Bibliographic citations
Lobaton, G., (2020). Variación teórico experimental del módulo elástico en concretos de alta resistencia considerando relaciones a/c de: 0.25, 0.30 y 0.35 [Tesis, Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14076/21727
Lobaton, G., Variación teórico experimental del módulo elástico en concretos de alta resistencia considerando relaciones a/c de: 0.25, 0.30 y 0.35 [Tesis]. PE: Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería; 2020. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14076/21727
@misc{renati/711335,
title = "Variación teórico experimental del módulo elástico en concretos de alta resistencia considerando relaciones a/c de: 0.25, 0.30 y 0.35",
author = "Lobaton Rosas, Gerson Bruno",
publisher = "Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería",
year = "2020"
}
The present investigation has the purpose of determining the variation between the theoretical values and the experimental values of the elastic modulus in high resistance concrete with water-cement ratios (a/c) of 0.35.0.30 and 0.25. In this way, the state of the art of investigations in our country that address the issue of elastic modulus in concrete has been reviewed. Based on this review, works such as the thesis “El Módulo de Elasticidad de Concretos Preparados con Cemento Portland Puzolánicos Atlas IP“ by Ana Torre Carrillo or in mortars for structural purposes such as the thesis “El módulo de Elasticidad en Morteros de Cemento con Arenas de las Canteras de la Ciudad de Iquitos“ by Verónica Casas Tuanama. Both investigations were carried out on concrete specimens with ranges of compressive strengths considered standard (ranging from 210 to 420 kg/cm2), thus not finding in our study that they address the relationship between the elastic modulus and the resistance in mixtures considered high resistance. (greater than 420 kg/cm2). In this context, the present investigation begins based on the indications of the American Concrete Institute in its ACI 318 regulations, ACI 363R-92 report and ASTM C 469 regulations. To carry out the concrete mixtures for the present thesis, it was used Portland Cement type I, SikaCem® plasticizer in an amount of 5% by weight of the cement. Accelerator forging and resistance admixture ACCELGUARD 100 in 4%, coarse sand of fineness module 2.84, added thickness of maximum nominal size of 1” and fineness of 7.68. Thus the mix design was elaborated based on the Maximum Compacted Unit Weight Method for the water-cement ratios of 0.35, 0.30 and 0.25 obtaining concrete patterns with settlements of the order of 3 to 5 inches. Based on these of mixture designs, specimens were produced that were subjected to the compression, traction, flexion and Elastic Modulus tests. These tests were carried out in the Laboratory N°1 of Materials Testing at UNI. The tests data and regulations followed are presented in chapter VI: RESULTS OBTAINED while the processing of these results as the calculation of compressive, tensile, flexural and elastic modulus stresses, data processing of tests in concrete in fresh state as determination setting time, compacted unit weight and others are presented in Chapter VII: ANALYSIS OF RESULTS. For the present investigation, it was possible to manufacture concrete with compressive strengths at 28 days between 495 kg/cm2 and 646 kg/cm2. Likewise, for these concrete mixes the final setting times were 462.07 minutes for the water-cement ratio 0.35, 505.40 minutes for the a/c ratio of 0.30 and 559.63 minutes for the a/c mix equal to 0.25. In this way, the results of the experimental elastic modulus tests obtained range from 342'000.84 kg/cm2 to 369 982.31 kg/cm2. For the present investigation, it was concluded that in the range of resistances studied and the theoretical elastic modulus values calculated by using the equations for concretes of normal weights raised by ACI 318 SUS14 in its section 19.2.2.1.b and by the E060 standard in its section 8.5.2, the values of the experimental elastic modulus are lower than those obtained experimentally in the range from 495 kg/cm2 to 530 kg/cm2. Meanwhile in the range from 530 kg/cm2 to 646 kg/cm2, it is higher than the value theoretically found by the expressions provided by both aforementioned regulations.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License