Executive Summary... i Hull Design... 1 Analysis... 2 Development & Testing... 3 Project Management & Construction... 5 Organization Chart...

Transcription

1

2 Executive Summary i Hull Design Analysis Development & Testing Project Management & Construction Organization Chart Table 1 Bearied Treasure Basic Specifications TABLE OF CONTENTS Design Drawings and Bill of Materials Formwork Hull Appendix A References A:1-2 Appendix B Mix Proportions.... B:1 Appendix C Gradation Curves Project Schedule and Tables C:1-3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Founded in 1868, the University of California, Berkeley campus is located in the middle of the San Francisco Bay region. Of the 33,000 students enrolled at this flagship school of the UC system, the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department prepares close to 250 undergraduates for leadership in the professional activities of civil engineering. Berkeley graduates go on to become some of the most influential innovators in education and industry alike. Correspondingly, the Concrete Canoe Team strives to uphold UC Berkeley s tradition of excellence. The Mid-Pacific Region represents the ASCE student chapters as far north as Humboldt, CA and as far south as Fresno, CA. This region, consisting of twelve collegiate chapters, represents the diverse academic awareness that instills in students the values for practical engineering applications. Canoe Name: Bearied Treasure Dimensions & Specifications: Weight: 265 lb (120 kg) Color: Black with Gold & White Graphics Max Length: ft (6.7 m) Max Width: in (77.0 cm) Max Depth: 13.5 in (34.3 cm) Shell Thickness: ⅜ in (0.95 cm) Unit Weight: 73 pcf ( kg/m 3 ) 28-day Comp. Strength: 2950 psi (20.4 MPa) Reinforcement: ARG Scrim Tensile Strength: 350 ksi (2.4 GPa) Concrete 28-day Tensile Strength: 290 psi (2.0 MPa) Elastic Modulus: 1390 ksi (9.7 GPa) Since the early 1970 s, UC Berkeley has been one of the forerunners of the concrete canoe competition. Engineering competition teams such as concrete canoe have helped generations of Berkeley students achieve the practical skills that will help propel them into implementing real world solutions. In the face of the adversity of receding resources, this year s canoe team has utilized this project as a vehicle for expanding each member s appreciation for the aspects and complexities of working on an engineering team. On a quest for Bearied Treasure, this year s concrete canoe team has spent the last seven months working on technical design, materials research, and construction. To unearth secrets of success, the team had to dig deep and discover the engineering solutions buried within the challenges. The Hull Design and Analysis Team developed a rigorous, systematic cost-benefit assessment of revitalizing last year s hull design, and captured the benefits that resulted in optimal structural and paddling performance. The depth of this year s analysis surpassed that of previous Berkeley teams. The Concrete Team aggressively pursued their goals for the development for a crack resistant and aesthetically pleasing building material. Realizing the additional demands of working at an off-campus site, the Construction Team found more efficient and effective uses of valuable time resources.

3 Goals: Figure 1 Torque due to paddlers Use ComiCal s hull design as a base to optimize maneuverability, stability, tracking, speed, and weight. For the 2005 Bearied Treasure hull design, the team used Prolines, a robust hydrodynamic modeling software, to examine modifications to the 2004 ComiCal hull design. That design was set as the base due to its success in the 2004 races in Reno, Nevada. Furthermore, ComiCal is faster than the 2003 third-place national champion, Bearkelium. Most modifications to hull design variables (i.e. length) carry both benefits and costs to performance. The Hull Design Team balanced these variables for maximum net gain, and then found additional gain from a costless benefit. d d HULL DESIGN The first trait optimized was tracking. To maintain a straight path with low tracking, the rear paddler spends much of her time performing turning stokes, thus reducing speed. The problem is that paddlers repeatedly exert a net torque on the canoe. One solution is to reduce the current 6.1 in. rise in the canoe s bottom profile from its center to its ends, thereby reducing its rocker (See Design Drawings). While this improves tracking by increasing the resistance to torque from the water, it is detrimental to the canoe s maneuverability, defined here as the ability to turn (CanoeRoots, 2003). A better option is ComiCal s symmetry about the transverse centerline, the canoe s mid-ship. In contrast, asymmetrical designs put the center of gravity closer to the stern, requiring the rear paddler to steer more. Thus the symmetrical design was retained, where paddlers exert equal forces and, correspondingly, equal and opposite torque, requiring fewer turning strokes (Figure 1). In an attempt to improve tracking even further, increasing length was modeled, but maneuverability, constructability, transportation, and weight became critical concerns. As such, the designers limited the length to 22 feet. ComiCal has a relatively flat-bottom hull; this is disadvantageous for speed since increasing the wetted surface area increases frictional drag. This resistance is most significant when the canoe is moving slowly: when races begin and while negotiating buoys (Lazauskas & Tuck, 1996). However, the critical factor in this part of the design is stability. In design software, initial stability is measured by a canoe s reaction, or inherent Righting Arm, to each increment of rotation about the canoe s longitudinal axis. This is the distance between the center of gravity of the canoe and the center of the reacting buoyancy force (Papoulias, 2002). Since paddlers routinely fell out of Bearrier Reef (2001) during turns, Bearied Treasure s initial stability ought to be greater. Since all attempts at rounding the bottom of the canoe and decreasing its maximum beam, or width, resulted in dangerously low stability (Figure 2), the cross-section and maximum beam of 29.3 in. were not modified for Bearied Treasure. Righting Arm (feet) Bearkelium ComiCal Bearrier Reef Heeling Angle Figure 2 - Stability Plots Another consideration is ultimate stability, which is the maximum angle the canoe can rotate about its longitudinal axis without water entering (Papoulias, 2002). This is influenced mostly by freeboard, the height of the canoe above the water. It is advantageous to decrease freeboard because it directly influences the weight of the canoe. At the 2004 Mid-Pac, ComiCal s freeboard was just enough to prevent taking on water. Therefore, its ultimate stability was set as the minimum standard for Bearied Treasure with a minimum freeboard of 7.0 in. and maximum depth of 13.5 in. This design team found that all changes to the hull design under consideration were too detrimental to other aspects of the design. Therefore, through empirical evidence, theory, and models, this year s design team decided to use ComiCal s hull design. The design team is confident that Bearied Treasure will give the paddlers the best chance at national success.

4 Goals: ANALYSIS Find the critical stresses and moments, and their locations under all anticipated loads. Evaluate the effectiveness of including frame elements in the structure. The first steps were to check the moment demand of the canoe using a 2D beam model and check its capacity with XTRACT, a cross-section analysis tool. The second step was to check for shell stress and frame loading demands using SAP 2000, a finite element analysis (FEA) software. These were checked with hand calculations. Finally, capacities of frame elements were found using XTRACT. In the initial XTRACT models, preliminary composite values obtained from the Concrete Engineer were implemented. The concrete had an elastic modulus of 1450 ksi and ultimate compressive strength of 2.8 ksi. The reinforcement consisted of circular strands with area of sq. in., an elastic modulus of ksi and ultimate tensile strength of 270 ksi. The canoe was first modeled by hand as a beam with a 200 lb. distributed self-weight in many scenarios. The two critical cases were (1) constant hydrostatic pressure and four paddlers, with a maximum positive moment demand of 6.6 kip-in.; (2) linear triangular hydrostatic pressure distribution and two paddlers, with a maximum negative moment demand of 7.1 kip-in. XTRACT revealed the moment capacity of the canoe at its yield point to be ± 65 kip-in., far exceeding demand in all scenarios. SAP models were created to determine demands on shell and frame elements. Using a mesh of 1792 shell elements, loading scenarios were paddling, transportation (via the trailer and via people), on stands, and submersion. Paddler loads were modeled as uniform and non-uniform. The controlling loading case was identified as four paddlers exerting 60% of their 180 lb. loads on their feet. The paddler-loading configuration that yielded the highest demands consisted of four-point loads (knees & shins) and uniform shell loads (feet). After recursively determining the conditions for equilibrium of the model without restraint (floating), the hydrostatic pressure was confirmed. Using the SAP design loading case, three critical tensile stress locations were identified in the shell: the area beneath the paddlers, the area of high curvature between the sides and bottom, and the top at the mid-ship. Without a frame, the shell distributes its longitudinal tensile stresses to the aforementioned critical locations; tensile stresses at the top edge reach 1000 psi. To disrupt this distribution pattern, a frame system was researched (Kassegne & Reddy, 1997). After much iteration, the best configuration consisted of three ribs and a gunwale. A gunwale is a frame element that circumscribes the top of the shell. Its design was based on an FEA model assumption that it is attached to the shell at its nodes, creating continuous moment releases (Kassegne & Reddy, 1997). In SAP, the gunwale s only demand is 84 lb. in axial tension. It has an adequate axial tension capacity of 270 lb., according to XTRACT. Ribs are transverse frame elements. As modeled, ribs are attached to the shell at their nodes. The optimal number of ribs is three: one at the mid-ship and two 61 in. aft and bow of the mid-ship. According to SAP, the maximum demands on the ribs are a positive moment of 230 lb-in. and 50 lb. of axial tension. According to XTRACT, their capacities are 330 lb-in of positive moment and 700 lb. of axial tension. SAP revealed that decreasing the shell thickness by ⅛ in. doubles the tensile demand, validating ⅜ in. as the minimum thickness. With a frame and ⅜ in. thick shell, the composite in SAP yields maximum tensile stress demand of 400 psi and maximum compressive stress demand of 340 psi. These demand stresses were checked using hand calculations at critical locations; these values were comparable to values found in SAP. Thus, the SAP analysis results were confirmed (Govindjee, 2005).

5 Goals: DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING Design a buoyant concrete mix. Attain a composite tensile strength meeting predicted tensile demand. Improve fracture toughness to minimize cracking. CONCRETE With these goals laid out, an aggressive program was prepared that included researching materials, determining a baseline mix, testing mix designs, and selecting a final mix. The addition of the ASTM C33 gradation requirements on the composite aggregate necessitated the research of various types of aggregates. K1 and K25 3M glass bubbles, perlite, vermiculite, 3M Microspheres, and Macrolite Ceramic Spheres were all considered. K1 glass bubbles were chosen for their very low specific gravity (0.13), along with various sizes of Macrolite that could be combined to fit the gradation. All other aggregates were rejected on the basis that they were not compatible with the gradation requirements and caused an unnecessary strength reduction. To meet the goal of improving toughness, materials that would help reduce the amount and severity of the cracks in the canoe, were researched. Grace Microfibers were chosen for their capabilities to reduce the formation of shrinkage cracks and to resist crack propagation. Materials that would increase the overall strength as well as specifically raising the tensile strength were also studied. Silica fume was selected for its abilities to increase cohesion and lower transition zone effects since its pozzolonic reaction raises overall strength (Mehta & Monteiro, 1993). Silica fume is also known to improve fiber performance by densifying its surrounding cement matrix, thereby increasing the available friction force. This was supported by results from Hydra2D, a computational microstructure analysis software (Figure 3). Latex appeared as a binder in the mix in order to raise tensile strength and lower density with its low specific gravity of 1.04 (Blaga & Beaudoin, 1985). Class F pozzolanic fly ash and cement were minimized to 15% and 70% respectively to maximize silica fume and latex content. A high range water reducer, Adva 100, was selected so that both an allowable level of workability and a proper dispersion of materials in the cement matrix could be obtained. With the material candidates chosen, a scheme was laid out for testing important parameters such as binder-aggregate ratio, silica fume-latex ratio, and gradation of aggregate. Strength, density, and workability were the three controlling factors of the mix refinement. The baseline mix demonstrated adequate strength, poor workability, and reasonable density. Strength was not an issue because every mix exceeded predicted analysis demand. The density of 66 pcf was greater than desired, but was deemed less critical than workability. To test for workability, trial mix samples were placed onto a Attribute Baseline Final mix 28-Day Strength 1600 psi (11 MPa) 2900 psi (20 MPa) Density 66 pcf 74 pcf (1100 kg/m 3 ) (1200 kg/m 3 ) Workability Poor Fair Table 2 Mix evolution No Silica Fume Silica Fume Figure 3 Simulation of densification around fiber by addition of silica fume mock form and many mixes were rejected based on their poor texture, lack of plasticity, or lack of cohesion. Addressing poor cohesion solved the workability issue. Latex was dropped from the mixes, as it did not provide the cohesion needed and caused bleeding. Various fiber amounts were used to

6 determine the maximum volume fraction allowed for workability. Also, an assortment of pigments in a variety of concentrations were tried to achieve the desired shade. Pigment improved cohesion in the mix, which made the concrete easier to place. Linear optimization for density of the aggregate amounts resulted in poor aggregate packing, which increased binder-aggregate demand. This made the mix too lean and unworkable (Mehta & Monteiro, 1993). A revised gradation and increased binder-aggregate ratio improved consistency and cohesiveness. Over the course of the year, 30 mixes were prepared and the compressive strength of each was obtained using 2 in. x 4 in. cylinders tested in accordance with ASTM C-39 at 7, 14, 21, and 28 days. The most promising mix was then chosen and further tests were performed. One was the ASTM C496 Splitting Tensile Strength Test, which revealed a tensile strength of 290 psi (2.0 MPa), and another was ASTM C469 Elastic Modulus Analysis indicating 1390 ksi (9.7 GPa). These results helped to refine the composite analysis. In the end, the density goal could not be accomplished because the aggregate gradation requirement prevented the further addition of glass bubbles. The lightweight glass bubbles are much finer than Macrolite, and would have improved aggregate packing by filling space currently occupied by dense cement paste. A scanning electron microscopy investigation confirmed the poor aggregate packing (Figure 4). The final mix selection was then based on workability, resistance to bleeding, and potential for crack resistance. The mix (Cannonball) had a unit weight of 74 pcf (1186 kg/m 3 ) and a compressive strength of 2900 psi (20 MPa). Figure 4 Cannonball SEM, 300x REINFORCEMENT/COMPOSITE The primary of goal of the reinforcement selection mirrored the concrete process as both sought to increase the resistance to cracking. Thus a material that would increase the tensile strength of the composite was needed. To avoid the dangers of shell delamination, the safest option is to select a material that has been tested and found to be dependable in previous years. The materials considered were carbon fiber strands and mesh, steel braided wire, and ARG (alkali resistant glass) scrim reinforcement with mesh spacing of 0.2 in and 0.4 in. The ARG scrim with smaller spacing is the clear choice because the concrete is mechanically bonded by more reinforcement; there is more surface area on which the concrete can bond. The smaller spaced ARG scrim exhibited greater adhesion to fresh concrete, thus created a better construction product preventing delamination. The smaller spaced mesh reinforcement also better impedes crack propagation. The composite with this reinforcement also experiences less strain per unit load. This ultimately reduces concrete cracking. Composite strengths were tested using model structural elements. A flat 1 ft. x 2 ft. shell element was tested according to ASTM C293, center-point flexural loading test (Figure 5). The modulus of rupture at 1600 psi showed a stronger flexure strength compared to last year s 1000 psi, performed on a test plate composed of last year s composite. Separately cast ribs were also tested using a third-point flexural loading test, according to ASTM C78. Their positive moment capacity at the yield point is 450 lb-in. This is greater than the expected capacity found using XTRACT, and is double the moment demand on the ribs. The result of pursuing goals through research and development was a concrete composite with capacities that exceed all predicted demands. Figure 5 Center-point flexural loading

7 Goals: PROJECT MANAGEMENT Efficient resource allocation, knowledge transfer, and communication. A functional orientation was this year s organization model. The organizational breakdown structure (OBS) was an organized hierarchy with specialized, functional units (Shtub, 1994). These units fostered a team orientation in which the technical personnel performed work tasks most effectively and efficiently. The functional units encourage continuity of knowledge that promotes better technical transfer between successive project teams. Table 3 Milestone Activities An engineer led each functional unit: Hull Design and Analysis, Concrete, Construction, and Paddling. The engineers organized and performed the tasks within their specialized scope of work. They reported progress to and convened with each other and the Project Manager on a weekly basis. Additionally, the engineers addressed horizontal communications and collaboration weaknesses (both inherent to a functional organization) by initiating cross channel unit visits through and special meetings. Each major milestone marked a significant transitional event for the project. The project s critical path was determined by selecting the activities that had no float: hull design and construction (Shtub 1994). The logistical problems that consumed much of the slack were associated with the need to work at two different locations: campus and the team s facility, 7 miles away. Resources had to be allocated accordingly. Work hours were compiled for each activity: 290 for Hull Design & Analysis; 320 for Concrete Mix Design; 480 for Construction; and 160 for commuting. Goals: Milestones Variance Reasons for Variance Hull designed + 2 weeks Software acquisition Form Delay in milling availability; + 4 weeks constructed Final materials selection Activity delayed by form Canoe cast + 2 weeks construction Curing Consumed float to stay on None completed schedule Canoe Finish None Projected for competition CONSTRUCTION Reduce formwork time, save money, and improve quality. The pre-existing use of a male fiberglass form, cast from a female foam form, was time and manpower intensive. In the interest of time and money, the fiberglass phase was eliminated by casting directly on a male foam form with surface treatment. Treatments considered were liquid latex, paraffin wax, joint compound, greases, and epoxy. Joint compound was chosen for its availability and ease of placement. Epoxy was selected for its strength and gloss finish. A computer numerically controlled milling machine carved the male foam form Figure 6 Form from three monolithic blocks. Ribs were added to specifications using a hot-wire cutter. A first layer of epoxy with aggregate was applied to give the form structural integrity, followed by joint compound for smoothing, and a final layer of epoxy for a gloss finish (Figure 6). Concrete was placed by hand using trowels and rollers. Construction began with rib placement, and then moved to the shell concrete. Layer thickness was controlled by spaced ⅛ in. thick speaker wire, while a construction engineer monitored for consistency and quality. Reinforcement for structural elements was installed according to design drawings. Placement of shell reinforcement occurred as soon as possible and was closely followed by the front of the next layer of concrete. This was repeated for a total of 3 layers of concrete and two layers of reinforcement. After three weeks of concrete curing, the foam form was easily removed in sections with the use of a hot wire cutter. After sanding to the desired finish, the canoe was waterproofed with two layers of sealant, per the 2005 Rules, and decorated with whimsical pirate graphics.

8

9 ID Task Name Duration ugust September October November December January February March April May June July 8/15 8/22 8/29 9/5 9/12 9/19 9/26 10/3 10/10 10/17 10/24 10/31 11/7 11/14 11/21 11/28 12/5 12/12 12/19 12/26 1/2 1/9 1/16 1/23 1/30 2/6 2/13 2/20 2/27 3/6 3/13 3/20 3/27 4/3 4/10 4/17 4/24 5/1 5/8 5/15 5/22 5/29 6/5 6/12 6/19 6/26 7/3 7/10 7/17 1 Project Milestones 261 days 2 Project Start 0 days 8/30 3 Rules published 0 days 9/10 4 Hull Design 0 days 10/30 5 Concrete Mix Design 0 days 2/5 6 Form Work 0 days 2/11 7 Casting Day 0 days 8 Curing Complete 0 days 9 Regional Competition 0 days 2/12 3/5 4/12 10 National Competition 0 days 6/25 11 Functional Activities 261 days 12 Hull Design & Analysis 131 days 13 Goals and Learning 20 days 14 Prolines Modeling 28 days 15 Form Modeling 7 days 16 Structural Modeling 83 days 17 Structural Analysis/Calculations 48 days 18 Concrete Research 125 days 19 Develop Material Selection 14 days 20 Trial Batches & Test Samples 104 days 21 Reinforced Composite 7 days 22 Final Mix Modifications 7 days 23 Construction 192 days 24 Materials & Process Research 62 days 25 Patch Fiberglass Practice Canoes 7 days 26 Milling 35 days 27 Form/Mold Prep 47 days 28 Casting Day 1 day 29 Curing 21 days 30 Sanding & Finishing 26 days 31 Decals & Lettering 7 days 32 Design Paper 110 days 33 Outlines 14 days 34 Drafts 17 days 35 Reviews & Regionals Submission 7 days 36 Reviews & Nationals Submission 35 days 37 Presentation 151 days 38 Concept & Designs 7 days 39 Props and Slide Generation 7 days 40 Rehearsals 16 days 41 Alumni Review 6 days 42 Improvements and Rehearsals 34 days 43 Fundraising 256 days 44 Pursuing School Grants 90 days 45 Compiling Donor Lists 124 days 46 Sending & Receiving Letters 193 days 47 Donor Updates 146 days 48 Paddling / Recruiting 256 days 49 Recruiting 34 days 50 Training & Workouts 42 days 51 Race Course Training 178 days 2005 California Concrete Canoe Bearied Treasure Task Critical Task Milestone Summary

10 NOTES: FORM & CONSTRUCTION D C 1. MILL MALE FOAM FORM USING CNC DRILLING MACHINE. 2. APPLY 2 LAYERS OF EPOXY WITH AN INTERMEDIATE LAYER OF JOINT COMPOUND FOR A SMOOTH FINISH. 3. FOR THICKNESS CONTROL, USE SPACED 1/8" GAGE SPEAKER WIRE AND ROLLING PINS. 4. DRAWINGS NOT TO SCALE. 5. TOLERANCE: +/- 1/4". A VIEW A ELEVATION SEE SHEET 2 FOR DIMENSIONS E F 24'-3" 1 B VIEW B ISOMETRIC ITEM NO. 1 DESCRIPTION EPS Type I - Medium Density Foam 2 Epoxy 3 Joint Compound D C B C E VIEW C PLAN SEE SHEET 2 FOR DIMENSIONS F 267" DETAIL D 48" 49" D DETAIL D SURFACE TREATMENT SEE NOTE 2 ABOVE FOR PROCEDURE ENGINEER: DANNY YOST, JR DRAWN BY: DANNY YOST, JR. DATE: 5/10/2005 CHECKED BY: HARRY TAM DATE: 5/10/2005 B 3 5/8" A 7 1/2" TITLE: A E SECTION E-E SEE SHEET 2 FOR DIMENSIONS F Report Page NO. ASCE NATIONAL CONCRETE CANOE COMPETITION SECTION F-F (MAXIMUM WIDTH AND CONTAINS A RIB) SEE SHEET 2 FOR DIMENSIONS SHEET 1 OF

11 D C B 7 1/2" 6 1/8" 2" D CANOE DESIGN DETAIL D G A C G 35 1/2" 35 1/2" VIEW A PLAN 22'-0" 9 5/8" 19" 27 1/4" 61" 11 3/4" 13 1/8" 13 1/2" 13 3/8" 13 1/8" 11 3/4" VIEW C ELEVATION 31" DETAIL D FLOTATION 9 5/8" 4 2 DETAIL F 1 H H E 1 1/2" 27 1/4" 3" 1/8" 24 3/8" 19" 9 5/8" 35 1/2" 25 1/2" 35 1/2" 35 1/2" SECTION E-E TYPICAL GUNWALE & SHELL I I 3 1/8" 2" 3@ 1/8" 6 1/8" ROCKER 7 1/2" 1 1/4" 1 1/4" F B 1" 1" VIEW B ISOMETRIC 2 1 1/4" 1/8" typ. cover DETAIL F GUNWALE & RIB CONNECTION 24 3/8" 3 1 1/2" 2" ITEM NO DESCRIPTION Cannonball - Concrete 5mm x 5mm Alkali-Resistant Glass Scrim 10mm x 10mm Alkali-Resistant Glass Scrim EPS Type I - Medium Density Foam Flotation (Stained Yellow) NOTES: 1. Drawings not to scale 2. Tolerance: +/- 1/8" except Section E-E with tolerance: +/- 1/16" ENGINEER: DANNY YOST, JR DRAWN BY: DANNY YOST, JR. DATE: 5/10/2005 CHECKED BY: HARRY TAM DATE: 5/10/2005 D C B 9 3/8" 9 1/2" 10 1/4" A 10 5/8" E 10 1/4" TITLE: A 3 7/8" SECTION G-G G SECTION H-H E H (WIDEST SECTION & CONTAINS A RIB) I SECTION I-I Report Page NO. ASCE NATIONAL CONCRETE CANOE COMPETITION SHEET 2 OF

12 APPENDIX A: REFERENCES ASTM. (2003). Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates, Fine Aggregate, C 33-02a. West Conshohocken, PA ASTM. (2003). Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens C 39/C 39M 01. West Conshohocken, PA ASTM. (2002). Standard test method for flexural strength of concrete (using simple beam with third point loading), C West Conshohocken, PA ASTM. (2002). Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete (Using Simple Beam With Center-Point Loading), C West Conshohocken, PA ASTM. (2002). Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson s Ratio of Concrete in Compression, C , West Conshohocken, PA ASTM. (2003). Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens, C 496, West Conshohocken, PA Bentz and Garboczi. (1989). Hydra2D. Cement Hydration simulation software. Blaga, A., Beaudoin, J.J. (1985). CBD-241. Polymer Modified Concrete. Canadian Building Digest, Institute for Research in Construction. October, 1 st California Concrete Canoe. (2001). Bearrier Reef, ASCE/MBT Mid-Pacific Regional Design Report, California Concrete Canoe. (2003). Bearkelium, ASCE/MBT Mid-Pacific Regional Design Report, California Concrete Canoe. (2004). Comical, ASCE/MBT National Design Report, CanoeRoots. (2003). The Elements of Canoe Design, Magazine volume 2, 2003, Rapid Magazine Inc., Palmer Rapids, ON < (Oct, 2004) Computers & Structures, Inc., (2004), SAP 2000, Finite Element Analysis software. Govindjee, S. (2005). Engineering Mechanics: Strength of Material, Pearson Custom Publishing Imbsen Software Systems. (2004). XTRACT, Beam Section Analysis software. Kassegne & Reddy. (1997). A Layerwise Shell Stiffener and Stand-Alone Curved Beam Element < (Oct, 2004) Lazauskas, L. & Tuck, E. O. (December 1996). Low Drag Racing Kayaks, < (Jan 30, 2005)

13 APPENDIX A: REFERENCES Mehta & Monteiro. (1993). Concrete: Microstructure, Properties, and Materials, McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y. NCCC Rules. (2005) American Society of Civil Engineers National Concrete Canoe Competition, online at: < (Sept 10, 2005) Papoulias, Prof. Fotis A. (2002). naval arch on the web: lectures, < (Sept 9, 2004) Shtub, Avraham; Bard, Jonathan; Globerson, Shlomo. (1994). Project Management: Engineering, Technology, & Implementation, Prentice Hall, Inc, New Jersey Vacanti Yacht Design. (2000). Prolines 7, Hull Design software.

14

15 APPENDIX C: GRADATION CURVES AND TABLES COMPOSITE AGGREGATE GRADATION CURVE GRADATION CURVES AND TABLES Percent Finer (by weight) Lower Limit Upper Limit Aggregate Diameter (mm) COMPOSITE AGGREGATE GRADATION TABLE Concrete Aggregate: Composite Sample Weight (g): 2000 Specific Gravity (Gs): 0.56 Fineness Modulus: 2.58 Sieve Diameter Weight Cumulative Weight Percent Finer (mm) Retained (g) Retained (g) (%) 3/8 inch No No No No No No

16 GRADATION CURVE FOR ALL INDIVIDUAL AGGREGATES Macrolite 714 Macrolite 1430 Macrolite 3050 K1 Glass Bubbles Percent Finer (by weight) Diameter (mm) INDIVIDUAL AGGREGATE GRADATION TABLE Concrete Aggregate: Macrolite 715 Sample Weight (g): 500 Specific Gravity (Gs): 0.77 Fineness Modulus: 4.31 Sieve Diameter Weight Cumulative Weight Percent Finer (mm) Retained (g) Retained (g) (%) 3/8 inch No No No No No No

17 Concrete Aggregate: Macrolite 1430 Sample Weight (g): 500 Specific Gravity (Gs): 0.85 Fineness Modulus: 3.25 Sieve Diameter Weight Cumulative Weight Percent Finer (mm) Retained (g) Retained (g) (%) 3/8 inch No No No No No No Concrete Aggregate: Macrolite 3050 Sample Weight (g): 500 Specific Gravity (Gs): 1.05 Fineness Modulus: 1.98 Sieve Diameter Weight Cumulative Weight Percent Finer (mm) Retained (g) Retained (g) (%) 3/8 inch No No No No No No Concrete Aggregate: K1 Glass Bubbles Sample Weight (g): 500 Specific Gravity (Gs): 0.13 Fineness Modulus: 0.03 Sieve Diameter Weight Cumulative Weight Percent Finer (mm) Retained (g) Retained (g) (%) 3/8 inch No No No No No No