Laminated Ferrocement: Difference between revisions

From Open Source Ecology
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
LFC
LFC
'''
 
LFC Tests on panels''' - 6-13-2011 by Abe Connally, http:www.velacreations.com
 
'''LFC Tests on panels'''  
 
6-13-2011 by Abe Connally, [http://www.velacreations.com]
 


'''Panel 1''' - 1 layer 3/8" hardware cloth, 36.5" X 20.75" - 757 si, 5.26 sf
'''Panel 1''' - 1 layer 3/8" hardware cloth, 36.5" X 20.75" - 757 si, 5.26 sf
5/16" - 3/8" thick
* 5/16" - 3/8" thick
Cured for 3 days
* Cured for 3 days
17lbs, 3.23 lbs/sf
* 17lbs, 3.23 lbs/sf
 


'''Panel 2''' - 2 layers 3/8" hardware cloth, 36.5" X 20.375" - 744 si, 5.17 sf
'''Panel 2''' - 2 layers 3/8" hardware cloth, 36.5" X 20.375" - 744 si, 5.17 sf
3/8" - 7/16" thick
* 3/8" - 7/16" thick
Cured for 3 days
* Cured for 3 days
22lbs, 4.25 lbs/sf
* 22lbs, 4.25 lbs/sf
'''
 
Tests''' - panels were placed on bricks, spaced 14" apart.  Weight was placed in center of panel, between brick supports.
 
'''Tests''' - panels were placed on bricks, spaced 14" apart.  Weight was placed in center of panel, between brick supports.
 
* Test 1 - 1 gallon water @ 8lbs on 2.25 si, 3.55 psi
* Test 2 - 1 gallon water @ 8lbs on 1.5 si, 5.33 psi
* Test 3 - human @ 173 lbs on 46 si, 3.76 psi


Test 1 - 1 gallon water @ 8lbs on 2.25 si, 3.55 psi
Test 2 - 1 gallon water @ 8lbs on 1.5 si, 5.33 psi
Test 3 - human @ 173 lbs on 46 si, 3.76 psi


'''Results'''
'''Results'''
Test 1, panel 1  - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
* Test 1, panel 1  - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
Test 1, panel 2  - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
* Test 1, panel 2  - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
Test 2, panel 1  - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
* Test 2, panel 1  - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
Test 2, panel 2  - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
* Test 2, panel 2  - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
Test 3, panel 1  - troweled side down - visible sag but no cracks
* Test 3, panel 1  - troweled side down - visible sag but no cracks
Test 3, panel 2  - troweled side down - slight visible sag but no cracks
* Test 3, panel 2  - troweled side down - slight visible sag but no cracks
Test 3, panel 1  - troweled side up - extreme sag and panel snapped along brick support
* Test 3, panel 1  - troweled side up - extreme sag and panel snapped along brick support
Test 3, panel 2  - troweled side up - visible sag but no cracks
* Test 3, panel 2  - troweled side up - visible sag but no cracks


Troweled side has 1/8" less concrete on mesh
Troweled side has 1/8" less concrete on mesh


'''Conclusions'''  
'''Conclusions'''  
Both panels survived psi ratings for tank design (3.44 psi), however because troweled side has less concrete, it is a weaker side of panel in compression.  Suggest using formed side as inside of tank, so that the troweled side will be in greater tension (more mesh, less concrete).   
Both panels survived psi ratings for tank design (3.44 psi), however because troweled side has less concrete, it is a weaker side of panel in compression.  Suggest using formed side as inside of tank, so that the troweled side will be in greater tension (more mesh, less concrete).   
Panel 2 with 2 layers of mesh seem to be stronger in all tests.
Panel 2 with 2 layers of mesh seem to be stronger in all tests.


I think these would do just fine as roof tiles or panels, especially if shaped to take advantage of concrete's compression strength.  For a water tank, although they survived the psi required for an 8ft tall tank, I think more testing is required.
I think these would do just fine as roof tiles or panels, especially if shaped to take advantage of concrete's compression strength.  For a water tank, although they survived the psi required for an 8ft tall tank, I think more testing is required.


'''More Information'''
'''More Information'''

Latest revision as of 22:08, 13 June 2011

LFC


LFC Tests on panels

6-13-2011 by Abe Connally, [1]


Panel 1 - 1 layer 3/8" hardware cloth, 36.5" X 20.75" - 757 si, 5.26 sf

  • 5/16" - 3/8" thick
  • Cured for 3 days
  • 17lbs, 3.23 lbs/sf


Panel 2 - 2 layers 3/8" hardware cloth, 36.5" X 20.375" - 744 si, 5.17 sf

  • 3/8" - 7/16" thick
  • Cured for 3 days
  • 22lbs, 4.25 lbs/sf


Tests - panels were placed on bricks, spaced 14" apart. Weight was placed in center of panel, between brick supports.

  • Test 1 - 1 gallon water @ 8lbs on 2.25 si, 3.55 psi
  • Test 2 - 1 gallon water @ 8lbs on 1.5 si, 5.33 psi
  • Test 3 - human @ 173 lbs on 46 si, 3.76 psi


Results

  • Test 1, panel 1 - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
  • Test 1, panel 2 - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
  • Test 2, panel 1 - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
  • Test 2, panel 2 - troweled side up - no visible sag or cracks
  • Test 3, panel 1 - troweled side down - visible sag but no cracks
  • Test 3, panel 2 - troweled side down - slight visible sag but no cracks
  • Test 3, panel 1 - troweled side up - extreme sag and panel snapped along brick support
  • Test 3, panel 2 - troweled side up - visible sag but no cracks

Troweled side has 1/8" less concrete on mesh


Conclusions

Both panels survived psi ratings for tank design (3.44 psi), however because troweled side has less concrete, it is a weaker side of panel in compression. Suggest using formed side as inside of tank, so that the troweled side will be in greater tension (more mesh, less concrete). Panel 2 with 2 layers of mesh seem to be stronger in all tests.

I think these would do just fine as roof tiles or panels, especially if shaped to take advantage of concrete's compression strength. For a water tank, although they survived the psi required for an 8ft tall tank, I think more testing is required.


More Information