2016 Concrete Canoe Design Report Utah State University

TEMPUS 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY

TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Table of Contents Project Management ...... 1 Organization Chart ...... 2 Hull Design and Structural Analysis...... 3 Development and Testing ...... 5 Construction ...... 8 Project Schedule...... 10

List of Figures Figure 1: Person Hours with Paddling ...... 2 Figure 2: Person Hours without Paddling ...... 2 Figure 3: Tempus Total Budget Allocation ...... 2 Figure 4: Tempus Budget Allocation and Comparison ...... 2 Figure 5: Safety Program Flowchart ...... 2 Figure 6: Shallow-vee Profile ...... 3 Figure 7: 3D Hull Design ...... 3 Figure 8: Moment Diagram ...... 4 Figure 9: Color Tests ...... 5 Figure 10: Fuller Curve ...... 6 Figure 11: Depth Gages ...... 7 Figure 12: EPS Mold with Inlay Design ...... 8 Figure 13: Metal Molds ...... 8 Figure 14: Keel Mold ...... 9 Figure 15: Wood Cross Sections...... 9

List of Tables Table 1: Specifications and Properties ...... ii Table 2: Setbacks During Construction ...... 2 Table 3: Tempus Milestones ...... 2 Table 4: Tempus Hull Features ...... 3 Table 5: Loading Scenarios ...... 4 Table 6: Test Results ...... 5

List of Appendices Appendix A: References ...... A-1 Appendix B: Mixture Proportions ...... B-1 Appendix C: Example Structural Calculation...... C-1

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Executive Summary Epoch’s excellent paddling performance led the team to use the hull design as a framework for In an effort to take on new challenges, the Tempus . The design team modified the bow and stern 2016 Utah State University (USU) Concrete Canoe rockers to improve maneuverability during races. Team decided to veer away from their previous New construction techniques were developed to landscape themes and the steampunk theme evolved. incorporate the modifications, increase demolding With it came spectacles and corsets, apothecary jars efficiency, and decrease sanding time. A lack of and pipelines, gears and spyglasses, metalwork and clarity in previous structural analysis calculations led the entire nineteenth century industrial revolution. the design team to create a new, simpler model for Steampunk is “a subgenre of science fiction and computing design stresses due to the maximum sometimes fantasy that incorporates technology and loading case. For simplification and constructability, aesthetic designs inspired by 19th-century industrial the team decreased the number of mix designs by steam-powered machinery” (Wikipedia, 2016). With half. A major innovation was a direct result to a this unique, eccentric style, the team incorporated change in the national rules prohibiting concrete Victorian aesthetics to create a canoe that rewinds stains. The team discovered new ways to utilize the time. The team named this year’s canoe Tempus : a properties of concrete for aesthetic appearance. Extra word meaning “time” in Latin to symbolize new effort was spent on experimenting with concrete dye beginnings (Merriam-Webster, 2015). Because the to construct an aesthetically-pleasing canoe. To majority of Epoch’s team members graduated or ensure desired colors, articulate planning and precise chose to pursue other activities, this was the casting execution were carried out for all inlay beginning of a new stage in the USU Concrete Canoe molds. Additionally, the team changed the form Team’s history: a time to build on the past and apply construction process to enhance the type of inlay innovations that will project into the future years to used. Sustainability continued to be an emphasis as ensure continued success for the team. the canoe was designed and constructed. Established in 1888, USU is located in Two focuses for this year’s team were Logan, Utah, and enrolls 28,622 students, of which, communication and maintaining project scheduling. 3,008 are enrolled in the College of Engineering To ensure accomplishment of all tasks, a new system (Utah State University, 2016). The USU Concrete of committees was implemented for delegation. This Canoe Team competes in the American Society of resulted in an excellent display, cross-section, and set Civil Engineers (ASCE) Rocky Mountain of stands. To enhance communication between Conference where it placed second in 2015, and first current and future teams, the team created a manual in 2012, 2013, and 2014. The team strives diligently of Standard Operating Procedures. This provides a to return to the national competition to uphold recent foundation for the canoe process and allows more fourth and fifth place titles. Tempus is designed to time to be spent on improvements in all aspects of showcase the work of new techniques developed by the project. The 2016 USU Concrete Canoe Team the young team with the goal of reaching the aspires to redefine the meaning of innovation, National Concrete Canoe Competition once more. learning, and engineering ingenuity through Tempus .

Table 1: Specifications and Properties (*estimated) Tempus Specifications Concrete Mix Properties Name Tempus Structural Mix Finishing Mix Maximum Length 20’ 10” Unit Weight (Wet) 58.8 pcf 90.9 pcf Maximum Width 31 5/8” Unit Weight (Dry) 49.0 pcf 94.3 pcf Maximum Depth* 13 1/2” Tensile Strength 910 psi 3960 psi Average Thickness* 3/4” Compressive Strength 200 psi 730 psi Overall Weight* 185 lbs Air Content 16.9% 1.5% Primary Colors Black, gray, red, brown Composite Flexural Strength 400 psi Reinforcement Active 3/16” pre-stressed steel cables Passive Geogrid Mesh

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Project Management committee to ensure consistent communication between the committee and team captain. The team captain utilized a previous year’s Before the 2016 season began, the project schedule as a framework when establishing construction lab was updated to add a new ventilation the timeline for the construction of Tempus . Major system and settlement basin. The team has utilized milestones were established to ensure Tempus would these improvements to minimize exposure to be completed in time for the ASCE Rocky Mountain gaseous chemicals and dust from concrete mixes and Conference. Table 3 summarizes these milestones, reduce cement entering Logan’s wastewater system. scheduled completion dates, and actual completion Proper eyewear, face masks, and hand protection dates. Critical-path activities included: hull design, were used to minimize risk to team members during structural analysis, concrete mix design, form sanding, casting, and concrete mixing. construction, casting day, and completion of the final The design team focused on sustainable product. Due to changes in the 2016 ASCE NCCC practices by using recycled and donated materials. Rules and Regulations, such as the exclusion of Recycled glass bubbles, used as a lightweight stains, more time was available to dedicate to the concrete aggregate, reduced the amount of materials finishing of the canoe. the team had to purchase. Monetary costs were also The team faced several setbacks during reduced when the team received a portion of its construction of the canoe. Cutting of the EPS mold materials through donations. However, overall was delayed due to issues of obtaining the correct expenditures increased due to higher competition cutting wire. This delayed mold construction, but by costs. The team captain estimated a budget of $6,000, increasing work time, decreasing surface area in need with the majority of funds dedicated to conference of sanding, and completing multiple tasks at once, fees and expenses. Although, the team was over- Tempus was cast according to schedule. A summary budget, increased fundraising financed the extra of setbacks is shown in Table 2. costs. Financial allocations are specified in Figure 4.

Table 2: Setbacks During Construction Realizing knowledge was a key sustainable asset, inexperienced team members were given Key Scheduled Actual responsibilities with assigned mentors to ensure team Activity Completion Completion success would be passed on to future teams. As seen EPS in Figure 1, team members have dedicated 2203 1/9/2016 1/12/2016 Form person-hours to the project. Without each team Inlays 1/16/2016 1/23/2016 member, Tempus would not be what it is today.

Plaster 1/19/2016 1/20/2016 Table 3: Tempus Milestones

Gear Molds 1/23/2016 2/4/2016 Milestone Scheduled Actual Activity Completion Completion Styropoxy 1/23/2016 1/30/2016 Hull Design Finalized 10/3/2015 10/1/2015

To meet milestones, the team captain Structural Analysis 1/11/2016 1/22/2016 implemented a new project management method, Practice Canoe Casting 11/21/2015 11/21/2015 Scrum Management, to enhance the critical-path method. The Scrum Management Method allows Mix Design Finalized 2/6/2016 2/6/2016 small teams, or committees, to focus on specific tasks, then meet with the team captain to evaluate Final Canoe Casting 2/6/2016 2/6/2016 their progress (CIO, 1994). Implementation of this Final Canoe Demold 2/27/2016 3/3/2016 method included assigning committees to design and construct the canoe stands, product display, cross- Design Paper 2/27/2016 2/24/2016 section, and propose changes to the Epoch hull design. A co-captain was appointed to each

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Project Management Resource Allocation

Tempus Person Hour Breakdown with Tempus Person Hour Breakdown without Paddling Paddling 2203 Total Person Hours 2038 Total Person Hours Captain Meetings 3% Captain Project Project Sr. Design Oral Meetings Oral Team Meetings Management Team Management 6% Meetings Presentation* Meetings Sr. Design3% Presentation* 5% Hull 6% 2% 2% 5% Meetings 2% Finishing* 2% Design Hull Design Paddling 9% 1% Canoe Finishing* 1% 7% 9% Canoe Structural Construction Structural Construction Analysis (Final) Analysis (Final) Mold 3% 17% 3% 16% Construction Mold Construction (Practice) Mold 16% (Practice) Construction 17% (Final) 26% Mix Design Mix Design Development Development 2% Canoe 2% Mold Construction Canoe Construction (Practice) Construction (Final) 5% (Practice) 24% 6%

Figure 1: Person Hours with Paddling Figure 2: Person Hours without Paddling Note that some of the categories are estimated hours, indicated by a Note that some of the categories are estimated hours, indicated by a *, as these activiti es are still ongoing. *, as these activities are still ongoing.

Tempus Total Budget Allocation Tempus Budget Allocation and Comparison $7,000.00 2016 2016 Actual $4,500 $4,250.00 $4,250.00 Budget $6,078.15 $4,000 $3,500.00 $6,000.00 2015 Final $5,440.00 $3,500 $4,650.00 $3,000 $5,000.00 $2,500 $2,000 $4,000.00 $1,500 $996.78 $694.12 $694.12 $600.00 $600.00 $580.00 $580.00 $400.00 $400.00 $360.00 $360.00

$1,000 $200.00 $100.00 $100.00 $87.25 $87.25 $3,000.00 $500 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $2,000.00 $- $1,000.00 FinancialDistribution $- Figure 3 : Tempus Total Budget Allocation – Due to higher competition costs compared to 2015, the team’s overall budget was increased by 14.5%. However, the 2016 Actual Expenses is estimated to be over budget by approximately 2015 Final 2016 Budget 2016 Actual 10.5%. Figure 4: Tempus Budget Allocation and Comparison – The team used the 2015 Budget Allocation as a guide when determining the 2016 Budget.

Figure 5 : Safety Program Flowchart – The team followed the above safety program when handling various materials.

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Organization Chart

Jordan Ogata (Jr, 2, 2) Head Captain, Management

Kate Madsen (Jr, 3, 2) Blaine Worrell (Jr, 2, 1) Matt Gillespie (Sr, 3, 0) Mariah Kromanaker Aesthetics Construction Mix Design and (So, 2, 2) Construction Paddling Design Team: Caitlyn Erickson (Sr, 2, 1) Paddling Team: Matt Gillespie (Sr, 3, 0) Jonathan Delgado (Sr, 1, 1) Sam Ingram (Sr, 2, 0) Caitlyn Erickson (Sr, 2, 1) McKenna Sumrak (Sr, 4, 2) Nate Young (Sr, 2, 1) Nate Young (Sr, 2, 1) Hayden Coombs (Jr, 1, 1) Jordan Ogata (Jr, 2, 2) Construction Team: Silvia Smith (Jr, 3, 2) Jonathan Delgado (Sr, 1, 1) Jordan Ogata (Jr, 2, 2) Mariah Kromanaker (So, 2, 2) Caitlyn Erickson (Sr, 2, 1) Caitlin Park (Jr, 1, 0) Addison Ochsenbein (So, 1, 1) Matt Gillespie (Sr, 3, 0) Silvia Smith (Jr, 3, 2) Abby Repko (So, 1, 1) McKenna Sumrak (Sr, 4, 2) Phillip Duncan (So, 1, 0) Katie Burn (Fr, 1, 1) Nate Young (Sr, 2, 1) Mariah Kromanaker (So, 2, 2) Sam Ingram (Sr, 2, 0) Addison Ochsenbein (So, 1, 1) Blain Worrell (Jr, 2, 1) Rachel Paskett (So, 2, 0) Shawn Barrett (Jr, 1, 0) Abby Repko (So, 1, 1) Hayden Coombs (Jr, 1, 1) Katie Burn (Fr, 1, 1) Name (Class, Years on Team, Kate Madsen (Jr, 3, 2) Michael Young (Fr, 1, 0) Years as Registered Participant)

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Hull Design The entry radius of 2-1/4 in. was increased to 8-1/2 in. so that the amount of water displaced during turns Epoch , achieved excellent tracking, stability, was reduced, making Tempus easier to maneuver. and straight-line speed due to the long, shallow-vee profile hull as shown in Figure 6. This profile combines the stability of a flat bottom and the efficiency of a round hull which improved overall initial and secondary stability (USU, 2015). Tracking was also greatly improved due to the v-shaped keel. However, paddlers indicated that Epoch did not have the required maneuverability to pivot quickly through crucial turns in the sprint and slalom races. This lack of maneuverability was attributed to either the shallow rocker and entry radius, or the transition of the vertical-to-horizontal section of the bow and Figure 7: 3D Hull Design stern. Consequently, the goal of Tempus was to use Epoch ’s hull design with modifications to the bow Other modifications to the hull design and stern such that tracking and stability would be included adjusting the gunwale and entry line angle. retained while improving maneuverability. The design team chose to exclude the inwales which proved hazardous to paddlers. The outwales were retained and widened to provide strength and rigidity. The entry line angle of 22 ° was reduced to 17 ° to cut through the water better and improve Tempus ’ top speed. Table 2 summarizes Tempus ’ salient hull features. With the modifications to the rocker and entry radius, the tracking and stability of Epoch were retained while maneuverability increased. In addition, the straight-line speed is expected to Figure 6: Shallow-vee Profile increase by sharpening the entry line angle. The The design team proposed several balance of these strengths allows this year’s modifications to Epoch ’s bow and stern. After inexperienced paddling team to control Tempus analysis, these modifications were then made to the while achieving speeds necessary to dominate the Epoch hull CAD file and qualitatively assessed based competition. on paddler feedback and hydraulic modeling Table 4 : Tempus Hull Features dynamics. After iterative adjustments were made Tempus Hull Features using AutoCAD, a final design was selected that allowed the bow to be submerged such that the full Feature Dimension length of the canoe can be utilized during the women’s tandem races. This was necessary for the Length 20 ft entire length of the canoe to be utilized during Beam 30 in. straightaways. The canoe shape was left unmodified to Depth 13 in. maintain straight-line speed. The length of the canoe, 20 ft 10 in., influences top speed and tracking. The Rocker 5 in. maximum beam of 30 in. was placed 1 ft aft of center Entry Line Angle 17 ° to provide stability and increase maneuverability. The bow and stern rocker, both initially 3-3/16 in., Entry Radius 8.5 in. were increased to 5 in. to improve maneuverability. Symmetry Asymmetrical

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Structural Analysis analysis. The required tensile and compressive The main objective of the structural analysis stresses for the mix design were determined to be 237 team was to ensure Tempus would structurally psi and 74 psi, respectively. Required concrete support all potential loading scenarios. The loading strengths for the three race scenarios are illustrated scenarios analyzed included: 2-man, 2-woman, co- in Table 3. ed, transportation, and display. AutoCAD 2014 and Table 5: Loading Scenarios Microsoft Excel were used to perform the analysis. Loading Scenario Tensile Strength Compressive Strength The canoe was modeled as a beam on an 2-man 237 psi 74 psi elastic foundation. The original weight estimate for 2-woman 144 psi 45 psi the concrete mix design of 45 pcf applied to a Co-ed 191 psi 61 psi thickness of 0.5 in. led to a total canoe weight of To increase strength capacity, the team used approximately 155 lbs. A factor of safety of 1.2 a geogrid passive reinforcement mesh rated at 2575 resulted in a factored weight of 185 lbs. The self- lb/ft in addition to a pre-tensioning system for active weight of the canoe was modeled as a non-linear reinforcement. In the practice canoe, six cables were distributed load using the average cross-sectional used for the pre-tensioning system, based on a area at 0.5-foot intervals along the 20-foot canoe. previous year’s design. However, when the design The weights of the paddlers were approximated as was closely analyzed it was clear that each cable had 130 lbs and 180 lbs for women and men, been tensioned to more than its rated capacity. To respectively. These were modeled as point loads at meet the desired strength while also making safety a different locations for each race, determined by priority, the team decided to increase the number of balancing the internal moment. cables to eight so that the capacity was not exceeded. Similar to the self-weight force, the In addition to ensuring safety measures, the increase hydrostatic force was applied as a non-linear in cables better distributed the compressive load distributed load using the average submerged cross- along the width of the canoe and increased the sectional area at 0.5-foot intervals along the canoe. overall compression, thereby increasing the tensile The submerged volume was calculated using a trial- strength. To oppose the calculated stresses, each and-error method. The canoe self-weight and paddler cable was tensioned to 100 lbs. weights were combined to determine the required The team concluded that in order to develop hydrostatic force acting on the canoe to maintain a concrete mix to meet the required concrete flotation. Using this force, the required submergence strengths, a lighter-weight mix was not feasible. depth was determined. Instead, the team focused on utilizing active Transportation of the canoe was modeled reinforcement to increase the canoe stress capacity with 20 straps used to suspend the canoe inside a and passive reinforcement to protect against metal-framed crate. Each strap was modeled to unforeseen events. As the team moved forward with support 9.25 lbs in order to hold the weight of the the concrete mix design, it was confident a mix entire canoe. Two supports located 5 ft from both would be achieved to withstand all calculated forces. ends modeled the display loading scenario. Stresses were calculated by determining the critical loading case and analyzing the cross- sectional properties where the maximum moment occurred. Shear and moment diagrams were developed for each loading scenario. The 2-man race resulted in the highest moment making it the critical loading case. The maximum moment was calculated as approximately 596 lb-ft. To determine the moment of inertia and neutral axis, the cross-section was assumed to resemble a U-shape for simpler Figure 8: Moment Diagram

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

design team tested cement-to-lime ratios of 50:50, Development and Testing 75:25, and 90:10 according to ASTM C39 to As the 2016 season approached, the team set determine their respective strengths. Results from the two concrete mix design goals: develop a compression tests indicated that a higher cement-to- combination of concrete mixes with a composite lime ratio produced stronger concrete. However, the specific weight of 45 pcf and reduce the total number increase of cement decreased the workability of the of mix designs. To achieve these goals, the team concrete. To preserve workability and maintain referenced last year’s method for achieving a specific adequate strength, the design team chose the 75:25 weight of 50 pcf using four mixes (USU 2015). cement-to lime ratio for the finishing mix. Table 6 After preliminary testing was completed, the lists the strength test results for the various design team decided to place more emphasis on combinations of cement and lime. strength than weight, which resulted in a slightly Table 6: Test Results higher overall specific weight than originally Concrete:Lime 28-Day Compressive planned. However, the resulting strength was also Ratio Strength (psi) higher than expected, benefitting the design of the 90:10 7017 canoe. In addition to the focus on strength and 75:25 4870 50:50 1586 weight, the design team was able to reduce the number of concrete mixes from four to two for After the desired strength and workability Tempus : finishing and structural. requirements for the finishing mix had been Finishing Mix achieved, additional color tests were performed to Due to the exclusion of stains per the 2016 ensure the vibrant color had been sustained after Rules and Regulations, significant time was devoted modifying the mix design for strength and to incorporating dyes into the finishing mix to meet workability. Results indicated that the color of the Tempus aesthetic goals. It was especially important modified mix was acceptable. To ensure colors that the colors matched the theme and were would be consistent throughout construction, the consistent among batches in order to perfect the design team used a concrete dye sheet provided by aesthetic quality of Tempus. In addition, the color Intermountain Concrete Specialists. This dye sheet quality had to be balanced with the physical characteristics of the concrete. It had to be strong enough to withstand the required stresses while maintaining workability for good application during casting. Throughout the development process, the team conducted strength tests followed by color tests followed by more strength tests to obtain desired results in both areas. Initially, a finishing mix design was developed that would meet strength requirements. The first color tests were intended to test for concrete property changes due to the addition of dyes to the Figure 9: Color Tests finishing mix. After testing different proportions of and appropriate ratio conversions allowed the design fly ash in the mix, results showed that the fly ash team to mix consistent colored concrete across tinted all of the colors. After analyzing the necessity batches. Once the basic colors had been chosen and of fly ash to the properties of the mix, the team tested, the design team experimented with various decided to remove it from the finishing mix. shades of the basic colors so that more options were The removal of fly ash changed the available to enhance the aesthetics. consistency and workability of the mix, altering the To achieve consistent colors across samples, necessary balance of lime and cement. Once the 1-pound batches were used. Each batch was mixed appropriate colors were achieved, the mix was first, then the dyes added at the end of the mixing modified to increase strength and workability. The process. The initial tests used the base colors for

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Tempus : red, black, brown, and yellow. To create a EPS beads were chosen to increase the air greater assortment of colors, dyes were combined at content in the mix. For the architectural mix used in various ratios (Figure 9). Again, compression and Epoch, air in the concrete was created by whipping tensile tests defined by ASTM C139, and ASTM the cementitious materials, then folding in the C496/496M were performed on the finalized colored aggregates. This same process was repeated for concrete to ensure the dyes used did not affect the Tempus. To ensure that the increase in the air content strength of the concrete. The results indicated that the finishing mix had sustained its strength. Structural Mix Last year’s design team performed extensive testing of cementitious materials that resulted in a cement-to-fly-ash-to-lime ratio of 25:50:25. Due to Figure 10: Fuller Curve the positive performance of Epoch, the same cementitious material ratio was used for Tempus. The team was then able to focus on improving the use of aggregates and the gradation of the structural mix. Figure 10: Fuller Curve Epoch’s structural mix mainly consisted of in the structural mix would not affect the Poraver and cenosphere aggregates, while the compression strength, tests were conducted with architectural mix utilized Expanded Polystyrene various proportions of EPS beads and 2-4 mm (EPS) beads and shredded EPS. As the design team Poraver beads. Once the strength was confirmed, created a single mix combining the most effective additional tests of aggregate proportions were characteristics of Epoch’s structural and architectural conducted to reduce the specific weight. Compared mixes, Poraver and EPS beads were selected as the with a baseline mix, the compressive strength preferred aggregates. decreased minimally with the addition of EPS beads. Analysis began with matching aggregate Further tests focused on the reduction of fine amounts and sizes to the Fuller Curve. After aggregates were completed by casting test cylinders, calculations, a 0.55 power Curve was determined the then running compressive and tensile strength tests best fit for Tempus, a modification of the Fuller in accordance with ASTM C139 and ASTM C Curve (Figure 10). The Fuller Curve describes the 496/496M. Results indicated that all test mixes packing density and gradation of aggregate sizes would meet the required compressive strength; which affects the workability, moisture however, the required tensile strength was not met susceptibility, durability, strength, and shrinkage of when the EPS proportion exceeded 0.6 percent by the final mixture. The goal is to fill voids between weight. Taking this into account, a final structural larger particles with smaller particles. Fuller mix design was chosen that achieved the best estimated that a 0.5 power curve obtains the best strength-to-weight ratio while obtaining a unit results (Pavement Interactive, 2012). weight of 58.9 pcf (ASTM C138). Once a gradation curve was chosen, Reinforcement aggregate sizes were selected to meet the set criteria. Using the structural analysis calculations, the To reduce waste, the team utilized leftover team implemented active and passive reinforcement aggregates from the previous year that met methods into the design of the canoe. Fibers were requirements. Poraver sizes 0.1-0.3 mm, 0.25-0.5 added to the structural mix to meet required mm, 0.5-1 mm, and 2-4 mm were used in addition to compressive strength, tensile strength, and tensile EPS beads. To increase sustainability, the team strain of the concrete. required all mixes to have a minimum of 25 percent aggregates-to-cementitious materials, by weight, reducing the total amount of portland cement used.

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Nycon PVA, RCA 15, RFS 400, and RF 4000 also served as a guideline for the unique shape of the were utilized to increase tensile strength and reduce hull. shrinkage of the concrete. Additional measures were However, during casting problems arose with employed outside of the concrete mix to further the application of the depth gages. Each gage had increase the tensile strength. A geogrid mesh, been cut to about a 3/4 in. x 3/4 in. size with a 3/8 in. commonly used in retaining walls and other soil thickness. This thickness was intended to serve as the foundations, was placed between layers of structural thickness for both layers of structural mix and the mix as passive reinforcement. It was purchased in a mesh in between. The team found that the gages were roll and had to be cut and shaped on the casting day too large to fit inside the mesh spacing such that the to fit the form. Where bulges formed, the mesh was first layer was applied to 3/8-in. thickness, matching cut and stitched together using flexible wire. the gages, then the mesh was placed. The second For active reinforcement, eight 3/16-in pre- layer of structural mix was applied as thinly as tensioned cables were placed in the gunwales and possible, but the resulting canoe was thicker than along the keel to maintain compression, thus planned. reducing the tensile strain. A system of pulleys was The precast keel insert, made from the EPS installed to place cables in precise locations over the female mold, was created to provide better alignment length of the canoe with precast concrete spacers of the bottom of Tempus and increase tracking during located along the gunwale to ensure concrete was races. Epoch also utilized a precast keel, but it was placed completely surrounding each cable. Stops placed as several sections that resulted in poor were crimped to the cables to act as anchors and alignment. This year the keel was created as a 10- transfer the forces to the concrete. On the casting foot long single insert placed at the middle of the day, after the keel and mesh were placed, each cable canoe. was pre-tensioned to the rated capacity of 100-lbs. The 2016 team was faced with new To preserve maximum strength, each cable was challenges this year regarding the mix design. Mix spaced 0.5 to 1.0 inches apart, allowing the concrete consistency and color were a priority. Desired theme to fully surround each cable. While Epoch only used colors were achieved with good consistency across two cables along the keel, Tempus has four, batches. Through multiple tests and a practice canoe, allocating a better distributed force along the canoe the team was able to develop a mix that would meet width. Due to time and curing, each cable was strength requirements. Instead of creating a lighter assumed to lose 50 percent of its force, resulting in concrete, as originally planned, the team decided that 50 lbs of pre-tensioned force per cable. in order to accommodate the construction design and Innovations ensure the concrete exceeded required strengths, a Innovations this year included the heavier concrete was valid. To allow next year’s implementation of concrete depth gages and a team to focus on enhancement of this year’s work, precast keel insert. Epoch’s depth gages consisted of the team has organized a set of standard operating screws drilled into the mold to the desired depth. procedures to pass knowledge and valuable Once the canoe was cast, the screws were removed information on to future teams. and the holes patched and covered with stain. Due to the prohibition of stains, the team had no adequate way of patching the holes from the screws without compromising the aesthetic quality. After various ideas were discussed, the team determined precast concrete depth gages would be fastened in place using the second layer of finishing mix and would be covered by the thin final layer of finishing mix. This allowed the team to ensure proper thickness while also preserving the aesthetic quality. Depth gages were placed in various locations across all areas of the canoe to ensure a thickness of 3/8 in. The gages Figure 11: Depth gages

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Construction Various three-dimensional inlay designs Construction of Tempus proved to be illustrating gears, pipes, and a clock were tested in challenging due to decreased lab space and lack of the EPS mold. These graphics were created using experience of the team. To counter these challenges, rotary tools to carve the shapes into the EPS. team captains dedicated time for careful preparation, Styropoxy was then painted onto the mold and planning, and safety training. Construction space sanded to obtain a smooth surface. A Sugru was carefully organized and team members were substitute with imprinted gears was also applied in taught how processes were completed, then assigned sectioned areas to provide a second method for to complete related tasks. This allowed the team to testing inlay designs. To increase aesthetics, dyes build on their inexperience. Additionally, many were added to the finishing mix to create the colors large-scale tasks were outsourced to local businesses desired for each inlay. New, reusable molds for the due to lack of construction tools and machinery such exterior of as the Computerized Numerical Control (CNC) the bow and machines. Outsourced projects included cutting 100 stern tips EPS blocks at 6 in. x 24 in. x 32 in. for the canoe were created form, new particle board cross sections using a CNC using bent machine, and new metal molds for the bow and stern sheets of tips. As a result, relationships between the metal (Figure community and the Department of Civil and 12). These Environmental Engineering at USU were molds were strengthened. This allowed the team to learn new cut and bent construction techniques from local businesses that in accordance will be passed on to future teams. with the Figure 12: EPS Mold with Inlay dimensions of Based on the modified version of last year’s Design hull design, 6 new cross sections were designed for the hull accurate construction of the modifications (Figure 3). design to increase precision while casting and Male and female cross sections were cut out of decrease finishing time. To ensure adequate curing particle board using a CNC machine. The machinery conditions, a moist sheet was placed over the canoe mitigated errors and saved approximately 10 person- and covered by Visqueen sheeting. A final layer of hours of work. By outsourcing this project, more finishing mix was applied after three weeks of curing time was available for the other aspects of and sanding. Once cured, the canoe was demolded construction. using hand scrapers and trowels to remove the EPS Practice Canoe mold, Styropoxy, and Sugru substitute. Results of the Before casting the final canoe, the team trial designs and methods were recorded detailing constructed a practice canoe to test new ideas and that would be utilized for the construction of Tempus. techniques and to serve as a teaching method for new members to learn the construction process (Figure 11). Construction of the team’s practice canoe began by building a reusable wood casting tabletop resting on seven sawhorses. The table was designed for easy disassembly, relocation, and storage. A 1 in. x 4 in. board was installed along the center of the table to ensure proper alignment of the EPS mold. The mold was then fabricated using the wood cross sections to cut the EPS blocks into the mold shape which were assembled and covered in plaster to create a smooth surface.

Figure 13: Metal Molds

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Final Canoe covered to begin the curing process. The casting day Construction of the practice canoe revealed consisted of applying the second layer of finishing three construction methods that needed adjustment mix (the first layer was placed the day before) and before casting Tempus. First, the Styropoxy did not two layers of structural mix, forming the geogrid preserve the shape and color of the tested inlay mesh for passive reinforcement, placing the keel, and design. Once applied directly to the EPS, the tensioning the pre-tensioned cables. The final layer Styropoxy produced deformations in the gears, of finishing mix was applied three weeks after pipes, and clock. The Sugru substitute, however, casting. The overall order of the canoe components preserved both the shape and color. The team is as follows: colored finishing mix (two layers), decided to use the Sugru substitute for all inlays and structural mix, geogrid mesh, precast keel, pre- Styropoxy for the remainder of the mold. Second, tensioned cables, structural mix, and colored nothing was used to inhibit the finishing mix from finishing mix (applied three weeks after casting). To adhering to the Styropoxy. This made the demolding ensure quality during casting, team members were process difficult and time consuming. The EPS mold separated into two groups: concrete mixing and of Tempus was covered in cooking oil, making canoe construction. Batches of structural mix were demolding much easier. Third, the galvanized steel prepared such that continuous application was cables used for active reinforcement were tensioned achieved. Pre-made concrete spacers and female after they were covered by the structural mix. This wood cross sections were used to ensure uniform required team members to re-shape the concrete, thickness throughout the canoe. creating unnecessary work. The cables for Tempus After the casting day, a moist sheet was were tensioned before casting, allowing the team to wrapped around the canoe with Visqueen sheeting increase efficiency. placed on top, as was done for the practice canoe. Casting Day Periodically, the canoe was uncovered, sanded, With the practice canoe completed and final wetted, and re-covered. The canoe was sanded until techniques determined, the team was ready to a 2000 grit finish was achieved. When the concrete construct Tempus. The EPS mold was built, inlays was fully cured, the canoe was removed from the were added using Sugru substitute molds, and a casting table and the demolding process began. Hand tensioning system was set up with eight cables along tools were used to successfully remove the EPS the canoe. Additional preparation for casting day mold. Hours of sanding, detailing, and sealing led to included the completion of Tempus for competition. purchasing The construction of Tempus completes a new new era of the USU Concrete Canoe Team. Intricate equipment inlays displaying colored concrete demonstrate the where versatility of concrete. Team innovation and passion necessary, has built a timeless masterpiece. Steampunk is alive installing a and thriving, a memorial to our origins. Tempus is shelving ready to sail. system to organize the lab tools and concrete materials, placing a precast keel Figure 14: Keel Mold and precast concrete spacers, and applying the first layer of finishing mix in the inlays. To prepare the precast keel, Visqueen sheeting was placed along the female mold (Figure 13). Structural mix was placed on the sheeting, forming the shape of the keel, and Figure 15: Wood Cross Sections

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY ID Task Name Baseline1 Start Baseline1 Finish Actual Start Actual Finish Sep 6, '16 Sep 13, '16 Sep 20, '16 Sep 27, '16 Oct 4, '16 Oct 11, '16 Oct 18, '16 Oct 25, '16 Nov 1, '16 Nov 8, '16 Nov 15, '16 Nov 22, '16 Nov 29, '16 Dec 6, '16 Dec 13, '16 Dec 20, '16 Dec 27, '16 Jan 3, '16 Jan 10, '16 Jan 17, '16 Jan 24, '16 Jan 31, '16 Feb 7, '16 Feb 14, '16 Feb 21, '16 Feb 28, '16 Mar 6, '16 Mar 13, '16 Mar 20, '16 Mar 27, '16 Apr 3, '16 Apr 10, '16 Apr 17, '16 Apr 24, '16 May 1, '16Ma M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S T T S M W F S 1 Project Start Tue 9/8/15 Fri 4/29/16 Tue 9/8/15 Fri 5/6/16 2 Hull Design Tue 9/8/15 Sat 10/3/15 Tue 9/8/15 Thu 10/1/15 3 Research Tue 9/8/15 Fri 9/18/15 Tue 9/8/15 Fri 9/18/15 4 Re-Design Tue 9/8/15 Thu 10/1/15 Tue 9/8/15 Thu 10/1/15 5 Mix Design Tue 9/8/15 Sat 2/27/16 Tue 9/29/15 Sat 2/20/16 6 Development and Testing Sat 10/3/15 Sat 2/6/16 Sat 10/3/15 Sat 2/6/16 7 Cast Final Cylinders Sat 2/6/16 Sat 2/6/16 Sat 2/6/16 Sat 2/6/16 8 Break Final Cylinders Sat 2/27/16 Sat 2/27/16 Sat 2/20/16 Sat 2/20/16 9 Material Procurement Tue 9/29/15 Thu 10/22/15 Tue 9/29/15 Thu 10/22/15 10 Structural Analysis Tue 9/8/15 Mon 1/11/16 Tue 9/8/15 Fri 1/22/16 11 Longitudinal Tue 9/8/15 Mon 1/11/16 Tue 9/8/15 Fri 1/22/16 12 Lateral Tue 9/8/15 Mon 1/11/16 Tue 9/8/15 Fri 1/22/16 13 Practice Form Construction Sat 10/24/15 Fri 11/20/15 Sat 10/24/15 Fri 11/20/15 14 Practice Casting Day Sat 11/21/15 Sat 11/21/15 Sat 11/21/15 Sat 11/21/15 15 Practice Curing Sat 11/21/15 Sat 12/12/15 Sat 11/21/15 Sat 12/12/15 16 Practice Demolding Sat 12/12/15 Sat 12/12/15 Sat 12/12/15 Sat 12/12/15 17 Winter Break Sat 12/19/15 Sun 1/10/16 Sat 12/19/15 Sun 1/10/16 18 Form Construction Mon 12/28/15 Fri 2/5/16 Mon 12/28/15 Sat 2/6/16 19 Cut Foam Mon 12/28/15 Fri 1/1/16 Mon 12/28/15 Sat 1/9/16 20 Assemble Form Mon 1/4/16 Sat 1/9/16 Sat 1/9/16 Tue 1/12/16 21 Carve Inlays Sat 1/9/16 Sat 1/16/16 Mon 1/18/16 Sat 1/23/16 22 Plaster Mon 1/18/16 Tue 1/19/16 Fri 1/15/16 Wed 1/20/16 23 Sugru Sat 1/23/16 Sat 1/23/16 Sat 1/23/16 Thu 2/4/16 24 Styropoxy Wed 1/20/16 Sat 1/23/16 Thu 1/28/16 Sat 1/30/16 25 Sand Styropoxy Sat 1/23/16 Wed 1/27/16 Mon 2/1/16 Fri 2/5/16 26 Set Gunwales Wed 1/27/16 Thu 1/28/16 Fri 2/5/16 Fri 2/5/16 27 Weigh Aggregates Wed 1/20/16 Thu 2/4/16 Mon 2/1/16 Sat 2/6/16 28 Tensioning System Fri 1/29/16 Thu 2/4/16 Fri 2/5/16 Fri 2/5/16 29 Apply Finishing Mix Fri 2/5/16 Fri 2/5/16 Fri 2/5/16 Fri 2/5/16 30 Measure Admixtures Fri 2/5/16 Fri 2/5/16 Mon 2/1/16 Sat 2/6/16 31 Casting Day Sat 2/6/16 Sat 2/6/16 Sat 2/6/16 Sat 2/6/16 32 Curing Sat 2/6/16 Sat 2/27/16 Sat 2/6/16 Thu 3/3/16 33 Finishing Mix Outside Sat 2/20/16 Sat 2/20/16 Thu 2/25/16 Thu 2/25/16 34 Demolding Sat 2/27/16 Sat 2/27/16 Thu 3/3/16 Thu 3/3/16 35 Finishing Sun 2/28/16 Sat 3/26/16 Fri 3/4/16 Sat 3/26/16 36 Spring Break Mon 3/7/16 Fri 3/11/16 Mon 3/7/16 Fri 3/11/16 37 ASCE RM Conference Thu 3/31/16 Sat 4/2/16 Thu 3/31/16 Sat 4/2/16 38 Final Product Sat 10/24/15 Sat 3/26/16 Tue 11/10/15 Sat 3/26/16 39 Design of Display, Stands, Sat 10/24/15 Sat 11/21/15 Tue 11/10/15 Sat 2/6/16 Cross-section 40 Display Mon 1/11/16 Sat 3/26/16 Sat 1/16/16 Sat 3/26/16 41 Stands Mon 1/11/16 Sat 3/26/16 Sat 1/16/16 Sat 3/26/16 42 Cross Section Mon 1/11/16 Sat 2/6/16 Sat 1/16/16 Sat 3/26/16 43 Design Paper Sat 11/7/15 Sat 2/27/16 Tue 12/1/15 Wed 2/24/16 44 First Draft Sat 11/7/15 Tue 1/12/16 Tue 12/1/15 Tue 1/12/16 45 Second Draft Thu 1/14/16 Thu 1/28/16 Tue 1/12/16 Thu 1/28/16 46 Third Draft Thu 1/28/16 Thu 2/4/16 Thu 1/28/16 Wed 2/3/16 47 Faculty Review Thu 2/4/16 Tue 2/9/16 Thu 2/4/16 Tue 2/9/16 48 Fourth Draft Tue 2/9/16 Thu 2/18/16 Tue 2/9/16 Thu 2/18/16 49 Final Draft/Printing Thu 2/18/16 Sat 2/27/16 Thu 2/18/16 Wed 2/24/16 50 Submit Final Paper Tue 3/1/16 Tue 3/1/16 Wed 2/24/16 Wed 2/24/16 51 CEE 4870 & 4880 Tue 9/8/15 Wed 5/4/16 Tue 9/8/15 NA 52 Progress Report 1 Tue 9/8/15 Thu 10/1/15 Thu 9/24/15 Mon 10/19/15 53 Team Lead Presentation Tue 10/6/15 Tue 10/6/15 Tue 10/6/15 Tue 10/6/15 54 Interim Team Presentation Tue 11/3/15 Tue 11/3/15 Tue 11/3/15 Tue 11/3/15 55 Progress Report 2 Fri 10/2/15 Thu 11/5/15 Thu 10/29/15 Thu 11/5/15 56 Interim Report Tue 9/8/15 Thu 12/10/15 Tue 11/10/15 Thu 12/10/15 57 Progress Report 3 Wed 1/27/16 Wed 2/10/16 Thu 1/28/16 Tue 2/9/16 58 Progress Report 4 Wed 2/24/16 Wed 3/16/16 Wed 3/2/16 Wed 3/16/16 59 Final Presentation Mon 4/4/16 Wed 4/20/16 Mon 4/4/16 Wed 4/20/16 60 Final Report Mon 4/4/16 Fri 4/29/16 Wed 3/9/16 Fri 4/29/16 61 *Colored tasks are NA NA NA NA estimated.

Project: GANTT Chart 2015-201 Baseline Milestone Critical Split Milestone Manual Task Manual Summary Rollup Date: Mon 2/22/16 Baseline Summary Task Project Summary Duration-only Baseline

Page 1

TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Appendix A - References

ASTM. (2013). “Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens.” ASTM C39/C39M, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using 2 in. or [50 mm]) Cube Specimens).” ASTM C109, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Terminology Relating to Concrete and Concrete Aggregates.” ASTM C125, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific Gravity) and Absorption of Coarse Aggregates.” ASTM C127, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific Gravity), and Absorption of Fine Aggregates.” ASTM C128, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Test Method for Density (Unit Weight), Yield, and Air Content (Gravimetric) of Concrete.” ASTM C138/C138M, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Specification for Portland Cement.” ASTM C150, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2012). “Standard Specifications for Air-Entraining Admixtures for Concrete.” ASTM C260, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2012). “Standard Specification for Liquid Membrane-Forming Compounds for Curing Concrete.” ASTM C309, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Specification for Chemical Admixtures for Concrete.” ASTM C494/C494M, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens.” ASTM C496/C496M, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Specifications for Blended Hydraulic Cements.” ASTM C595, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2012). “Standard Specifications for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete.” ASTM C618, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2010). “Specifications for Pigments for Integrally Colored Concrete.” ASTM C979, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2014). “Standard Specification for Slag Cement for Use in Concrete and Mortars.” ASTM C989, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2010). “Standard Specification for Fiber-Reinforced Concrete and Shotcrete.” ASTM C1116, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2012). “Standard Performance Specification for Hydraulic Cement.” ASTM C1157, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

ASTM (2014). “Standard Specification for Silica Fume in Cementitious Mixtures.” ASTM C1240, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2011). “Standard Specification for Liquid Membrane-Forming Compounds Having Special Properties for Curing and Sealing Concrete.” ASTM C1315, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM (2013). “Standard Specification for Latex and Powder Polymer Modifiers for Use In Hydraulic Cement Concrete and Mortar.” ASTM C1438, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. CIO. (1994) “How to Pick a Project Management Methodology.” (Feb. 1, 2016) Merriam-Webster. (2015). “Tempus.” (Feb. 1, 2016) Pavement Interactive. (2012). “Gradation and Size.” (Feb. 1, 2016) USU. (2015). Epoch . Technical Design Paper, report. Utah State University. “Utah State University Fall 2015 Enrollment Analysis.” (Feb. 1, 2016) Wikipedia. (2016) “Steampunk.” (Feb. 1, 2016)

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

Appendix B - Mixture Proportions

MIXTURE DESIGNATION: STRUCTURAL CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS Component Specific Gravity Volume (ft 3) Amount (mass/volume) (lb/yd 3) White Portland Cement, Type I 3.15 0.872 c: 171.84 Mass of all cementitious Fly Ash 2.15 2.422 m1: 33.67 materials, cm Hydrated Lime 2.5 1.041 m2: 171.84 687.35 lb/yd 3 c/cm ratio 0.3334

FIBERS Component Specific Gravity Volume (ft 3) Amount (mass/volume) (lb/yd 3)

PVA RSC 15 1.3 0.108 f1: 9.26

PVA RFS 400 1.3 0.040 f1: 3.44

PVA RF 4000 1.3 0.049 f1: 4.23 AGGREGATES Base Quantity (lb/yd 3) Batch Quantity Volume, Aggregates Abs (%) MC stk (%) SG (at MC stk ) OD SSD SSD (ft 3) (lb/yd 3) Poraver 0.1-0.3 30 0 0.40 675 911.25 6.15 153.59 Poraver 0.25-0.5 21 0 0.88 572.4 732.67 0.974 53.48 Poraver 0.5-1.0 18 0 0.71 456.3 547.56 2.11 93.48 Poraver 1.0-2.0 19 0 0.53 388.8 466.56 2.27 74.97 Poraver 2.0-4.0 14 0 0.32 321.3 395.2 3.59 71.6 EPS Beads 3 0 0.02 27 28.08 2.2 2.75 ADMIXTURES Dosage Admixture lb/gal % Solids Water in Admixture (lb/yd 3) (fl.oz/cwt) MasterGlenium 3030 8.7 25 20.00 9.344 Total Water from DARASET 400 11.68 25 61.00 6.115 All Admixtures Master Air AE 90 7.9 25 11.40 9.397 35.87 lb/yd 3 DARACEM 55 10.515 25 22.00 11.011 SOLIDS (LATEX , DYES AND POWDERED ADMIXTURES ) Component Specific Gravity Volume (ft 3) Amount (mass/volume) (lb/yd 3)

0 S1: WATER Amount (mass/volume) (lb/yd 3) Volume (ft 3) Water, lb/yd 3 w: 370.76 4.34 3 Total Free Water from All Aggregates, lb/yd ∑wfree : 65.34 3 Total Water from All Admixtures, lb/yd ∑wadmx : 35.87 3 Batch Water, lb/yd wbatch : 270.55 DENSITIES , AIR CONTENT , RATIOS AND SLUMP cm fibers aggregates solids water Total Mass of Concrete, M, (lb, for1 yd 3 ) 649.83 16 449.87 370.76 M:1486.46 Absolute Volume of Concrete, V, (ft 3) 4.29 0.2 17.29 4.34 V:26.12 Theoretical Density, T, (= M / V) 56.92 lb/ft 3 Air Content [= (T – D)/D x 100%] 16.92 % Measured Density, D 48.68 lb/ft 3 Slump, Slump flow 2.0 in. water/cement ratio, w/c: 2.16 water/cementitious material ratio, w/cm: 0.57

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY TEMPUS • 2016 CONCRETE CANOE DESIGN REPORT

MIXTURE DESIGNATION: FINISHING* CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS Component Specific Gravity Volume (ft 3) Amount (mass/volume) (lb/yd 3) White Portland Cement Type I 3.15 4.579 c: 900 Mass of all cementitious

Hydrated Lime 2.5 1.923 m1: 300 materials, cm 1200 lb/yd 3

c/cm ratio 3 FIBERS Component Specific Gravity Volume (ft 3) Amount (mass/volume) (lb/yd 3)

PVA RSC 15 1.3 0.074 f1: 6.00

AGGREGATES 3 Base Quantity (lb/yd ) Volume, Batch Quantity Aggregates Abs (%) MC stk (%) SG 3 3 OD SSD SSD (ft ) (at MC stk ) (lb/yd ) Poraver 0.1-0.3 30 0 0.40 675 911.25 12.02 300

ADMIXTURES Dosage Admixture lb/gal % Solids Water in Admixture (lb/yd 3) (fl.oz/cwt) MasterGlenium 3030 8.7 27 20.00 17.618 DARACEM 55 10.515 20 22.00 15.378 Total Water from All Admixtures Bonding Adhesive 9.2 500 26.00 319.125 375.270 lb/yd 3 Shirnkage Reducer 8.3 35 15.00 23.149 SOLIDS (LATEX , DYES AND POWDERED ADMIXTURES ) Component Specific Gravity Volume (ft 3) Amount (mass/volume) (lb/yd 3) Powdered Admixtures (various colors)* Various Powdered Admixture CC86 (Black) 1.5 2,520

WATER Amount (mass/volume) (lb/yd 3) Volume (ft 3) Water, lb/yd 3 w: 552.00 7.404 3 Total Free Water from All Aggregates, lb/yd ∑wfree : 90.00

3 Total Water from All Admixtures, lb/yd ∑wadmx : 375.27 3 Batch Water, lb/yd wbatch : 86.73 DENSITIES , AIR CONTENT , RATIOS AND SLUMP cm fibers aggregates solids water Total Mass of Concrete, M, (lb, for1 yd 3 ) 1200 6 300 12 552 M:2070 Absolute Volume of Concrete, V, (ft 3) 6.502 0.074 12.02 0.1 7.404 V: 26.1 Theoretical Density, T, (= M / V) 79.31 lb/ft 3 Air Content [= (T – D)/D x 100%] 1.48% Measured Density, D 78.15 lb/ft 3 Slump, Slump flow 8 in. water/cement ratio, w/c: 0.613 water/cementitious material ratio, w/cm: 0.46 *The finishing mix was used with various amounts of powdered admixtures (dyes) to create different colors, but the basic mix remained the same.