Properties of Brick and Block Materials - Lab Report Example

Running Head: Properties of Brick and Block Materials Water Absorption by Capillary Action/ Suction Student’s Name: Course Code: Lecture’s Name: Date of presentation: Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Objective 3 1.Abstract 3 2.Introduction 3 3.Hypothesis 4 4.Experiment A: Water Absorption by Capillary Action/ Suction 5 Methods and Materials 5 Procedure A 5 Experiment B: Comparative Water Absorption of Brick and Block Materials 6 Procedure B 6 5.Results 7 Table 1: Sample Measurements 7 Table 2: Water Absorption by Capillarity 7 Table 3: Water absorption of Brick and Block 10 6.Discussion 11 Table 4: Calculated Data 12 7.Conclusion 12 8.Appendix 13 The graph of Cumulative mass absorbed by the Thermalite Block Vs square root Time 13 The graph of Cumulative mass absorbed by the Engineering Block Vs square root Time 13 The graph of Cumulative mass absorbed by the Facing Block Vs square root Time 14 Objective The water absorption test allows you to determine the total volume of the pores present in the masonry sample (the porosity). 1. Abstract The suction or capillary action refers to the upward rising of water within the wall or via the permeable construction materials through absorption. The experiment is aimed at determining the capillary action of the provided dry masonry building materials; engineering block, Thermalite block and facing block. This will involve measuring the weight of a specific unit of the blocks and then determining the mass of moisture absorbed. It also seeks to determine the correlation between porosity value and water absorption coefficient. 2. Introduction Water infiltrates through the walls of structures during wet seasons, however, there are some serious cases especially old walls which may lead to crumbling or frosted masonry surfaces. The suction or capillary action refers to the upward rising of water within the wall or via the permeable construction materials through absorption. This water dissolves the soluble minerals and salts present within the building materials such as phosphates and sulphate complexes. These salts may as well be from the water source. The above described process is directly related to the size of pores and number of pores in the building material. The relationship is such that; the larger the pores in both size and number in the building material, the higher the amount of water sucked up. However, higher suctional pressures are realized in materials with finer pores. The water absorption experiments are usually performed to show porosity i.e. the total volume of pores present in a unit area of material. The resultant value is useful as parameters such as durability and ability of a material to resist frost can be computed from it. The first section of this experiment seeks to quantify the capillary action of the provided dry masonry building materials; engineering block, Thermalite block and facing block. This will involve measuring the weight of a specific unit of the blocks and then determining the mass of moisture absorbed. The second experiment seeks to determine the correlation between porosity value and coefficient of water absorption. 3. Hypothesis Experiment A seeks to determine the capillary action of the given materials by determining the water absorption coefficient. Experiment B seeks to determine the correlation between porosity value and water absorption coefficient. The hypotheses are: H0: There is no correlation between porosity value and water absorption coefficient H1: There is a correlation between porosity value and water absorption coefficient 4. Experiment A: Water Absorption by Capillary Action/ Suction Methods and Materials 3 specimens blocks of different building materials i.e. Thermalite block, engineering brick, and facing block A weighing scale Measuring ruler Flat dish Water Water dish supports Stop Clock Procedure A The different blocks were selected and their masses were measured and recorded. By use of a measuring ruler, the length, width and height were measured and recorded. Two supports were erected in the water dish. Sufficient amount of water was poured until it covered the supports to a depth of 5mm. The Thermalite bock specimen was placed and the stop clock was switched on at the same time. The block was left in position for 1 minute. The Thermalite bock was then remove from the water bath, wiped a damp cloth and its mass was weighed and recorded. NOTE: The timer was not stopped. With the damp face first, the Thermalite block was re-immersed in the water bath and the above process was repeated every minute for 10 minutes while adjusting the water level in the basin. The same process was repeated with the pother specimens i.e. engineering brick and facing block. Experiment B: Comparative Water Absorption of Brick and Block Materials Procedure B The same samples of Thermalite, Engineering brick and Facing block used in experiment A were used. This means that the physical dimensions used were as those recorded in the earlier tests. The samples were then saturated by use of a saturation apparatus and then placed in a vacuum chamber. The chamber was evacuated for 10 minutes, and then flooded with water. This saturated the specimens. They were removed from the chamber after soaking for 10 minutes. After removing, the samples were wiped off any excess water and their saturated weights measured and recorded. 5. Results Table 1: Sample Measurements Table 2: Water Absorption by Capillarity Specimen : Thermalite Block mass dry (g)=642.4 Area sq.cm= 189.15 Tme (Minutes) Mass when weighed after every minute (g) Cumulative mass of water absorbed (g) Mass of water absorbed per water (g) Time (min0.5) 1 655.61 13.21 13.21 1 2 660.25 17.85 4.64 1.41 3 663.7 21.3 3.45 1.73 4 666.26 23.86 2.56 2 5 668.53 26.13 2.27 2.24 6 670.81 28.41 2.28 2.45 7 671.92 29.52 1.11 2.65 8 673.39 30.99 1.47 2.83 9 675.19 32.79 1.8 3 10 676.53 34.13 1.34 316 Specimen : Facing Block mass dry (g)=3228.72 Area sq.cm= 215 Time (Minutes) Mass when weighed after every minute (g) Cumulative mass of water absorbed (g) Mass of water absorbed per water (g) Time (min0.5) 1 3229.27 0.55 0.55 1 2 3229.42 0.7 0.15 1.41 3 3229.67 0.95 0.25 1.73 4 3229.61 0.89 -0.06 2 5 3229.74 1.02 0.13 2.24 6 3229.94 1.21 0.19 2.45 7 3230.03 1.31 0.1 2.65 8 3229.88 1.16 -0.15 2.83 9 3229.73 1.01 -0.15 3 10 3229.99 1.27 0.26 316 Specimen : Facing Block mass dry (g)=1983.61 Area sq.cm= 217.26 Time (Minutes) Mass when weighed after every minute (g) Cumulative mass of water absorbed (g) Mass of water absorbed per water (g) Time (min0.5) 1 1990.6 6.99 3.29 1  2 1993.89 10.28 2.81 1.41 3 1996.7 13.09 2.65 1.73 4 1999.35 15.74 2.2 2 5 2001.55 17.94 2.18 2.24 6 2003.73 20.12 2 2.45 7 2005.73 22.12 2.06 2.65 8 2007.79 24.18 2.12 2.83 9 2009.91 26.3 2.06 3 10 2011.97 28.36 -28.36 316 Table 3: Water absorption of Brick and Block The initial rate of absorption (suction rate) (g cm-2 min-1): 6. Discussion Water absorption coefficient (g cm-2 min-0.5) Where, M = mass of water absorbed (g) a = area (cm2) t = time (min) A is a constant characteristic of the material known as the water absorption coefficient (g cm-2 min-0.5) Rearranging to ma A the subject of the formula; We get; Table 4: Calculated Data Water absorption coefficient A (g cm-2 min-0.5) was computed and recorded as shown in the table below 7. Conclusion From the data collected from experiment A, we can conclude that compared to the other specimens, engineering block suffers lesser porosity as can be proved from the gradient of the respective graph as shown in the appendix. This shows that the Engineering Block is dense and compact with lower porosity i.e. Lower ratio of micro-voids (pores) per a unit volume. The same material could be having a lower permeability i.e. the extent to which micro-voids and pores are interconnected with the crystal structure of the material. This leads to the constraining of water passage through. From Table 3 and Table 4 we can deduce that the higher the porosity value the higher the water absorption coefficient A. Hence there is a relationship. 8. Appendix The graph of Cumulative mass absorbed by the Thermalite Block Vs square root Time The graph of Cumulative mass absorbed by the Engineering Block Vs square root Time The graph of Cumulative mass absorbed by the Facing Block Vs square root Time Read More