
res
SS
DM
it
Ct
Ti
lT
il
Tota
lFr
ee%
%M
ATER
IALS
Abso
rptio
n%
S.S.
D.k
/!
Moi
stur
eC
tiCo
rrec
ted
Tria
lT
tTr
ial
At
l%
%35
035
00
350
350
Ct
%kg
/m!
Corr
ectio
nd
Targ
etAc
tual
350
350.
03.
503.
500
00
000
000
Cem
ent
Rl
t0
0.0
0.00
0.00
066
014
05
1040
54
1034
610
3510
35R
epla
cem
ent
CA
t(1
)0.
660.
14-0
.510
40-5
.410
34.6
10.3
510
.35
00
00
00
00
000
00C
oars
e Ag
greg
ate
(1)
CA
t(2
)0.
00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
167
435
27
753
202
773
27
737
73C
oars
e Ag
greg
ate
(2)
FiA
t(1
)1.
674.
352.
775
320
.277
3.2
7.73
7.73
00
00
00
00
000
00Ad
iFi
ne A
ggre
gate
(1)
FiA
t(2
)0.
00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
210
195
21
951
92Ad
mix
iht
WFine
Agg
rega
te (2
)21
019
5.2
1.95
1.92
wei
ght
Wat
er2.
752.
80.
030.
030.
03Ad
mix
ture
(1)
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
Adm
ixtu
re (2
)0.
000.
00.
000.
00(
)So
lids
(kg)
TOTA
LS23
55.7
514
.77
2355
.75
23.5
623
.53
(g)
Com
men
ts:
2352
.52
Corr
ecte
d W
eigh
ts (k
g/m!)
=20
6.77
g(
g)
Corr
ecte
d W
ater
(L/m
!) =
206.
77SS
DAc
tual
-3.2
3Di
ffere
nce
from
Tar
get (
Litre
s) =
Corr
ecte
d W
ater
(L/m
)SS
DAc
tual
3.23
W/C
Ratio
0.60
00.
600
-1.5
4Di
ffere
nce
from
Tar
get (
Litre
s)
Diffe
renc
efro
mTa
rget
(%)=
W/C
Rat
io0.
600
0.60
0-1
.54
Fine
s(%
)=42
0-0
21Di
ffere
nce
from
Tar
get (
%) =
Yiel
d(%
)=Fi
nes
(%) =
42.0
-0.2
1Yi
eld
(%) =
Conc
rete
Appe
aran
ce:
Conc
rete
App
eara
nce:
Slum
pTe
stPl
astic
Dens
itySl
ump
Test
Plas
tic D
ensi
tyT
tPo
t+Te
stM
ode
Valu
e(m
m)
Conc
rete
Dens
ityTe
stPo
t +
conc
rete
()
y
1N
orm
al75
Mas
s(k
g)(k
g/m
!)co
ncre
te(k
g)1
Nor
mal
75(k
g)(k
g/m
!)2
Nor
mal
75Ac
tual
394
2549
281
3(k
g)2
Nor
mal
75Ac
tual
-3.9
425
-492
.813
MSl
Tt
75C
ll
td
1882
2352
522
Mea
n Sl
ump
Test
75C
alcu
late
d18
.82
2352
.522
88Ai
Tt
394
25Po
t Vol
ume
(litre
s) :
Air T
est
3.94
25Po
t Mas
s :
Met
er N
umbe
rKa
ya-4
92.8
13M
ean
Dens
ity (k
g/m
!) :
Air C
onte
nt (%
)(
)
Failu
reDe
nsity
Lab
Mou
ldAg
eat
Test
Max
Stre
ngth
AFa
ilure
Mod
eDe
nsity
(kg/
m!)
Test
ed B
yLa
bRe
fere
nce
Mou
ldNu
mbe
rAg
e at
Test
Test
Date
Max
Load
Stre
ngth
N/m
m")
Aver
age
Mod
e(k
g/m
!)y
Refe
renc
eNu
mbe
rTe
stDa
teLo
ad(K
N)N/
mm
")
10.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-1
(KN)
10.
00N
orm
al1
000
Nor
mal
00
ADAD
M1
AD-A
DM
-21
0.00
Nor
mal
0.0
10
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-3
AD-A
DM
-21
0.00
Nor
mal
70
00N
lAD
-AD
M-3
ADAD
M4
70.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-4
70.
00N
orm
al0.
0AD
-AD
M-5
70.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-6
280.
00N
orm
alAD
-AD
M-7
280.
00N
orm
al28
000
Nor
mal
00
ADAD
M7
AD-A
DM
-828
0.00
Nor
mal
0.0
280
00N
orm
alAD
ADM
9AD
-AD
M-8
280.
00N
orm
al28
000
Nl
AD-A
DM
-9AD
ADM
1028
0.00
Nor
mal
AD-A
DM
-10
Fil
Lb
Mld
At
Tt
Real
Flex
ural
Failu
reM
dTe
sted
ByLa
bR
fM
ould
Nb
Age
atT
tTe
stD
t
Real
Load
Flex
ural
Stre
ngth
aver
age
Mod
eTe
sted
By
Refe
renc
eNu
mbe
rTe
stDa
teLo
ad(k
N)St
reng
thN/
mm
")g
280
Nor
mal
ADAD
M1
MP
(kN)
N/m
m)
280
Nor
mal
280
Nl
00
AD-A
DM
-1M
PAD
ADM
2M
P28
0N
orm
al0.
0AD
-AD
M-2
MP
280
Nor
mal
AD-A
DM
-3M
P
Quarterly
!Rep
ort!M
ay!2012!
Page
!11!of
!13!
App
endix!B!–!Taffs!Well!and
!Gilfach!Co
ncrete
!Results
!!
!
MIXw/cSlump,!mm1daycoefficient!of!variation7day
coefficient!of!variation28day
coefficient!of!variation28day
coefficient!of!variation
Control!slump0.489523.80.4482.858.92.96.14.6Taff's!FEED0.6146018.51.6383.950.20.4""Control!Taff's!Well0.55collapse13.21.9392.350.50.65.310.4Taff's!Well0.5590182.544.32.855.73.16.64.3Taff's!Well!PA0.557021.21.047.81.2581.16.74.3Taff's!Well!PB0.5582.522.74.246.23.256.23.66.18.0Taff's!Well!PC0.556521.41.546.92.056.67.466.3Gilfach!FEED0.748808.22.423.31.731.31.1""Control!Gilfach0.67collapse8.15.524.45.534.91.94.63.3Gilfach0.678512.70.934.52.941.43.95.23.3Gilfach!PA0.677514.91.431.40.743.32.65.68.2Gilfach!PB0.6797.514.71.432.83.342.82.25.54.5Gilfach!PC0.677512.10.930.52.339.90.65.26.3
No!admixture!mixesCompressive!strength!N/mm2Flexural!strength!N/mm2
MIXw/cSlump,!mm%!fines!of!FA1day
coefficient!of!variation7day
coefficient!of!variation28day
coefficient!of!variation28day
coefficient!of!variation
Control0.55collapse113.21.9392.350.50.65.310.4Taff's!Well0.5902.823.90.752.51.864.35.56.13.6Taff's!Well!PA0.5904.9201.849.76.461.11.96.416.0Taff's!Well!PB0.5757.123.20.851.12.6633.06.123.1Taff's!Well!PC0.5659200.947.10.259.92.16.814.2Gilfach0.55603.514.81.144.31.3552.85.44.1Gilfach!PA0.5550519.82.043.81.655.31.965.6Gilfach!PB0.5550718.41.743.20.855.62.15.47.3Gilfach!PC0.5545917.21.741.70.4532.65.910.6
w/c!ratio!0.55!admixtureCompressive!strength!N/mm2Flexural!strength!N/mm2
HHF '<�2'9+7/'1
IF +6:/7+*�8/>+�*/897/(:9/43
���
���
���
���
�'843'7=��479'7
�4/89:7+�)439+39�4,�,++*�2'9+7/'1
�/7):1'9/3-�14'*�7'9/4
&/+1*�7'9/4����
�'79/)1+�8/>+�*/897/(:9/43��<+9�8/;/3-�2+9.4*�
JF�14<�4,�9+89�51'39
�7:8.+7
�/7�8)7++3
�7+*:89+7
�:89�)411+)947
@!/+;+�2+8.�8/>+
�43)7+9+�8'3*
���?���22
�479'7�8'3*
��?��22
$��574*:)9���
[NESP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
[NESQP$��574*:)9�Q��</9.���������
[NESRP$��574*:)9�R��</9.�������������������$��574*:)9���
�������������/11+7���
[NESSP$��574*:)9�S��</9.���������
[NESTP$��574*:)9�T��</9.�������
[NEWP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
[NEWQP$��574*:)9�Q��</9.���������
[NEWRP$��574*:)9�R��</9.���������
[NEWSP$��574*:)9�S��</9.���������
KF"+89�7+8:19
���p
��
EE
���
[NES
����
���
[NESQ
����
����
[NESR
���
�� �
[NESS
� ��
����
[NEST
���
�� �
[NEW
� �
���
[NEWQ
���
����
[NEWR
����
����
[NEWS
��
����
E���
�43)7+9+�8'3*
�479'7�8'3*
&/+1*
7'9/4����
���22�'3*
(+14<�',9+7
*+)'39'9/43�9+89
'<�2'9+7/'1
$��574*:)9
�43)7+9+
8'3*
p
E� �
�49'7
8'3*
�p
!'251+
!/>+
�22�
�4/89:7+
)439+39����
�/7):1'9/3-
14'*�7'9/4
�'9'
#!������
�!�
���!
�e
�G2/3
"49'1�%+/-.9��0-�
���
$��574*:)9
�43)7+9+�8'3*
���22�'3*�(+14<�',9+7�*+)'39'9/43�9+89
�479'7�8'3*
�'9+8�4,�9+898
��'3�p���'3�
'<�2'9+7/'1
4)0�9=5+
�7'3/9+
!/>+��22�
���p
�4/89:7+�)439+39�����
��
�'-8�/3�949'1
�
LLFXbgkg
'��$��9+89�51'39
(���7+*:89+7
������)�� '<�2'9+7/'1
ZYN
�:89�)411+)947
�+,47+�57+*:89+7
�/11+7
�/7�8)7++3
�
MMF�745+79=� !'251+
'<�2'9+7/'1
$��574*:)9
�43)7+9+�8'3*
�479'7�8'3*
!/>+��22�
���p��
E
!:7,')+�*7=�*+38/9=�C-��D
����
���
�;+3�*7=�*+38/9=�C-��D
����
����
%'9+7A'(84759/43A7'9/4����
E
��
���
!41/*A)439+39�C�D
���
����
EE
!/>+����� �22
!/>+� ����22
!/>+�����22
!/>+�����22
!/>+�������22
!/>+��������22
!/>+��������22
NNFF""+89�7+5479�,47�)43)7+9+
HHD"+89Ahig^l]kcgfA`dgnFA
IDVi\^cfa
'�� '<�2'9+7/'1
(��$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
���p�
�
�
���p�
�
�
�p���
��
����
�p���
�
�
���p
���
���
���p
�
�
p�
���
����
p�
��
���
�p
���
���
�p
����
���
p��
��
����
p��
����
����
��p���
��
����
��p���
��
���
���p���
��
��
���p���
��
�
���p���
��
��
���p���
��
��
���p
��
���p
��
949'1
�
949'1
�
)���7+*:89+7�574*:)9
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
���p
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
p�
��
����
��
����
�
����
��
����
�p
���
����
��
����
��
���
�
���
p��
���
���
��
����
���
� ��
��
���
��p���
�
���
���
� ��
���
����
���
����
���p���
���
��
����
����
���
���
����
� ��
���p���
����
���
� �
���
� �
����
����
���
���p
���
���
����
���
949'1
�
�
�
�
*��$��574*:)9��</9.�57+*:89+7�574*:)9�
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
���p
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
p�
��
����
���
���
���
���
��
���
�p
� ��
� �
����
����
���
����
���
��
p��
� ��
�
���
���
���
���
���
���
��p���
���
��
��
����
���
��
��
���
���p���
���
���
��
��
�
���
��
���
���p���
��
���
��
��
���
���
���
��
���p
���
��
���
��
949'1
�
�
�
�
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
[NESQP$��574*:)9�Q��</9.����S��[NESRP$��574*:)9����</9.����S��[NESSP$��574*:)9����</9.����SS�[NESTP$��574*:)9����</9.�����T�
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
'<�2'9+7/'1
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
[NESP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
XTESQP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�Q
XTESRP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�R
XTESSP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�S
XTESTP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�T
�
++���/11+7
+9'/3+*�����'88+*���� +9'/3+*�����'88+*���� +9'/3+*�����'88+*���� +9'/3+*�����'88+*���� +9'/3+*�����'88+*����
���p
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
p�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�p
�
���
��
����
�
����
��
����
�
����
p��
��
����
��
����
��
���
��
����
��
����
��p���
��
���
��
� ��
�
����
�
���
��
����
���p���
��
���
�
���
���
��
���
���
��
��
���p���
���
���
� ��
���
���
���
���
���
��
���
���p
���
���
���
���
���
949'1
�
�
�
�
�
JDVi\^cfaA]lim_j
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
UESP�/11+7
UESQP�/11+7�Q
UESRP�/11+7�R
UESSP�/11+7�S
UESTP�/11+7�T
���
���
�
��
���
���
���
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
X\jj_^CBD
Yc_m_jco_C22D
'<�2'9+7/'1
[NESP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
XTESQP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�Q
XTESRP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�R
XTESSP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�S
XTESTP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�T
UESP�/11+7
UESQP�/11+7�Q
UESRP�/11+7�R
UESSP�/11+7�S
UESTP�/11+7�T
�!�������
���
���
�
��
���
���
���
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
X\jj_^CBD
Yc_m_jco_C22D
[NESP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
[NESQP$��574*:)9�Q�</9.����S��
[NESRP$��574*:)9����</9.����S��
[NESSP$��574*:)9����</9.����SS�
[NESTP$��574*:)9����</9.�����T�
�!�������
�
OOFF""+89�7+5479�,47�2479'7
HHD"+89Ahig^l]kcgfA`dgnFA
IDVi\^cfa
'�� '<�2'9+7/'1
(��$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
�
�
�
�
�
����
�
�
���
���
�
�
��
����
��
����
���
���
��
����
���
���
���
���
�
����
���
���
��
����
����
����
���
���
��
��
��
�
���
��
�
��
�
�
)���7+*:89+7�574*:)9
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
�
�
�
�
�
��
����
��
�
����
��
���
��
��
����
��
����
���
��
���
���
���
���
��
���
���
���
��
���
����
����
� �
����
� ��
��
���
���
��
����
��
���
��
��
�
�
�
*��$��574*:)9��</9.�57+*:89+7�574*:)9�
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
�
�
�
�
�
��
����
��
��
����
�
����
�
��
����
���
���
��
���
����
���
���
����
���
���
����
���
���
����
���
���
���
���
���
�
���
���
���
���
���
���
���
���
�
�
�
���p���
���
���p
949'1
p��
��
��p���
���
���p���
��
p���
����
���p�
����
�p
����
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
[NEWQP$��574*:)9�Q��</9.�XT�W��[NEWRP$��574*:)9����</9.�XT�W��[NEWSP$��574*:)9����</9.�XT�W��
�'88+*����
���p
�
���p���
��
���p
949'1
p��
����
��p���
����
���p���
���
p���
����
���p�
����
�p
���
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
XTEWQP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�Q
XTEWRP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�R
XTEWSP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�S
�'88+*����
���p
�
���p���
���p���
���p
���p
949'1
949'1
p��
p��
��p���
��p���
���p���
���p���
p���
p���
���p�
���p�
�p
�p
���p�
���p�
�p���
�p���
���p
���p
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
'<�2'9+7/'1
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
[NEWP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
�
++���/11+7
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
+9'/3+*����
�'88+*����
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
��
����
�
����
�
����
�
����
��
���
��
���
��
���
�
����
���
����
��
����
�
���
��
���
��
����
���
� ��
���
����
���
����
���
����
�
��
�
���
���
���
�
����
��
���
���
����
���
� ��
��
���
���
���
���
���
��
���
���
���
���
���
�
�
�
�
JDVi\^cfaA]lim_j
���p���
���p
949'1
p���
���p�
�p
p��
��p���
���p���
!/+;+�8/>+
�22�
UEWP�/11+7
UEWQP�/11+7�Q
UEWRP�/11+7�R
UEWSP�/11+7�S
���p
���
���
���
�
��
���
���
���
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
X\jj_^CBD
Yc_m_jco_C22D
'<�2'9+7/'1
[NEWP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
XTEWQP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�Q
XTEWRP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�R
XTEWSP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�S
UEWP�/11+7
UEWQP�/11+7�Q
UEWRP�/11+7�R
UEWSP�/11+7�S
�'843'7=��479'7
���
���
���
�
��
���
���
���
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
X\jj_^CBD
Yc_m_jco_C22D
[NEWP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�
[NEWQP$��574*:)9�Q�</9.�XT�W��
[NEWRP$��574*:)9����</9.�XT�W��
[NEWSP$��574*:)9����</9.�XT�W��
�'843'7=��479'7
㪈
䋱 䋱䋮㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
䋲䋮㪩㪼㫈㫌㫀㫉㪼㪻㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼㩷㪻㫀㫊㫋㫉㫀㪹㫌㫋㫀㫆㫅
㪊㪅㪇㩼
㪌㪅㪇㩼
㪎㪅㪇㩼
㪐㪅㪇㩼
䇭䇭䇭㪤㪸㫊㫆㫅㫉㫐㩷㪤
㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉
㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㫆㪽㩷㪽㪼㪼㪻㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪚㫀㫉㪺㫌㫃㪸㫋㫀㫅㪾㩷㫃㫆㪸㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆
㪰㫀㪼㫃㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫉㫋㫀㪺㫃㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼㩷㪻㫀㫊㫋㫉㫀㪹㫌㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㩿㫎㪼㫋㩷㫊㫀㫍㫀㫅㪾㩷㫄㪼㫋㪿㫆㪻㪀
䋳䋮㪝㫃㫆㫎㩷㫆㪽㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㩷㫇㫃㪸㫅㫋
㪚㫉㫌㫊㪿㪼㫉
㪘㫀㫉㩷㫊㪺㫉㪼㪼㫅
㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉
㪛㫌㫊㫋㩷㪺㫆㫃㫃㪼㪺㫋㫆㫉
㶎㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫄
㪼㫊㪿㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪉㪅㪌㬍㪍㪅㪍㫄㫄
㪤㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪉㪅㪇㬍
㪊㪅㪇㫄㫄
㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩷㩷
䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚䌁㪀㩷㩷
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀㩷㩷
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩷㩷
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷㩷㩷
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌
㪺㫋㩷䌃㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀㩷㩷
䌖䋷䋭䌍䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪤㪘㪀㩷㩷
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪤㪙㪀㩷㩷
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪤㪚㪀㩷㩷
䋴䋮㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫊㫌㫃㫋
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪇
㪈㪅㪈㪈
䋭䋭
㪊㪅㪐㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌃
㪍㪋㪅㪌
㪊㪅㪌㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁
㪎㪐㪅㪏
㪌㪅㪇㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂
㪏㪋㪅㪇
㪎㪅㪇㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃
㪏㪏㪅㪊
㪐㪅㪇㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌍
㪍㪌㪅㪉
㪋㪅㪈㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌁
㪎㪎㪅㪋
㪋㪅㪎㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌂
㪎㪐㪅㪉
㪌㪅㪊㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌃
㪏㪈㪅㪊
㪍㪅㪊㩼
㪛㪸㫋㪼㫊㩷㫆㪽㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㫊
㪐㪄㪤㪸㫉㪄㪈㪉䌾㪉㪏㪄㪤㪸㫉㪄㪈㪉
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪩㫆㪺㫂㩷㫋㫐㫇㪼
㪞㫉㫀㫋㫊㫋㫆㫅㪼
㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋
㪈㪈
㪫㫆㫋㪸㫃㩷㪮㪼㫀㪾㪿㫋㩷㩿㫂㪾㪀
㪐㪉㪐㪇
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄㩷㪸㫅㪻㩷㪹㪼㫃㫆㫎㩷㪸㪽㫋㪼㫉㩷㪻㪼㪺㪸㫅㫋㪸㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋
㪤㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪤㫆㫋㪸㫉
㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪉䌾㪇
䋭㪉㪅㪈㪉
㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼
㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪚㫀㫉㪺㫌㫃㪸㫋㫀㫅㪾
㫃㫆㪸㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄㩷㪸㫅㪻
㪹㪼㫃㫆㫎㩷㪸㪽㫋㪼㫉
㪻㪼㪺㪸㫅㫋㪸㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪛㪸㫋㪸
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪇
㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㩿㩼㪀㩷
㪈㪅㪈㪈
㪙㪸㪾㫊㩷㫀㫅㩷㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪪㪸㫄
㫇㫃㪼
㪪㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼
㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪰㫀㪼㫃㪻
㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪋䌾㪇
䋭㪈㪅㪎㪊
㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋
㪬㪪㪎㩷㩿㪙㪌㪇㪇㪀
㪘㪪㪏㪇㪇
㪧㪛㪉㪇㪇㪪
㪈㪌㪇䌭
㪊䋯㫄㫀㫅
㪤㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪉
䋵䋵䋮䌐䌨䌯䌴䌯
㪸㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㩷㫇㫃㪸㫅㫋
㪹㪀㩷㪧㫉㪼㪻㫌㫊㫋㪼㫉
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪺㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
䌕䌓䋷
㪛㫌㫊㫋㩷㪺㫆㫃㫃㪼㪺㫋㫆㫉
㪙㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㫇㫉㪼㪻㫌㫊㫋㪼㫉
㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
㪘㫀㫉㩷㫊㪺㫉㪼㪼㫅
㪊
䋶䋶䋮㪧㫉㫆㫇㪼㫉㫋㫐㩷
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪌㪄㪇㪅㪉㪌㫄㫄
䋭
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪈㪅㪇㪄㪇㪅㪌㫄㫄
䋭
㪉㪅㪌䌾
㪈㪅㪉
䋭
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌㪄㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄
䋭
䋭
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪉㪌㪄㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌㫄㫄
䋭
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪉㪅㪇㪄㪈㪅㪇㫄㫄
䋭
㪌㪌㪅㪎
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪐㪅㪌㪄㪋㪅㪇㫄㫄
䋭䋭
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪋㪅㪇㪄㪉㪅㪇㫄㫄
㪪㪸㫄
㫇㫃㪼
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋
㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪤㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪮㪸㫋㪼㫉䇭
㪸㪹㫊㫆㫉㫇㫋㫀㫆㫅䇭㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪈㪅㪊㪎
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
䋭
㪪㫌㫉㪽㪸㪺㪼㩷㪻㫉㫐㩷㪻㪼㫅㫊㫀㫋㫐㩷䋨㪾㪆ঢ䋩
㪉㪅㪍㪌
㪦㫍㪼㫅㩷㪻㫉㫐㩷㪻㪼㫅㫊㫀㫋㫐㩷䋨㪾㪆ঢ䋩
㪉㪅㪍㪉
㪪㫆㫃㫀㪻䇭㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷䋨㩼䋩
㪋
䋷䋷䋮䋮㪫㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫇㫆㫉㫋㩷㪽㫆㫉㩷㪺㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼
䋱䋱䋩㪫㪼㫊㫋䇭䌰䌲䌯
䌤䌵䌣䌴䌩䌯䌮䇭䌦䌬䌯䌷䋮䇭
䋲䋩䌇䌲䌡䌤䌩䌮䌧
㪸㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪹㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪌㪅㪐
㪐㪋㪅㪈
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪎㪋㪅㪋
㪈㪐㪅㪎
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪈㪅㪍
㪏㪅㪈
㪈㪋㪅㪇
㪏㪍㪅㪇
㪈㪅㪉
㪍㪅㪐
㪉㪏㪅㪍
㪌㪎㪅㪋
㪇㪅㪍
㪍㪅㪊
㪉㪇㪅㪐
㪊㪍㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪍
㪌㪅㪎
㪈㪍㪅㪏
㪈㪐㪅㪎
㪇㪅㪏
㪋㪅㪐
㪈㪉㪅㪌
㪎㪅㪉
㪈㪅㪇
㪊㪅㪐
㪊㪅㪎
㪊㪅㪌
㪊㪅㪐
㪊㪅㪌
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪺㪀㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪅㪉
㪐㪏㪅㪏
㪇㪅㪐
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪌㪅㪋
㪐㪊㪅㪋
㪉㪅㪍
㪇㪅㪎
㪐㪐㪅㪊
㪐㪅㪊
㪏㪋㪅㪈
㪍㪅㪍
㪋㪅㪐
㪐㪋㪅㪋
㪈㪌㪅㪎
㪍㪏㪅㪋
㪈㪉㪅㪐
㪈㪇㪅㪎
㪏㪊㪅㪎
㪊㪈㪅㪎
㪊㪍㪅㪎
㪉㪐㪅㪈
㪉㪎㪅㪈
㪌㪍㪅㪍
㪉㪌㪅㪋
㪈㪈㪅㪊
㪉㪐㪅㪋
㪊㪉㪅㪍
㪉㪋㪅㪇
㪈㪈㪅㪊
㪈㪏㪅㪌
㪉㪋㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪻㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪈㪅㪌
㪏㪏㪅㪌
㪈㪇㪅㪐
㪈㪇㪅㪉
㪏㪐㪅㪏
㪉㪋㪅㪉
㪍㪋㪅㪊
㪉㪉㪅㪍
㪉㪈㪅㪈
㪍㪏㪅㪎
㪈㪏㪅㪎
㪋㪌㪅㪍
㪈㪎㪅㪍
㪈㪍㪅㪍
㪌㪉㪅㪈
㪈㪍㪅㪍
㪉㪐㪅㪇
㪈㪌㪅㪐
㪈㪌㪅㪉
㪊㪍㪅㪐
㪈㪍㪅㪈
㪈㪉㪅㪐
㪈㪍㪅㪊
㪈㪍㪅㪋
㪉㪇㪅㪌
㪎㪅㪐
㪌㪅㪇
㪐㪅㪎
㪈㪈㪅㪌
㪐㪅㪇
㪌㪅㪇
㪎㪅㪇
㪐㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
㪈㪐䌾㪈㪊㪅㪉
㪈㪊㪅㪉䌾㪐㪅㪌
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪋䌾㪉
㪉䌾㪈
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾
㪇㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪉䌾㪈
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾
㪇
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌
㪺㫋㩷䌁
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌂䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂
䌓䌋䋭
䌃䌃䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪋䌾㪉
㪐㪐㪅㪈
㪉䌾㪈
㪐㪍㪅㪌
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪏㪐㪅㪐
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪎㪎㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪋㪎㪅㪐
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪈㪏㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾
㪇㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪙㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌
㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪋䌾㪉
㪏㪐㪅㪈
㪉䌾㪈
㪍㪍㪅㪌
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪋㪏㪅㪐
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪊㪊㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪈㪍㪅㪎
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪎㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾
㪇㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪈㪐䌾㪈㪊㪅㪉
㪈㪊㪅㪉䌾㪐㪅㪌
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪋䌾㪉
㪌
㪼㪼㪀㩷㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪌
㪐㪐㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪅㪎
㪐㪎㪅㪏
㪇㪅㪐
㪐㪐㪅㪈
㪇㪅㪍
㪐㪐㪅㪋
㪇㪅㪉
㪐㪐㪅㪏
㪋㪅㪉
㪐㪊㪅㪍
㪈㪅㪌
㪐㪎㪅㪍
㪈㪅㪊
㪐㪏㪅㪈
㪈㪅㪇
㪐㪏㪅㪏
㪎㪅㪏
㪏㪌㪅㪏
㪉㪅㪏
㪐㪋㪅㪏
㪈㪅㪍
㪐㪍㪅㪌
㪈㪅㪊
㪐㪎㪅㪌
㪈㪏㪅㪌
㪍㪎㪅㪊
㪍㪅㪊
㪏㪏㪅㪌
㪌㪅㪌
㪐㪈㪅㪇
㪊㪅㪌
㪐㪋㪅㪇
㪉㪉㪅㪊
㪋㪌㪅㪇
㪈㪏㪅㪈
㪎㪇㪅㪋
㪈㪊㪅㪍
㪎㪎㪅㪋
㪍㪅㪋
㪏㪎㪅㪍
㪋㪌㪅㪇
㪎㪇㪅㪋
㪎㪎㪅㪋
㪏㪎㪅㪍
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
䋳䋩䌇䌲䌡䌤䌩䌮䌧䇭䌣䌵䌲䌶䌥䌳
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌆䋭䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
䌆䋭䌃䌁䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌁
䌆䋭䌃䌂䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌂
䌆䋭䌃䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪋䌾㪉
㪉䌾㪈
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪐㪅㪌
㪍㪅㪎
㪋㪉㪅㪏
㪉㪈
㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪈㪇
㪉㪇
㪊㪇
㪋㪇
㪌㪇
㪍㪇
㪎㪇
㪏㪇
㪐㪇
㪈㪇㪇 䌐䌡䌳䌳䌥䌤䋨䋦䋩
䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥
䌳䌩䌺䌥䋨㫄㫄䋩
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌂䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌃䋺㪪
㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃
䌆䋭䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
䌆䋭䌃䌁䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌁
䌆䋭䌃䌂䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌂
䌆䋭䌃䌃䋺㪝
㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃
㪠㪪㩷㪜㪥㩷㪈㪉㪍㪉㪇
㪐㪅㪌
㪍㪅㪎
㪋㪉㪅㪏
㪉㪈
㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪈㪇
㪉㪇
㪊㪇
㪋㪇
㪌㪇
㪍㪇
㪎㪇
㪏㪇
㪐㪇
㪈㪇㪇
䌐䌡䌳䌳䌥䌤䋨䋦䋩
䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥
䌳䌩䌺䌥䋨㫄㫄䋩
䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁
㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪙㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀
㪠㪪㩷㪜㪥㩷㪈㪉㪍㪉㪇
㪍
䋸䋸䋮䋮㪫㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫇㫆㫉㫋㩷㪽㫆㫉㩷㫄㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉
䋱䋱䋩㪫㪼㫊㫋䇭䌰䌲䌯
䌤䌵䌣䌴䌩䌯䌮䇭䌦䌬䌯䌷䋮䇭
䋲䋩䌇䌲䌡䌤䌩䌮䌧
㪸㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪹㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪌㪅㪐
㪐㪋㪅㪈
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪎㪋㪅㪋
㪈㪐㪅㪎
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪈㪅㪍
㪏㪅㪈
㪇㪅㪈
㪐㪐㪅㪐
㪈㪅㪉
㪍㪅㪐
㪉㪇㪅㪐
㪎㪐㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪍
㪍㪅㪊
㪉㪏㪅㪊
㪌㪇㪅㪎
㪇㪅㪍
㪌㪅㪎
㪉㪊㪅㪌
㪉㪎㪅㪉
㪇㪅㪏
㪋㪅㪐
㪈㪎㪅㪎
㪐㪅㪌
㪈㪅㪇
㪊㪅㪐
㪌㪅㪋
㪋㪅㪈
㪊㪅㪐
㪋㪅㪈
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪺㪀㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪍
㪐㪐㪅㪋
㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪋
㪐㪐㪅㪍
㪌㪅㪌
㪐㪊㪅㪐
㪋㪅㪎
㪋㪅㪊
㪐㪌㪅㪊
㪈㪈㪅㪋
㪏㪉㪅㪌
㪈㪇㪅㪉
㪐㪅㪊
㪏㪍㪅㪇
㪈㪏㪅㪋
㪍㪋㪅㪈
㪈㪍㪅㪍
㪈㪌㪅㪌
㪎㪇㪅㪌
㪊㪉㪅㪏
㪊㪈㪅㪊
㪊㪇㪅㪌
㪉㪏㪅㪐
㪋㪈㪅㪍
㪉㪊㪅㪋
㪎㪅㪐
㪉㪍㪅㪌
㪉㪍㪅㪇
㪈㪌㪅㪍
㪎㪅㪐
㪈㪈㪅㪇
㪈㪌㪅㪍
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪻㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪈
㪐㪐㪅㪐
㪇㪅㪈
㪇㪅㪈
㪐㪐㪅㪐
㪈㪏㪅㪌
㪏㪈㪅㪋
㪈㪏㪅㪈
㪈㪎㪅㪍
㪏㪉㪅㪊
㪉㪌㪅㪍
㪌㪌㪅㪏
㪉㪌㪅㪈
㪉㪋㪅㪍
㪌㪎㪅㪎
㪉㪉㪅㪎
㪊㪊㪅㪈
㪉㪉㪅㪉
㪉㪈㪅㪐
㪊㪌㪅㪏
㪉㪇㪅㪈
㪈㪊㪅㪇
㪉㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪐㪅㪐
㪈㪌㪅㪐
㪏㪅㪊
㪋㪅㪎
㪐㪅㪉
㪐㪅㪍
㪍㪅㪊
㪋㪅㪎
㪌㪅㪊
㪍㪅㪊
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪌㪅㪊
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾
㪇㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪌㪍㪅㪎
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪊㪋㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪈㪋㪅㪌
㪋䌾㪉㪅㪏
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪉㪅㪏䌾㪉
㪐㪐㪅㪐
㪉䌾㪈
㪏㪈㪅㪏
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪙㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪈㪈㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪏㪋㪅㪍
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪍㪏㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪊㪎㪅㪌
㪋䌾㪉㪅㪏
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪉㪅㪏䌾㪉
㪐㪐㪅㪌
㪉䌾㪈
㪐㪋㪅㪏
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌓䌋䋭䌍䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌
㪺㫋㩷䌁
䌓䌋䋭䌍䌂䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂
䌓䌋䋭
䌍䌃䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪋䌾㪉㪅㪏
㪋䌾㪉
㪉㪅㪏䌾㪉
㪉䌾㪈
㪉䌾㪈
㪈㪐䌾
㪈㪊㪅㪉
㪈㪊㪅㪉䌾
㪐㪅㪌
㪈㪊㪅㪉䌾㪐㪅㪌
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌍䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
㪎
㪼㪼㪀㩷㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪉
㪐㪐㪅㪏
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪌
㪐㪐㪅㪊
㪇㪅㪈
㪐㪐㪅㪐
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪋㪅㪊
㪐㪌㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪊
㪐㪐㪅㪍
㪇㪅㪊
㪐㪐㪅㪎
㪇㪅㪈
㪐㪐㪅㪐
㪎㪅㪍
㪏㪎㪅㪋
㪈㪅㪎
㪐㪎㪅㪐
㪈㪅㪋
㪐㪏㪅㪊
㪇㪅㪎
㪐㪐㪅㪉
㪈㪋㪅㪐
㪎㪉㪅㪌
㪌㪅㪈
㪐㪉㪅㪏
㪋㪅㪊
㪐㪋㪅㪇
㪉㪅㪏
㪐㪍㪅㪋
㪈㪏㪅㪐
㪌㪊㪅㪍
㪈㪍㪅㪈
㪎㪍㪅㪎
㪈㪊㪅㪌
㪏㪇㪅㪌
㪈㪉㪅㪋
㪏㪋㪅㪇
㪌㪊㪅㪍
㪎㪍㪅㪎
㪏㪇㪅㪌
㪏㪋㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
䋳䋩䌇䌲䌡䌤䌩䌮䌧䇭䌣䌵䌲䌶䌥䌳
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪋䌾㪉㪅㪏
㪉㪅㪏䌾㪉
㪉䌾㪈
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌆䋭䌍䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
䌆䋭䌍䌁䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌁
䌆䋭䌍䌂䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌂
䌆䋭䌍䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪐㪅㪌
㪍㪅㪎
㪋㪉㪅㪏
㪉㪈
㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪈㪇
㪉㪇
㪊㪇
㪋㪇
㪌㪇
㪍㪇
㪎㪇
㪏㪇
㪐㪇
㪈㪇㪇 䌐䌡䌳䌳䌥䌤䋨䋦䋩
䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥
䌳䌩䌺䌥䋨㫄㫄䋩
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
䌖䋷䋭䌍䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
䌓䌋䋭䌍䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁
䌓䌋䋭䌍䌂䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂
䌓䌋䋭䌍䌃䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃
䌆䋭䌍䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
䌆䋭䌍䌁䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌁
䌆䋭䌍䌂䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌂
䌆䋭䌍䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃
㪤㪸㫊㫆㫅㫉㫐㩷㪤㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉
㪐㪅㪌
㪍㪅㪎
㪋㪉㪅㪏
㪉㪈
㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪈㪇
㪉㪇
㪊㪇
㪋㪇
㪌㪇
㪍㪇
㪎㪇
㪏㪇
㪐㪇
㪈㪇㪇
䌐䌡䌳䌳䌥䌤䋨䋦䋩
䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥
䌳䌩䌺䌥䋨㫄㫄䋩
䌖䋷䋭䌍䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁
㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪙㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌍䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀
㪤㪸㫊㫆㫅㫉㫐㩷㪤㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉
㪈
䋱 䋱䋮㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
䋲䋮㪩㪼㫈㫌㫀㫉㪼㪻㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼㩷㪻㫀㫊㫋㫉㫀㪹㫌㫋㫀㫆㫅
㪊㪅㪇㩼
㪌㪅㪇㩼
㪎㪅㪇㩼
㪐㪅㪇㩼
㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㫆㪽㩷㪽㪼㪼㪻㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪚㫀㫉㪺㫌㫃㪸㫋㫀㫅㪾㩷㫃㫆㪸㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆
㪰㫀㪼㫃㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫉㫋㫀㪺㫃㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼㩷㪻㫀㫊㫋㫉㫀㪹㫌㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㩿㫎㪼㫋㩷㫊㫀㫍㫀㫅㪾㩷㫄㪼㫋㪿㫆㪻㪀
䋳䋮㪝㫃㫆㫎㩷㫆㪽㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㩷㫇㫃㪸㫅㫋
㪚㫉㫌㫊㪿㪼㫉
㪘㫀㫉㩷㫊㪺㫉㪼㪼㫅
㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉
㪛㫌㫊㫋㩷㪺㫆㫃㫃㪼㪺㫋㫆㫉
㶎㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫄
㪼㫊㪿㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪉㪅㪌㬍㪍㪅㪍㫄㫄
㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩷㩷
䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚䌁㪀㩷㩷
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀㩷㩷
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩷㩷
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷㩷㩷
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌
㪺㫋㩷䌃㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀㩷㩷
䋴䋮㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫊㫌㫃㫋
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪇
㪇㪅㪌㪏
䋭䋭
㪏㪅㪐㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌃
㪌㪈㪅㪍
㪉㪅㪏㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁
㪍㪍㪅㪈
㪋㪅㪐㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂
㪍㪐㪅㪌
㪎㪅㪈㩼
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃
㪎㪉㪅㪐
㪐㪅㪇㩼
㪋䌾㪇
䋭㪈㪅㪌㪏
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄㩷㪸㫅㪻
㪹㪼㫃㫆㫎㩷㪸㪽㫋㪼㫉
㪻㪼㪺㪸㫅㫋㪸㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪪㪸㫄
㫇㫃㪼
㪪㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼
㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋
㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼
㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪚㫀㫉㪺㫌㫃㪸㫋㫀㫅㪾
㫃㫆㪸㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆
㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪛㪸㫋㪸
㪬㪪㪎㩷㩿㪙㪌㪇㪇㪀
㪘㪪㪏㪇㪇
㪧㪛㪉㪇㪇㪪
㪈㪌㪇䌭
㪊䋯㫄㫀㫅
㪰㫀㪼㫃㪻
㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪌
㪫㫆㫋㪸㫃㩷㪮㪼㫀㪾㪿㫋㩷㩿㫂㪾㪀
㪋㪉㪍㪇
㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋
㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄㩷㪸㫅㪻㩷㪹㪼㫃㫆㫎㩷㪸㪽㫋㪼㫉㩷㪻㪼㪺㪸㫅㫋㪸㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋
㪛㪸㫋㪼㫊㩷㫆㪽㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㫊
㪈㪄㪝㪼㪹㪄
㪈㪉䌾
㪈㪋㪄㪝㪼㪹㪄㪈㪉
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪩㫆㪺㫂㩷㫋㫐㫇㪼
㪣㫀㫄㪼㫊㫋㫆㫅㪼
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪇
㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㩿㩼㪀㩷
㪇㪅㪌㪏
㪙㪸㪾㫊㩷㫀㫅㩷㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪉
䋵䋵䋮䌐䌨䌯䌴䌯
㪸㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㩷㫇㫃㪸㫅㫋
㪹㪀㩷㪧㫉㪼㪻㫌㫊㫋㪼㫉
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪺㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
䌕䌓䋷
㪛㫌㫊㫋㩷㪺㫆㫃㫃㪼㪺㫋㫆㫉
㪙㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㫇㫉㪼㪻㫌㫊㫋㪼㫉
㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
㪘㫀㫉㩷㫊㪺㫉㪼㪼㫅
㪊
䋶䋶䋮㪧㫉㫆㫇㪼㫉㫋㫐㩷
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪉㪌㪄㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌㪄㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪈㪄㪇㪅㪌㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪌㪄㪇㪅㪉㪌㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪋㪄㪉㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪉㪄㪈㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪉㪅㪊㪍䌾
㪈㪅㪈㪏
㪪㫌㫉㪽㪸㪺㪼㩷㪻㫉㫐㩷㪻㪼㫅㫊㫀㫋㫐㩷䋨㪾㪆ঢ䋩
㪉㪅㪏㪈
㪉㪅㪏㪈
㪦㫍㪼㫅㩷㪻㫉㫐㩷㪻㪼㫅㫊㫀㫋㫐㩷䋨㪾㪆ঢ䋩
㪉㪅㪎㪐
㪉㪅㪎㪐
㪮㪸㫋㪼㫉䇭
㪸㪹㫊㫆㫉㫇㫋㫀㫆㫅䇭㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪍㪏
㪇㪅㪍㪌
㪪㫆㫃㫀㪻䇭㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷䋨㩼䋩
㪌㪋㪅㪎
㪌㪐㪅㪇
㪪㪸㫄
㫇㫃㪼
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋
㪋
䋷䋷䋮䋮㪫㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫇㫆㫉㫋㩷㪽㫆㫉㩷㪺㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼
䋱䋱䋩㪫㪼㫊㫋䇭䌰䌲䌯
䌤䌵䌣䌴䌩䌯䌮䇭䌦䌬䌯䌷䋮䇭
䋲䋩䌇䌲䌡䌤䌩䌮䌧
㪸㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪹㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪅㪐
㪐㪏㪅㪈
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪊㪎㪅㪏
㪍㪇㪅㪊
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪉㪇㪅㪈
㪋㪇㪅㪉
㪉㪇㪅㪇
㪏㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪉㪅㪏
㪉㪎㪅㪋
㪊㪉㪅㪊
㪋㪎㪅㪎
㪎㪅㪏
㪈㪐㪅㪍
㪉㪈㪅㪇
㪉㪍㪅㪎
㪌㪅㪇
㪈㪋㪅㪍
㪈㪉㪅㪌
㪈㪋㪅㪉
㪊㪅㪉
㪈㪈㪅㪋
㪎㪅㪏
㪍㪅㪋
㪉㪅㪌
㪏㪅㪐
㪊㪅㪍
㪉㪅㪏
㪏㪅㪐
㪉㪅㪏
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪺㪀㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪊㪅㪊
㪐㪍㪅㪎
㪉㪅㪍
㪉㪅㪋
㪐㪎㪅㪍
㪈㪉㪅㪈
㪏㪋㪅㪍
㪈㪇㪅㪉
㪐㪅㪈
㪏㪏㪅㪌
㪈㪏㪅㪇
㪍㪍㪅㪍
㪈㪌㪅㪉
㪈㪊㪅㪐
㪎㪋㪅㪍
㪈㪏㪅㪋
㪋㪏㪅㪉
㪈㪍㪅㪇
㪈㪋㪅㪏
㪌㪐㪅㪏
㪈㪐㪅㪈
㪉㪐㪅㪈
㪈㪏㪅㪉
㪈㪍㪅㪐
㪋㪉㪅㪐
㪈㪍㪅㪍
㪈㪉㪅㪌
㪈㪏㪅㪉
㪈㪏㪅㪏
㪉㪋㪅㪈
㪈㪉㪅㪌
㪈㪐㪅㪍
㪉㪋㪅㪈
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪻㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪍㪅㪊
㪏㪊㪅㪎
㪈㪌㪅㪌
㪈㪋㪅㪏
㪏㪌㪅㪉
㪉㪎㪅㪐
㪌㪌㪅㪏
㪉㪍㪅㪍
㪉㪌㪅㪍
㪌㪐㪅㪍
㪉㪇㪅㪋
㪊㪌㪅㪋
㪈㪐㪅㪍
㪈㪏㪅㪐
㪋㪇㪅㪎
㪈㪊㪅㪎
㪉㪈㪅㪎
㪈㪊㪅㪊
㪈㪊㪅㪉
㪉㪎㪅㪌
㪈㪇㪅㪊
㪈㪈㪅㪋
㪈㪇㪅㪌
㪈㪇㪅㪌
㪈㪎㪅㪇
㪍㪅㪌
㪋㪅㪐
㪎㪅㪋
㪏㪅㪇
㪐㪅㪇
㪋㪅㪐
㪎㪅㪈
㪐㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪎㪅㪈
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪈㪐䌾㪈㪊㪅㪉
㪈㪊㪅㪉䌾㪐㪅㪌
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪋䌾㪉
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪊㪏㪅㪊
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪉㪌㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪈㪋㪅㪌
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪋䌾㪉
㪏㪋㪅㪌
㪉䌾㪈
㪌㪎㪅㪐
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪙㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪈㪐㪅㪍
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪎㪉㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪌㪍㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪊㪎㪅㪏
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪋䌾㪉
㪐㪎㪅㪋
㪉䌾㪈
㪏㪎㪅㪉
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌
㪺㫋㩷䌁
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌂䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂
䌓䌋䋭
䌃䌃䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪉䌾㪈
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪋䌾㪉
㪉䌾㪈
㪈㪐䌾㪈㪊㪅㪉
㪈㪊㪅㪉䌾㪐㪅㪌
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌
㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
㪌
㪼㪼㪀㩷㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪅㪇
㪐㪐㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪊㪅㪏
㪐㪌㪅㪉
㪇㪅㪉
㪐㪐㪅㪏
㪇㪅㪈
㪐㪐㪅㪐
㪇㪅㪈
㪐㪐㪅㪐
㪍㪅㪉
㪏㪐㪅㪇
㪈㪅㪉
㪐㪏㪅㪍
㪇㪅㪐
㪐㪐㪅㪇
㪇㪅㪋
㪐㪐㪅㪌
㪎㪅㪇
㪏㪉㪅㪇
㪉㪅㪈
㪐㪍㪅㪌
㪈㪅㪎
㪐㪎㪅㪊
㪈㪅㪇
㪐㪏㪅㪌
㪐㪅㪇
㪎㪊㪅㪇
㪋㪅㪍
㪐㪈㪅㪐
㪊㪅㪌
㪐㪊㪅㪏
㪉㪅㪉
㪐㪍㪅㪊
㪈㪉㪅㪍
㪍㪇㪅㪋
㪈㪈㪅㪇
㪏㪇㪅㪐
㪐㪅㪌
㪏㪋㪅㪊
㪍㪅㪐
㪏㪐㪅㪋
㪍㪇㪅㪋
㪏㪇㪅㪐
㪏㪋㪅㪊
㪏㪐㪅㪋
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇
䋳䋩䌇䌲䌡䌤䌩䌮䌧䇭䌣䌵䌲䌶䌥䌳
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇
㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃
㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋
㪋䌾㪉
㪉䌾㪈
㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼
㩿㫄㫄㪀
䌆䋭䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
䌆䋭䌃䌁䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌁
䌆䋭䌃䌂䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌂
䌆䋭䌃䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃
㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎
㪐㪅㪌
㪍㪅㪎
㪋㪉㪅㪏
㪉㪈
㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪈㪇
㪉㪇
㪊㪇
㪋㪇
㪌㪇
㪍㪇
㪎㪇
㪏㪇
㪐㪇
㪈㪇㪇 䌐䌡䌳䌳䌥䌤䋨䋦䋩
䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥
䌳䌩䌺䌥䋨㫄㫄䋩
㪩㪸㫎
㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃
䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌂䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂
䌓䌋䋭䌃䌃䋺㪪
㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃
䌆䋭䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉
䌆䋭䌃䌁䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌁
䌆䋭䌃䌂䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌂
䌆䋭䌃䌃䋺㪝
㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃
㪠㪪㩷㪜㪥㩷㪈㪉㪍㪉㪇
㪐㪅㪌
㪍㪅㪎
㪋㪉㪅㪏
㪉㪈
㪇㪅㪌
㪇㪅㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌
㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊
㪇㪈㪇
㪉㪇
㪊㪇
㪋㪇
㪌㪇
㪍㪇
㪎㪇
㪏㪇
㪐㪇
㪈㪇㪇
䌐䌡䌳䌳䌥䌤䋨䋦䋩
䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥
䌳䌩䌺䌥䋨㫄㫄䋩
䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁
㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪙㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀
䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀
㪠㪪㩷㪜㪥㩷㪈㪉㪍㪉㪇
DDB�#8�.#5'3+#-
EB�'26+3'&�4+:'�&+453+$65+0/
����
���
����
����
�#40/#39��035#3
�0+4563'�%0/5'/5�0(�(''&�.#5'3+#-
�+3%6-#5+/)�-0#&�3#5+0
"+'-&�3#5+0����
�#35+%-'�4+:'�&+453+$65+0/��8'5�4+7+/)�.'5*0&�
FB�-08�0(�5'45�1-#/5
�364*'3
�+3�4%3''/
�3'&645'3
�645�%0--'%503
<�+'7'�.'4*�4+:'
�0/%3'5'�4#/&
� ;���..
�035#3�4#/&
��;���..
��130&6%5���
VJANK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
VJANLK ��130&6%5�L��8+5*�����L���
VJANMK ��130&6%5�M��8+5*������������������� ��130&6%5���
�������������+--'3���
VJANNK ��130&6%5�N��8+5*���������
VJARK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
VJARLK ��130&6%5�L��8+5*���������
VJARMK ��130&6%5�M��8+5*���������
VJARNK ��130&6%5�N��8+5*���������
GB�'45�3'46-5
�� k�
�� �
AA
���
VJANL
���
����
VJANM
���
���
VJANN
���
�� �
VJANO
����
����
VJAR
���
���
VJARL
����
�� �
VJARM
� �
���
VJARN
���
���
��130&6%5
�0/%3'5'
4#/&
�05#3
4#/&
�k�
A���
A� �
�035#3�4#/&
"+'-&
3#5+0����
�����..�#/&
$'-08�#(5'3
&'%#/5#5+0/�5'45
�#8�.#5'3+#-
k�
�#.1-'
�+:'
�..�
�0+4563'
%0/5'/5����
�+3%6-#5+/)
-0#&�3#5+0
�0/%3'5'�4#/&
�#5#
������ ���
�����
�����
�`
�C.+/
�
�05#-�!'+)*5��,)�
���
��130&6%5
�0/%3'5'�4#/&
�����..�#/&�$'-08�#(5'3�&'%#/5#5+0/�5'45
�035#3�4#/&
�#5'4�0(�5'454
��#3�k ��#3����13�k��13�
�#8�.#5'3+#-
�0%,�591'
�#4#-5
�+:'��..�
�� k�
�0+4563'�%0/5'/5�����
�� �
�#)4�+/�505#-
HHBS]bfb
#�� ��5'45�1-#/5
$���3'&645'3
������%���#8�.#5'3+#-
UTJ
�645�%0--'%503
�'(03'�13'&645'3
�+--'3
�+3�4%3''/
�
IIBB��'45�3'1035�(03�%0/%3'5'
DD@�'45=cdbYgXf^ba=[_biB=
E@QdWY^a\
#���#8�.#5'3+#-
$�� ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
���
����
���
����
���
���
���
����
��
����
���
����
��
��
���
����
�
���
��
����
��
����
��
��
��
��
��
����
��
��
���
���
���
���
��
���
��
���
��
���
���
���
����
����
%���3'&645'3�130&6%5
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
���
����
���
���
����
���
����
���
���
����
��
����
��
�
����
��
��
�
���
����
���
� �
��
���
����
���
���
���
��
����
���
����
���
��
���
��
�
���
���
���
�
���
���
����
����
����
&�� ��130&6%5��8+5*�13'&645'3�130&6%5�
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
���
����
���
���
����
���
����
���
���
����
���
����
��
���
���
��
���
��
��
����
��
����
��
��
���
��
���
��
�
� �
���
��
��
��
��
���
��
��
��
���
��
��
���
����
����
����
�� k�����
��
�����k�
505#-
�k��
��k��
�� k���
���k�
�k
k��
����
�� k��
���
�� k��
���
���k�
����
�k
����
k
����
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
VJANLK ��130&6%5�L��8+5*�SO�R��VJANMK ��130&6%5����8+5*�SO�R��VJANNK ��130&6%5����8+5*�SO�R��
�#44'&����
�� k���
����
�� k�����
���
�����k�
505#-
k��
���
�� k��
����
�� k��
����
���k�
����
�k
����
k
����
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
SOANLK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�L
SOANMK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�M
SOANNK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�N
�#44'&����
�� k���
����
�� k�����
�����k�
505#-
505#-
k
k��
�� k��
�� k��
�� k�����
�����k�
k��
�� k��
�� k��
���k�
�k
k
�k��
��k��
�� k���
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
�#8�.#5'3+#-
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
VJANK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
�
''���+--'3
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
���
����
���
����
���
����
���
����
���
����
���
����
���
����
���
����
���
���
��
����
��
����
��
����
��
����
���
���
���
���
���
����
���
��
��
����
�
����
�
����
���
���
�
� ��
��
���
��
����
��
����
���
���
���
���
���
���
���
���
���
����
��
����
��
����
���
����
����
����
����
����
����
����
F@QdWY^a\=XgdhZe
�� k�����
�����k�
505#-
���k�
�k
k
k��
�� k��
�� k��
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
PANK�+--'3
PANLK�+--'3�L
PANMK�+--'3�M
PANNK�+--'3�N
�� k���
��
���
���
��
��
��
�����
�
�
�
��
��
�
��
��
��
��
��
SWeeZY?>@
T^ZhZe^jZ?..@
�#8�.#5'3+#-
VJANK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
SOANLK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�L
SOANMK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�M
SOANNK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�N
PANK�+--'3
PANLK�+--'3�L
PANMK�+--'3�M
PANNK�+--'3�N
��������
��
���
���
��
��
��
�����
�
�
�
��
��
�
��
��
��
��
��
SWeeZY?>@
T^ZhZe^jZ?..@
VJANK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
VJANLK ��130&6%5�L�8+5*�SO�R��
VJANMK ��130&6%5����8+5*�SO�R��
VJANNK ��130&6%5����8+5*�SO�R��
��������
JJBB��'45�3'1035�(03�.035#3
DD@�'45=cdbYgXf^ba=[_biB=
E@QdWY^a\
#���#8�.#5'3+#-
$�� ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
���
����
���
����
���
���
���
����
��
����
���
����
��
��
��
���
�
���
���
����
��
����
���
����
��
��
���
����
��
��
�
��
���
���
��
��
��
���
��
��
���
��
����
����
%���3'&645'3�130&6%5
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
���
����
���
���
����
���
����
��
��
����
��
����
��
�
����
��
����
�
���
����
�
����
���
��
� �
��
����
��
��
���
���
��
���
��
���
���
��
���
��
��
��
���
��
����
����
����
&�� ��130&6%5��8+5*�13'&645'3�130&6%5�
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
���
����
���
���
����
��
���
���
���
����
�
����
��
�
����
��
� ��
��
��
����
��
�
���
��
��
�
����
��
���
����
���
�
���
���
��
���
��
���
���
��
��
��
��
����
����
����
�� k�����
��
�����k�
505#-
k��
���
�� k��
��
�� k��
���
�k��
����
��k
����
k
����
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
VJARLK ��130&6%5�L��8+5*�SO�R��VJARMK ��130&6%5����8+5*�SO�R��VJARNK ��130&6%5����8+5*�SO�R��
�#44'&����
���k�
����
�� k�����
���
�����k�
505#-
k��
���
�� k��
���
�� k��
���
�k��
����
��k
����
k
����
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
SOARLK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�L
SOARMK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�M
SOARNK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�N
�#44'&����
���k�
����
�� k�����
�� k�����
�����k�
�����k�
505#-
505#-
k��
k��
�� k��
�� k��
�� k��
�� k��
���k�
�k��
�k
��k
k
k
�k��
��k��
��k��
�� k���
�� k���
���k�
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
�#8�.#5'3+#-
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
VJARK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
�
''���+--'3
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
�'5#+/'&����
�#44'&����
���
����
���
����
���
����
���
����
��
����
��
����
��
����
��
����
���
����
���
���
���
���
���
����
��
����
��
���
�
����
���
����
���
����
�
� ��
�
���
�
���
��
���
��
���
��
��
���
���
���
����
��
����
��
���
���
���
���
����
���
��
��
���
��
����
����
��
���
����
����
����
����
����
F@QdWY^a\=XgdhZe
�� k�����
�����k�
505#-
�k��
��k
k
k��
�� k��
�� k��
�+'7'�4+:'
�..�
PARK�+--'3
PARLK�+--'3�L
PARMK�+--'3�M
PARNK�+--'3�N
���k�
��
���
���
��
��
��
�����
�
�
�
��
��
�
��
��
��
��
��
SWeeZY?>@
T^ZhZe^jZ?..@
�#8�.#5'3+#-
VJARK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
SOARLK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�L
SOARMK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�M
SOARNK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�N
PARK�+--'3
PARLK�+--'3�L
PARMK�+--'3�M
PARNK�+--'3�N
�#40/#39��035#3
��
���
���
��
��
��
�����
�
�
�
��
��
�
��
��
��
��
��
SWeeZY?>@
T^ZhZe^jZ?..@
VJARK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�
VJARLK ��130&6%5�L�8+5*�SO�R��
VJARMK ��130&6%5����8+5*�SO�R��
VJARNK ��130&6%5����8+5*�SO�R��
�#40/#39��035#3
Fin
al R
epo
rt
Ap
pe
nd
ix |
3
Appe
ndix
3. Fu
ll Sta
ge 1
Resu
lts
Tab
le A
3.1
Stag
e 1
full
resu
lts
Com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
Fl
exur
al st
reng
th
MIX
w
/c
Slum
p (m
m)
1 da
y (N
/mm
2 ) C
OV
(%
) 7
day
(N/m
m2 )
CO
V
(%)
28 d
ay
(N/m
m2 )
CO
V
(%)
28da
y (N
/mm
2 ) C
OV
(%
) N
0.
48
95
23.8
0.
4 48
2.
8 58
.9
2.9
6.1
4.6
G-F
EED
0.
66
80
12.5
1.
9 30
.3
0.0
39.1
3.
5 -
- N
-G
0.58
co
llaps
e 13
.5
4.1
36
2.7
48.7
1.
6 5.
4 4.
4 G
-A
0.58
12
0 17
.6
0.6
43.5
1.
0 52
.2
2.3
5.6
5.3
G-B
0.
58
80
17
1.6
40.2
1.
6 49
.9
1.9
5.6
5.4
G-C
0.
58
80
17.9
0.
7 40
.4
2.0
50.1
1.
2 6
5.7
G-D
0.
58
60
19.3
1.
9 42
.2
2.1
52.3
1.
4 5.
8 7.
3 G
-E
0.58
60
16
.6
0.3
40.6
1.
0 48
.1
3.6
5.4
5.6
B-F
EED
0.
72
70
9.3
2.4
25.8
0.
4 35
.5
0.9
- -
N-B
0.
67
colla
pse
9.6
0.5
26.2
1.
0 35
.9
1.3
4.6
0.2
B-A
0.
67
70
11.8
1.
8 30
.4
2.9
41.7
2.
2 5.
3 4.
9 B
-B
0.67
80
12
.9
2.1
31.3
4.
5 43
.7
1.7
5.5
5.1
B-C
0.
67
62.5
13
2.
3 33
.1
2.0
42.7
1.
8 5.
4 7.
7 B
-D
0.67
47
.5
13.2
2.
3 35
.2
0.4
45.6
2.
6 5.
6 3.
2 L-
FEED
0.
614
60
18.5
1.
6 38
3.
9 50
.2
0.4
- -
N-L
0.
55
colla
pse
13.2
1.
9 39
2.
3 50
.5
0.6
5.3
10.4
L-
A
0.55
90
18
2.
5 44
.3
2.8
55.7
3.
1 6.
6 4.
3 L-
B
0.55
70
21
.2
1.0
47.8
1.
2 58
1.
1 6.
7 4.
3 L-
C
0.55
82
.5
22.7
4.
2 46
.2
3.2
56.2
3.
6 6.
1 8.
0 L-
D
0.55
65
21
.4
1.5
46.9
2.
0 56
.6
7.4
6 6.
3 S-
FEED
0.
748
80
8.2
2.4
23.3
1.
7 31
.3
1.1
- -
N-S
0.
67
colla
pse
8.1
5.5
24.4
5.
5 34
.9
1.9
4.6
3.3
S-A
0.
67
85
12.7
0.
9 34
.5
2.9
41.4
3.
9 5.
2 3.
3 S-
B
0.67
75
14
.9
1.4
31.4
0.
7 43
.3
2.6
5.6
8.2
S-C
0.
67
97.5
14
.7
1.4
32.8
3.
3 42
.8
2.2
5.5
4.5
S-D
0.
67
75
12.1
0.
9 30
.5
2.3
39.9
0.
6 5.
2 6.
3
Fin
al R
epo
rt
Ap
pe
nd
ix |
4
Appe
ndix
4. Fu
ll Sta
ge 2
Resu
lts
Tab
le A
4.1
Stag
e 2
full
resu
lts
Com
pres
sive
stre
ngth
Fl
exur
al st
reng
th
MIX
w
/c
Slum
p (m
m)
% fi
nes
of F
A
1 da
y (N
/mm
2 ) C
OV
(%
) 7
day
(N/m
m2 )
CO
V
(%)
28 d
ay
(N/m
m2 )
CO
V
(%)
28da
y (N
/mm
2 ) C
OV
(%
)
N
0.55
co
llaps
e 1
13.2
1.
9 39
2.
3 50
.5
0.6
5.3
10.4
G-A
0.
55
65
2 16
.4
1.7
44.4
2.
7 53
2.
7 5.
7 5.
7 G
-B
0.55
67
.5
2.85
20
.1
1.4
46.1
1.
6 59
.2
2.2
5.8
9.6
G-C
0.
55
70
5.11
20
.7
0.9
46.1
1.
7 55
.2
1.9
5.9
7.1
G-D
0.
55
60
6.54
19
.4
3.1
48.3
1.
3 58
.6
1.7
5.5
2.7
G-E
0.
55
85
9.0
16.6
2.
2 47
.8
1.6
59.2
1.
7 4.
7 12
.2
B-A
0.
55
60
1.0
14.5
2.
8 48
.2
1.1
57.6
2.
5 6.
1 4.
2 B
-B
0.55
30
2.
89
14.6
1.
7 49
.2
1.1
60.5
1.
8 6.
4 3.
8 B
-C
0.55
30
5.
05
17.9
2.
7 48
.4
1.5
59.4
2.
4 6.
1 1.
0 B
-D
0.55
25
7.
43
16.5
2.
8 48
.3
2.4
58.5
2.
5 5.
9 1.
4
L-A
0.
5 90
2.
8 23
.9
0.7
52.5
1.
8 64
.3
5.5
6.1
3.6
L-B
0.
5 90
4.
9 20
1.
8 49
.7
6.4
61.1
1.
9 6.
4 16
.0
L-C
0.
5 75
7.
1 23
.2
0.8
51.1
2.
6 63
3.
0 6.
1 23
.1
L-D
0.
5 65
9.
0 20
0.
9 47
.1
0.2
59.9
2.
1 6.
8 14
.2
S-A
0.
55
60
3.5
14.8
1.
1 44
.3
1.3
55
2.8
5.4
4.1
S-B
0.
55
50
5.0
19.8
2.
0 43
.8
1.6
55.3
1.
9 6
5.6
S-C
0.
55
50
7.0
18.4
1.
7 43
.2
0.8
55.6
2.
1 5.
4 7.
3 S-
D
0.55
45
9.
0 17
.2
1.7
41.7
0.
4 53
2.
6 5.
9 10
.6
�