Sie sind auf Seite 1von 8

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.1 Introduction 2

1.2 Methodology 3

1.3 Result And Analysis 4

1.4 Discussion 5

1.5 Recommendations 6

1.6 Conclusion 6

1.7 References 7

1.8 Appendices 8

1|Page
Los Angeles Abrasion Test (ASTM C131)
Introduction
The Los Angeles test is a measure of degradation of mineral aggregates of standard grading
resulting from a combination of action including abrasion a grinding resulting in a rotating steel
drum containing a specified number of steel spheres. The number steel charges depend upon the
amount and grading of the test sample. As the drum rotated, self-plate picks up the sample and
steel sphere, carrying them until they are dropped to the opposite of the drum creating and impact-
crushing effect the content then roll with drum with abrading and gridding action until the self-
plate impact and the cycle is repeated. After prescribe number of revolution the content is remove
from the drum and the aggregate portion is sieved to measure the degradation as percent loss.

AASHTO T 96 or ASTM C 131: Resistance to Degradation of Small-Size Coarse


Aggregate by Abrasion and Impact in the Los Angeles Machine.

Objective
To ascertain the degradation of aggregates by abrasion and impact.

Apparatus
1. Loss Angeles abrasion machine

2. Tray

3. Sieve (25mm, 20mm, 14mm, 10mm, 1.7mm, and pan


4. Sieve shaker

5. Balance (accurate to 0.01)

6. Fine Haired brushed

2|Page
Figure 1.1: Sieves (19mm, 12.5mm, 9.5mm, 1.7mm and Pan)

Figure 1.2: Electronic Balance (accurate to 0.01g)

Methodology
a. Sample are weight up to 2500g for every size; 14 10 mm and 20 14mm
b. Samples are placed in Los Angeles Abrasion Machine.
c. Eleven steel balls are added in the machine.
d. The drum is rotated for about 500 revolutions at 30 33 rpm.
e. Sample is removed from the drum and sieved on no. 12 sieve after being rotated.
f. The retained sample on the sieved is washed and dried at the temperature of 105
to 110C.After the sample cool down, weight of the samples is taken.

3|Page
Result and Analysis

Aggregate Size Weight Of Sample Weight Of Sample Loss


Before (Kg) After (Kg)
(Mm) (Kg)
20-14 2.5 1.13667 1.3633
5.000
14-10 2.5 0 0.6477 1.85223

Percent Wear (Average) 3.21553 5.0 100 64.310 %


Percent Wear 1 1.3633 2.5100 54.532%
Percent Wear 2 1.85223 2.5100 74.089%

Calculation

Weight loss = (Weight of sample before abrasion) (Weight of sample after abrasion)
= 5.0000 1.78437
= 3.21553kg

Weight loss
Percent wear = Initial weight x 100

3.215
= 5.0000 x 100

= 64.310%

4|Page
Discussion

During the experiment, many factors can influence the data obtained. The factors are outlined
below:

a) Different data will be collected when the weighting process because of wind resistance.
The sample data may be higher or lower than the reading data because of the reading
error.

b) Drum must be clean before using because it may have affected the weight of the sample.
Its because dust from previous project will affect the reading of the scale.

c) The condition of the machine may also affect the sample weight. Because of that the
small aggregates will escaped from the machine. Sample may escape from the open
window.

d) Only 10 steel balls are being used may cause different data from the actual experiment.
Steel balls are used to abrasion and impact the aggregate when the drum is rotating.
Aggregate will break to smaller size that will represent the percentage of the total mass of
aggregate. The data may be slightly different than that we had obtained.

Even though this experiment has a problem as stated above, the value of aggregate physical
property requirement still not exceeded as what the JKR had stated in the Table 1.1 ( JKR manual).

5|Page
Recommendations

All the problems stated above can be solved if these precautions have been taken. These all are
listed below:

e) Laboratory must be closed area especially at the measuring area to avoid the wind
resistance affected the weight data or closed box of measuring machine.

f) After doing the experiment, all the apparatus must be clean and keep at the clean place to
avoid any dust entering the apparatus.

g) Machine must do the maintenance regularly. All the damages must be repaired before
being used by student. Its also can avoid accident in laboratory.

h) The accurate amount of steel balls will make the collected data more efficient. The
sample will break into what we supposed to get.

Conclusions

From the experiment, we get the value is 64% More than the requirement of JKRs; 30%.
Aggregate physical property is lower Los Angeles abrasion is tougher and more resistance to
abrasion. We can conclude that the aggregate been used are less resistant to abrasion. Its because
the value more than half than JKRs requirement. Lower Los Angeles abrasion loss values indicate
aggregate that is tougher and more resistant to abrasion.

6|Page
Reference

g. Celeste Hoffman. Los Angeles Abrasion. 2007 December 15; 1(1): [11 screen].
Available from: URL:
http://pavementinteractive.org/index.php?title=Los_Angeles_Abrasion

h. University of New Mexico, Civil Engineering Department, Civil Engineering


Materials Laboratory, CE 305L. Resistance to Degradation Of Small-Size Coarse
Aggregate By Abrasion And Impact In The Los Angeles Machine [Astm C131].
1(1): [3 screen]. Available from: URL:
http://civilx.unm.edu/laboratories_ss/pcc/laabrasion.html

i. Ahmed Essam Mansour. Los Angeles Abrasion Test. ; 1(1): [3 screen]. Available
from: URL: http://www.ahm531.com/lab-reports/concrete-
lab/reports/1/LA%20Abrasion%20test.pdf

j. Muniandy R., Radin Umar Radin Sohadi. Highway Materials, A Guide Book For
Beginners. University Putra Malaysia: Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia; 2010.

k. Paul H.W., Karen K.D. Highway Engineering [Seventh Edition]. USA: John
Wiley & Son; 2003.

7|Page
Appendices

Figure 1.2: Aggregates Before Sieve

Figure 1.4: Aggregates after sieved

Figure 1.5: Los Angeles Abrasion machine

8|Page