"9.; i ['43. I O u I 5! \ .s X " w ' ' ' ' -'. ‘ ." -. I 4'1.“ tgf. ”L:\;' ' . ' u _ A I ; “la“..ri‘ ' ‘ . . 4 : - «W 4 .r. 4:-4 . ’ 4 .' s- - ."~;=-'~" ~ . '4 4 . . ‘ ‘ .. ,4 .4 _ "¥:"0 1 ‘*' 09-”. ‘ . ‘ 0 ' 0J4‘ '1‘! d _, ‘... . ".9.09 “*2“..- :INA_:;_W. _ ..., - ,- , . .4441 u- . II F.“ "H“. I ‘ ".. " ' ... L . ._ ' . “. 1"“ .$ ‘ r'&$" "'q ‘ - '5. 4'. " n‘i‘ ' "“‘fi'mJ?’ 1', ‘2' 3.: 5 3' «$1.13!. .4- ' 2'44 ' é“ ' 4 . I _ , ‘. . -. #3 , «...-g. 9;"? .' 1.". 4 w; '1" :1! I = - 5’34 V‘ ' 1;; ‘ $"é‘; V‘s-cf: ‘I'fiqflrru- . 0‘ “I“ .“' - I .I ‘. l - I I ‘. “I .4“ _ “T _ I. ‘4' I . ... . .' h‘ - - .- 5' .- 5-,. '1 4‘34 4 : "(g “N . .i "" "4 .‘ , ' .4 .. I? “2‘ on ”pr-5W ...2'-?~«~'?24_:;:fi- ..*"'-,~ 4 -‘ ._i f 4. :44. 44K, -- " . -. -. - .4 9- —‘ -~' - 4 4 -‘ '4 -' ' JIFV 9: ~ .s-r .44 - ~ w'yie..~7:$3ss. .~ ‘M‘mfif’fla-‘C” n. , ~ _. 4 h \ . -. ‘ "o "' o v - ' [Q -4 ' - '_s~4b4wf 4;: "4' .~:- - ‘ - '.‘ . i" 4 4 "044.417" 1‘ .o “5;.“ o‘.» .llr'ts'. , ‘ 4 . .’ I" F "‘ h ' 4”” o ' :' - ' I ‘ Z a”. y “'1 .'3"- 3.0. .'4 3‘ 5' 4 ,,_..; 'g. _. "'3 ".‘ [4; . “had" ‘ ?;_‘z r 1 . 3", " ,C“.I4 ' .....rlg‘“ ‘1.— ' ' ' ' " ' V ' H" ' . 73' ' ' ‘_‘ fi 4 ' ~ 344.44. u" . "'4 a“ - 'b 4}; ' .‘ ...“.n’: '1ng .3; ' .q' - I .' ' '. VI 4' < , o (‘u 4 ‘ U .4. . ,. Y . , ‘ A -4 '“ 4. ‘0 I v.‘.'l. ,‘ 4 I“. ‘ 35.: “r . 'M .V 01‘ Lu“ v .v: ' 14' I ... .14...“ I 1' ' ; “y ‘4 .J. 4%.: .... i..;. s? ‘n .4 2.“ 9—2.3?3‘9.“ "'3 d‘“ . ‘4‘ 1' ‘ 4 J "' & "4‘ ~‘. ”a .. "' ‘ MW 4000.0 .454" ' s ' mm- '3 4'7 - ff ’ I» I“! 4424: watt" "'T', 1.4, ‘1... -4... 44. v4 ' .j . 0". “4:... -' ..." . ' “I 0' w“ ,1 ”I, F. «2-4 ”' 1.5 y?! “I“ I .- . fi' .“ I 4 ’ O : r , J" .:0 - " ‘.‘ * "ln- :th“f Y. 2’ u _ g, g 1%, I '“j; 1-, , 1-. I‘vifiii' "i y-‘NJN ‘0: "9'“ ’4 ‘ "9 " "gz'W'i-I ‘ “-" "‘ . " " .' 3‘12"" ' ' * 44.“ -' .4: .4 4 N: 7; 33:}; was; éfifi "-42 :3; . .. é; aka 4:4; “343 '4 0:9 I o : '| .‘ " ‘F - V . ‘_: '~':"” ‘ I '_'_J ¢ 9'. .Qp'." " 'I.‘ - V- .4-.. l' h of" "144 " ' ’40 " "" 4. v. . Wan ' .404“. ("qr L " 4 a an 4 4 .fl .‘_ ‘ 3.x. . ‘4 (“5‘9 firfi {1-~ qt?- ”.333. 4 “$17 "" ' ' L" a M‘“ ' '1 " “ fig yrwnm} 9-' In 4‘ ~— ----43 '... 44 H4. w‘osv - 4 *1§._,.24 4*.1“: . .- K 3, . -4 "“4 n.4,: . . . ' ,4 4 ' w . '4’ * 3* -. n 4 441 .4. "in; .414“ 4.. ‘4»<3~=""*‘-’~*' “bu-m 4,. “-1 "v“!it'z hr 71"": ' _ I I . v — _ 5‘ _ r .4 _ V ,_ ‘, _‘ ‘ - . ' ‘4 i , . ‘ I . it'd: l ‘“ 4:2,»..: A ‘4 4 ' o n . ‘ 4 t . ‘5 u ". "“5’ r‘. ,4“ ‘ $.52 q o 'zifltfi‘n- 7 7- :- '. a: 1;”! ‘4'4," “7;“ . .‘fru‘ “at.“ 3.2.4. fl~'- '1 i ‘ ..- . 4" I. ‘ 4 0, . ‘ ‘- I‘ I“; . ' 4 0“. 5 ' . f‘b' .1 _ a?!" 3:; 147’ fi . “'1'“. ! ;"(“4L & "9: v‘ RI ”lg-[515,9 L“, ‘ at ‘50 Q 1.- _"-‘;J;‘v~’;’h 'u. ~',/"5‘1 3. 4. .. 41. ~ M ‘ g 44.1 4- 44 3‘14"“? ugh“. 4,4. .,, ° ~ "4' ‘f'gygga‘é. .4 ‘.. 343.54,. _ - ,1 :.-. ,n :. £4 7 .. - A J..- 4 ( ... fl . _ “,4,” ...}.Uh ‘ , g 4‘. .‘ . ‘vk‘41."0. “tame, 7.. ‘ .. ..U", _. - .. .. .... ...»4 ' '4 ‘v ' "'4' fl" ' ’ 2V4: ' 3 . ' ~:"‘""3'. 7+?» , 4.-..'%;'5§253r4;411:.: a- .4 444 4:7- $45,474, '33 .. i: .. 4 ..~ 5- 4 43:43:41 - 4.144."!3'4 - ~ . .,, .44 m - A" -...~. .1: - -4'.."-.-. -..- ~ «gm r *5 J 4 - R'S'Hx .. I" '“ fl!" ‘ . nu- “U" ,4“ H1 ‘4 “Vim-.040: 4 ' 4 .... “3‘ 5.3453,?“ - ;“- 4— 4 . . 4 0 {'6‘ A ...; ,4": ?R§,fi.fl 13-:9,:“f‘.m1.4.; . - $3 a: .... - .1 Y" '_ “#:"W ,‘4 .. \l ‘ ‘ C .4 ‘ ' .\ '4 _ ’ ,4 . 44;, 4 ~ .‘ . 4.- N" , ' . 44 ‘4 .1 -- c ’,A . . _' :: “' “3 f n' ... ,..~ ‘9' ' -. 4 v «1.4-4 v' ‘ ".42 7..~~ - w an. . '- - ‘4. mum, .4 ; “my: 'fi?‘ff§’w§ ~24; ., a“ «1% r . U r 1' . O. ‘4" 0"! . _ 4.44. 4.. .{n 0M 45:34; , I .A . ’ _* o" ’4‘ WI 4. 5- .. , v4 . ”I; .4,."‘.. .‘t . LI“. 7 _ ‘ ' " ' ‘ '. 34$“. 4 ':£‘. “sir w “M "-1 in g} I ”Mn“ ’5. 254.33%? d vi- 7 mm?" ’3,“ $444431 «5,35,: : but»: ”If _ ' . ’| ' 4 i ' '. ‘4 ' ’ ‘ F ' ~' ’-‘ " J ' .. - :f ‘ -. '-~ 4 1 724.. ‘ : .* ’ ‘4. u 4' ~45 . .4”... ,g. .f. *' ', “ E “,g. I" . .h - 'I v“? 1“ 4’;‘*'" " n" 'fgii‘flflt"? ' V 4.4,: '2 - 1' 37.” 'I‘ '54.; " “.9 "1-3;; f," 5" 1:3": ,4; 4?1.'f.':;j:‘."‘,!;;;‘_:3 : ct. 47rs-Fm755‘1‘335‘ .P4' r!Y 0 ‘ 1“,"! Y ' ' J a: ‘1 5:1 "I 9- . “i . it v a , . 'n 1" i 4.: \ 41,244431fi:1%r; .,. I 4" . ' %:;\-~ 3;: Y ;_ 3' -:‘_£.¢ 1'4 - -;,-c- .i" : , 5 4' . . ' ‘4‘ 0‘. l' .4 -' . 4!“ z .. - . ' .yfl‘ls {g 4“ . "'.!‘ - 4‘ d...“ I ‘u g“; 4“,: “M r ..‘pt - -.Jv :‘ j. > . .3 .35-. - I. - 4 4‘. l.‘ . 0. .0 4, l4 4 . l ' .1 . . “J" .'1 |4 ,, “ ,1: . '4‘. “ ‘fl 4 '- " 45‘: 40 .-, ‘ “’4" . -__ -a ’;' 0- Mi‘ .1; ...”. "‘:iw ' ‘ “R. '43,. K”; 4 " ‘ '1v4" ' ' 4- - ' . 4» I 2 '- 5239*? 4' ‘b'fl'fl' '4 4' . '4‘ .--' . -‘- 3' . ‘3 3 ‘5 WM“ 44¢ .' 2 n 4:...» ' ...-4. ...}: . "I -- 44 " 4.44% "3": -'§ ' ' ’ .‘. I u t: "0,14 0 Jr.“ 4 fl- 4] ’ 44 a» . 7“ ‘ 4' ‘ ' 0". X}. f " -g- r .l}. .,4 . ._ k, ‘-, 4‘_ , l =m~ o .. 4 .. .-. I *‘IW '4 - Q ..“f _"., . “.‘l ’4 ‘1'. at. g o! J A ‘- I. U .. " ,. .' .90 y "’ ' ‘ ‘ o, J’— f 4"... f- 5 ‘O I ‘.. ‘04“ 4.. . . a}. - ;~;::.‘W5:0 is: . . 1“" Wé " ' " If '1“ ‘. "' “ - 3». pm," “ ‘4: 3‘ WWW” W‘ ' " :4 ' 4 'L “if? ' -:L'-.‘ _ ..-_ .. r f: i". .1 .. 1' $532091}- ., , a .- ' ‘ "‘5'"? . '4) 4 - 4 K. '4' A. ... 4 ..1:6|f‘~”‘.l‘_ 4'05! 341433 “4*" m: ‘ _ ..., ,f'v -‘ ‘ ‘4‘. «1“:1.‘5;.I ‘ (..., .fl.“ . 32.: :};fi*;{zs.n . ‘4‘ 7 ‘1 ‘rv-;"'- U'u‘:‘l_f;: . as " 3‘1"” ' ' ' ' '4‘ 4 ‘3'“ ’ ' “Wm 1. ‘r 1" 3! " J “' .4 ' .§“‘4"1".‘%”~1 ‘ - l “'9 .' '49:”-131.’ o 1 i' «‘3';- "i “733' .f‘-L-O?~~‘" ‘, 4. “1.1.9433“ .' $7 .. v - ‘5“flvv" . 4. 4' 4 ’ 14¢ IL“; 0: ‘1‘." 4 fiM“"’”' u.-sa.—-."H : -"-|"..' 44-14., :4 .33' “..1‘3€*W" , 3,“, Y: _. : a, ”Mr... “V .'|I.?\_ ’5‘, III ,I” . . '. .\‘. - ‘4’“: TWI}. "4393”” , l- , ”4 --,_.-».-.. 74,774." .. o' ”4‘ :‘J‘i' . 1' “f - .554. '32,.54‘17‘4' :53»; $12553 v- . . ' v ,I . , 4 - .1,..". -4 4 4'. ' '0' ‘1. 3.” «.4 ., .".'4-' ..ng 4...- .... _: . . _. ’4' ... 63:4}; » 4 1:4 44‘, “N4. 4 ' ‘3 v: "-44%” 5;; qt :’ . (""3“ \gfl‘l-r-F firn¢ "4‘ I~hut 5,_ 19'”): 544.21: 1;}. 99 .r 3 _ 1. 1.! ’4‘" . ‘ :313‘3‘15?’ "1:33:40 _ 7: I ’;' "1‘ 4' «0n. ’ FL, 3* ‘K' .F'n :1 ‘, 1Q .Uiue “4ng ,' ‘o- .1 ‘ “'31-!7?“ 4::‘1‘137'; ff; ‘3'? ‘ I,“ I“, 7 '. r“ o ‘ (‘73- ‘~ :7 5;.- ‘4‘ ‘ 4. 9m. ’ ' I ..:O n- h “Fin n 't‘ I -"'-‘Q “.0 .- .." m h“ ”mfg ' “85.44 1"...: .2.63“’1‘."4. ;'. ' “' " ”I 04",, ‘J‘: 7;“. . :- - ‘ ‘ o- 0' t u“ “(3-; Ir "ii“.qisa. I. . ' '3 4! q “1: r- ‘ III |I.:' II M." v 41 ’ r' o P 4 , IF! “Jig ’ . _ 3- 4 3.,v’mu . 4F I. . I“?! '35 ”:0“. “in“ .../...: 1 ’ {1‘3}; "9. .. o (if? —‘ ' ‘S‘éi'éi" 4 94-1.... ' ".: " v.4... ‘ o'r ' I “ Y "1'2"?“ “_ ‘ “..- .‘I‘ 0 "3:"‘i'."& ': :1-.f "' 7': O“ L)!“ 4.5“." . 4 “ 53': .3. 6' v. . {“4 :4»: x :4. '4 ' "" ' " i} 3"!!wa fl “ .' ‘11'4-‘9‘W‘E'9‘ ‘ 4"? . 3’? {333493.442 :u- .v'\ 4.. 5 h ‘ n , - h: “'.In' t, .4 o. .L 7: ...... v .‘ .~. ,,.. I ‘ v. , . " . .‘ 4447.4": § ‘Lo . '4 4359!,4‘ .- .ME .‘ a 4: L151 4' '?':' a'ruiu‘m 5' ”(3“, 7‘3“?" - r, m: 3““ ."u '4‘: i f. . : ~- . 4 . . M 1:19., 444, 4 I- 3 -. . . w.,t‘ N .. . . .. ,4 ... .. _ , . . ._ ._. _| 44.. 4, -& o . |»‘ “1 _ “5 '44. _-_ ‘ a. ; ,4 1-, u 'I w 4, ,. . ‘4 ("a“) .. . ' . .‘3.’ ... | ...- '0‘ fl 1‘ O ‘ '1 "'13‘ "h .“ o” f! ’F w v 4' » ... M w 9 4 4- -- v. ., v.4 ”New, " fir...- -- 9%“. gal “I" a 4 “FF: 4' . ‘0'. .4“ J:- n... "H NI ‘ 4." '- ruff-“3'2"“. .p."-’:_ '3. I ;-}4.t:k.h LE": 33 .....agfiizv LP F! “”13“"; ' ‘3 .fi: ' “ " ‘ ' " ‘ ~ . " '. .... -. 4: ' ..4 " ”..--.. "Mm ”$14,: . ‘ ‘-' ell 2 cm: I 5"”44. I'» » " “393$ ""‘" “' W" ’ ’ "A' A! A 4 r l H,l‘$' ' ‘41.. 3': V ,v .w . ", ‘5'? E4r‘, 4 4‘ ~ ‘- 3. ,. 4 “‘11 ‘ {9.0 ... .' -_ _ ... " q “44; a ..W‘ In. 4".“ p.” ;" . ‘0 1, ‘ v“. ‘ . It "44. . 4" N’ - 1‘ ‘ " (. . ‘ ."4 ‘ :“ t ,M'é. .' a n -. 4.. 4.4 :4 a r. :; :4. - - 4 .4» r . . 4". b - M‘ v .I h}. . '_ ‘ I: ‘ d +0 '3 ‘ D . . J‘T . ‘4 5.. l - o , — ‘rt! g. ... u “)"""V“'“.P ' j» 4 l M 4‘". “ '1’!“ ‘ . 1“".3'"? a1'14:':' I“ 3' " ' """" J u.» is . < .. I l “‘ ‘ I - - -' - . , .' il- 4'. ' ' ‘ "'4 - 9 '4 '9 v: l“ 5 s d. ' J'Y " E" In“ ‘03”... "' “a “fit “FR“ ' 4; ”13".“ ' v 4.3.9.. ' ‘1' 3 ' 1. ‘3 52%? .‘fiém .; I“ 4 z"... --"._'.:“} ‘5”: ‘ ‘29.“: . 14.33.:‘37'. :64- fig... ‘42 Rs- .441; . - I . t ' v .- '4 : - - ‘ 4 “NW '4 - « n-w-Ja'r'fien .4' . ' 'L 01" Olu: l'?\ ‘ ‘ h'n- u ’ - 49.4- .. . IN} 0 ’44- 7 r ‘ r. t >.- ~-. c.‘ 4| - 4. 4 4“ . 'T,‘., ’%"' '1‘4. - :2; . _1. .' hf :. . , 5:5." x h: ‘-'. .4 -.. I ' ...}; _,. (I. -.H. U . 3’ 9 ‘Sa 33 . .-.QV. 1' ‘* 1? .34... "4 , =4... \ Q - A. a; 9%.,1' “—1”?! - ‘v ‘r 0“. 3‘- ‘- _. 3. . fl . z- ‘t . 9': " s; 24:," z '- 1'. 9.1,“. 4— no 1 A: x “t- (Fr-'- 35 1': I)" I "J I. ‘6‘. ‘9'N3‘3- 4 -r§:o~ :‘ Q . . 0 |zc 33%| “1 ' 3.3.5 .1 4‘54- mg 9-95": O h o) . 5 . - ' _ '. ~ , ' 4 ., v ; 44 5' 4‘ :‘, . , - t" . “4",“. 4t? 5 ' , . > .d- I" ' 12kg”? 4:" : a.“ ‘3‘ ’ 1 -“ 0> 11?." . 48- .. Weave Lt $215. :4 444...,» . “‘2' -:4 ‘fr- .3234?“ 1‘1. 3'}! . ’ : . “'.' " ”'f; “5:3 49 ... ‘7, 4 ' f" " 4 1' ' “'0 1W"? 'L' -_., '“ "’W' “I“, 35"?“ .' t' "4‘ ,' I, I. 0'“ 4 _4, 33;. ‘ ‘ “‘3‘. 9 'f. I: ' " "2‘ '4. ‘ \' "5".1 ' ' ' '''' 4! .“ 1 “ W I. “ “ - {6? '2 “2'41:"4-' 1’4!- ;" ..2 :‘c. Liqu, §'~‘.: “sf 0435; :3? 5‘“ ' g5' .43: . {43:40 .3 ".. ’ 4443 “366.; 3‘ - 1' . r. m. - . '. . 4: 4.... .. .. '1: " '4 4 . ° .mw' .4 .-.~...' . 4 451m 33%;: «5.1;:14234. 1.3.34" M: 344743.: ?‘ ;§""':"$"“"‘ .“F “V“? ‘“ fiéwfifi. ‘ “3* ‘ .~,,‘E.?’~”-t‘.;. ‘ “i . I,‘ _ ‘4 ' 4 _ n.. r , '- W“. . ' 'r '“J‘ ."‘ '. I.-.“ m '~.:'. ... .... .b , . ... ”'1’,“ ..- l' I... ‘22,- . -.. ' r: ‘ a.“ ' IA : fly, J 3 a I): 4. . ‘4 1 .. cl O r-r-“D . n . f“ " :'1 a... F4‘n”‘j' .' i . l 1 ' | .- o : ‘ .1: ‘0’.’ ~ ’9 ’74-“:3' .'I .1! :‘Qv' ."'-:0, r"...- - 2.4%.1:J'1.?; ' J?§:: . O” "l J rr-34.ii..4‘.r§94&u£ :.4 >,v,',I-E3“',I',“' ‘5! 34'}, 3:; W32.“ ‘. 1’ . 434064341? "MN "f“ “‘1', ' :9"? 4’?- 4 . '3”. ",9 . , fig; '~ an“ "M u . -' a .. fin. . , ~—.~4 4' '. "“‘é Q 0044. s» v - ~ ’ 9 “"r i . '1“ ~ I . - -. -.,.- Jv-Bvflas s: d ‘9 ' ' " '4 "”"u‘! ’ ' .' “ “ ' “ h ("I ‘, - , r 4. 4 I". . q . h" g A 4.0 4.. 1 3y . S . +. 4 0"?!) 4“ q ’ 4| ’1'41 ".2 “2 44 ' :34» , "'4‘1’5; 1" . I ”H“ “I; '- . g ‘ I!“ ”'- ‘ d ' 'L‘I kn“; - "fi' I“ :‘4' ;' ‘ 4': . :60; a I ' J . ’ 0| " _ -444 I h" " ‘4‘}:‘3" ' ‘3', ‘0 ‘ ‘7‘ V,“ -t‘¢.'?t‘l'll ‘ ,. -_._ ., '._3:~,":.2i.‘.' . -‘v, s. I" .i r: ’4 '4; 4 3-, '0? ‘3. U' V-\ 0:“ 31'..- I‘v'h“. ' ‘ . ;r;"!"“ 14 (IDMI- IV‘LI I “I'll 4 4: IV “V” . I . , 3? F ' ' ' n.3, ‘ . .f . fl“ ”4‘ . "'0 I '4' ' . . “... .-.- 1“ 4’ ::“&2 : J]! I 'Iv 4:»: E ‘4' .J 'F :F“‘““?1‘u“"§"‘1“4h"fl ' "'-' - '.'.: " at“ {5'1” ’ a .4? 4 .a' 7 :" ° .- 9.4.1 ‘ I I :4. fi" 4"." .' '3 4| I 1" . , .. - :"F' J‘-" 4 .' _.,_..~ ' , . . I ' " ' , . . ‘7'4’ 4 .- o a: 30:.1‘5‘: I“. ‘.‘ #4. ‘49, "UV U- ‘¥ 0 :5 '~ I. . nu ~ _. ”.lf' ‘1‘“‘4. .’ ...? . ‘4’ I... ‘ ‘ . . ‘4 -;4 4;. - . a 41;? g.q!, " W0 "0 {1%) “n 0 in ' ‘ “fly. ‘0, 0' 0 "Off ,‘4‘ v. “1.. "\".’2J"‘ I ‘ 4 .4. ‘04": “ J‘. 1‘.- .._ 1‘ l “’5 t"_- - co: . 4 _ 4 1 «:4; O - a. o .. 4.“, V . P 4.; Q - n 4 ' A ' " 411:; 4.1.” '0 O .t'. o.‘ “’1'" ...; 4 o. 1" U B 7W. ' I ”4 ‘5'. 1 4h" " ."*': ?&‘C 5*“. ‘ I . .4 4.. .‘: .43 ' Mwwm "er"u- “:‘jf‘ . 4 f". ..,..,-z..:~:-, ~44" 4 4W “"“"" " ' ' 3'4”“ ’ 4 H -' . . .. . I. ' 7- . “.4, V. . ' .4' ,Ififi’v- '- -"0'. w" - - Vi’“"fl» '5? g' H O; 4 1' ' '.“:;£ :1“! " *5; 4%.. " '7‘” '4 2 o v I“. 4:" '4‘ I O 3 ¢ '4' :4“ fi‘l-Jn§$:’?::“ ' ‘ 4 N ‘ ' V“. ‘ A 4 I o; ' I J, 4' '” 4 “ ‘ -'- z“ 44: ~ . , "“ “ I t a . “ w- 4 |; F ’ .4 I . ““' ' '- t F - ' ‘ ’4‘- ‘ b . . ' .‘5’ W4“ 5&4” .- l '44..." ‘1"!“4fl t"'i"""’"“§‘ NW“?- 4 ' - “ 4:44.45. m J '- . .°.. Jl.“M4.-j‘19."-tz '. .. :4. ..' - 1.,4'" , .1 _ 5 7,2455.“ “ £11,“? Sr' JEWC. ' ‘1 '4 t. L '1 'I‘;-| "‘ w 4 - _'."' ‘ " - ‘7': “fl. - ‘4 .. ...4. ' " ' ' ' 4'. '04. " - " '-" . .1444}: ,.“ 4 "- Y3" fh‘)‘ “N “ '3‘ng - " ".21 ' . 4' “U . “ ’1. ‘ L'uggv' p‘ I. '- 3 4 . _2. . :2. z .: ...,” ._'- n‘ .i4 .; ..." V‘"‘""’ W L 1:454), I‘ ' Fljfl‘f ' J I ’ . . -4. ~ .4. .“ 11:] lgfl0 ’ 4;.” 4. :‘ g 2 . 4 ' .J, -94. ' ‘42 {CM-at “Edi" '4 '2" F ”W 'J ‘1’, 13:?" 6' 1 ' 'fJ'M' .' '1“ .9- 6 .44.. - ..s ” I“ “5 ""5?" 43:16 ' ‘%' “J ‘M “ W" 4 '- 1m ~ I“ '"‘ ‘- 4‘ ‘ " 4' ""71. L' 4 "4 ..‘ 4' “ .. 1.4.1.}. 35‘ “‘1 «43‘4” 13341:. . . . . .. -.-.m Wu . - 4 . . .ni , .‘4r‘1'fa-91‘J: , @3533, * .4444. F“? 1%.? 1:41:41 ’14; 35 """H "W" 354344.341“ 4.4;;2-4 ., 2- .. v'v-‘wv mm; )1“. 5' .1...‘ . “- 1.2.33“ l“- - J 4 ._.._ .g..- L- 4 1 3.’ , («'4 '31; '- I 4 u “m ’3; 4 o I”. - 1 ”3.. 4 “ 233.5“ g“ L '12‘5 F - 0‘4 - '.‘ , 44‘ . W” I u r -| .‘ , 4 U) :M‘ I” ~ . 14' l 1' 4}. 3w ... 4,, ..L a ‘, ““4 u. .1": h, 3 ,7 ”‘4? . ,11';:"*:43?5“fl“. .7: I...‘ 4 , ‘n -4 .4 * 3., ...... d.- . Igut- -i “ x? 2“,", ;' :“JF1‘QNM J“ a.” 2.1;“in 0 ;§ . F"; in“. . H.“ a; .0 4". 0—3:;414- " d.) . ' §;;;..“.o l ' VI I; . I“: - P. J .. 1 . "J wuu'kru £44 5:7. - a" '. '3 ' . . «43‘ . LN “fr“ ’-“ ’- (‘4'3' ‘ “" 5 "3‘ " . l '4)“ ‘ " M" . .' “'11:.L#1:W4";,:a E'lml. .. El. 3' “vfir-b : . “I, ilk-“14' “0’ ".“I , ”‘3. .|-4 #6:? 9,: .fi- :- 1 I. 9'; 5, “.4“ “ ~ . I ' “'33.?“ 4. 4” t: ‘5?“ A: ‘32, ,i- .“ 44.. ~ ”é: .4 . 2“ . . '4 - “ I-- : ?:: ’ ”1'1“??? I ”A" " - '4’ h '4‘ .“I fi_,? 4} "...” yflf'iflj‘u 14‘. H " '“ '7' "" .' r. I -' . . ”JEW'W M yr 4.4.5, .fvw ’.: n '1“ u 94’. ' 4. '10 v“, 4' 4 ‘ f, . .' ‘ ‘ I ” '0 4 4'4, .44. 4 g 4 . ) [q 4 v .y - “- 0 find 1 "I! ‘ ' a l -‘ 4 W ’ ‘ A '4‘ ,4, ‘4' J" . 4' I.° ‘ '. -. t :7 ”4;; ,0. ‘. t" ' u‘* '. 4.90 q.~ b 9 do n 4 ‘“ 32‘}. 1 ‘- “ 4.94: fig!“ .4 a .2 -:‘ '. I ., ,I’l'b- - - q ._ 0: \ §.- . J 'f' H 5‘0'5-3- gin f' 'b' I ,' l'" ’4'. 0- 4" a ,zlo ': 1". ‘ t ' “1‘ I . 0 4‘ ). 5‘“; “. ‘4‘: . '44 “.4 ‘ o. v 2" J! i i. 04 ' ‘ "a - '2“ I' ‘ 4’ ‘? I. I. 4' 4 “l?“ f ‘ ‘ :‘r “:‘I‘: I" «V ‘ ' ' 0 “F ‘ l— I: 4*”. H r “ “‘I . fl' “...“ '_ 4],.“ I: "" ’ ' p ' 'Ifi'..‘h“ll "n 'O 4‘, .14 ».Ib ’ 4 ' ‘ . I ... “‘l . V 1". ’0'!“ 4' (0"... ‘ 9 a. -4 I" “ . .' " I 4 ("1.3. . . J ”0 1““ L, 9 I . _ _ ’ i, 4 V 4 \ 4 a I. A _ ‘_ ’J .3 v- " 4.- . 0' ‘54!“ 4'1”“ '1, fl . ' fl.» 3'“ ' “ "4' "“ 4' ' 5 ' “v ' '4"' -; . 9r ~I -" ’-' ' ',',’°°| 4 “Vi-14‘ ~4 4 4 2r " “‘4'“: ch 44' " .4" 24.." --» - ..,- "WV" 4"“94 '4” " («343.4% 3.1".“ ““4“" “ 4‘4 “'3 ' I - ,J' .. -.,-».g,.¢.~'-' '~ ‘0 4""°’:'.“1.3t‘.' 14444-411542 4.4.4.44»: 14., ~ "’ 2n. \‘--‘.~'4- 44‘ - ‘ t:— 9 a f .... . .. 4 .... . “.4". ‘ . . ., , .... _W . f4 | 4». ,1 13-. b.4441 . I '.‘h.‘ “V: "' v '.'. 0' “..‘0‘1 9' “q, ...4 .“ig’ “I I." .4 ‘74". ‘ 4‘". ”HA“ V‘ ‘ “‘4' A l“ h.“ "4' i“ " _#.‘ ' “r“ 0'“ ‘7 “ 4"“. “.0 g I“ h“. 'P- W ' " ‘v o ‘0 ‘I . ,I‘ “1:. ' 4.7 . "4.2. “n : I ' .4 u. ' o _‘ l 4 9 “. , '- l I ' - ‘“ "‘0‘ 4 - “"' n “4;“. I . ' '0 '~ ‘ ... 4:“ «I». 44,“. :t ; 3“ ".9" “£5.29; HE; 424934744" - it." w I é ”4 " ' , ., . » ‘ “‘3.“ 13* .' 43.. .Pg'? '74": 4.... ‘13 if 44-“ 4‘4 ‘ 4 n . 4 4 , ., 0 1 ' " '4 .“ ... I"- ’3 ’54. l' .. I .4 44 ' ' o ' ' : . "' ?' an ' 4.1 .. -.i ..so "3" - - '-L".'~- fit:- I‘ Q... . . 2“,“. - -'4 .43!!! ‘ "‘“" ' .._ Nara. 4-4.3.. 4. . ‘4 ".1 I . .1431- 33* V “3.0;. 41 in .‘i' “VG-“WM?“ 2(V;0"!&I5-'t‘1“~“l' ""‘fu'g. um]. "1. "“6““ .. " “I" E“ ’ ' ““9“" :1 )‘3154‘ 2- ““ i". 7'- 1‘9' ‘ ' ' 4' I .AL.‘ '..‘4f'. : II A '. ‘4'. $ 4 , .10; i 44‘ . . '4 ' f,|l“ gt,‘.l 4 ", 1 '.-| '4, I I, ' o _.' . . 1 ' ‘ u 'I-' I 4 4'” -'.4'- f ' n -4' A“ J]. . 0 l‘ W ... . ' ' " ' J “ ‘4 - . ' I ' .l' “I ' ‘4 . "- ' ‘ 4: 1" 1"5'; ‘. 4,014 ‘lu‘t‘nrwfip‘ow ... 4.5! I“ 3 “'3. Q“? .I’; I- W K:4 II %’:;‘OV; :‘E: .414 ‘3’? ‘ Q 4' E“, _‘0€y’;'!:'$:l ‘ ".4 n; 4 $4) - 0.0: . . E .“ :1). fi-v - .‘. 0.4-". V 4 4 ’ L ‘ ' E4 H". . _ . n ~41! 4, ""444 4.. .. 34. ”53".“. 2* 4 .3: 4 .+r%--4;Mvm-}4s-ag:4.‘o~ 41-»: :44,» 9‘; r'- ., ‘= ' : :"4 3--- 4." .4-4 34:; «4.- {£15 .8341. .. 53.: 1‘53“;li 5 11:541. 4" A“; a4 hygiig Qua: w; - a , 4::-‘.,"‘*.:%2, 5.. :‘ ‘4'; '4". M". (had, 4:13,: ..4', * ‘; fir . 2": .... '5 5 . :3, . . ,-' .4 'l . : v “' '4 '. ' ‘ 3' .4. '. :-"I 4 I 4 2| ' l I- , ‘| . ' 4. \ ‘ “ ‘3‘- A. I“ <0. “‘I' . 0' ' 'F‘ ‘ . ‘ h '4 1"; ' .~ .4 .‘ ‘ A n “ .y‘l ”d . .44. 5' ”9%, ”'3 “— .I'a-r'a -'|‘ ‘. ‘ fi?“' 4’ Kg 4 44 It» .ufi~:ll~;‘ 2‘ ..idh‘14‘43", ' " a "a ' I ”Hun". ‘ P“ _'-' 4 'IL!‘. ' r ' I 4“" “i 0. 'l .r “'4 “ It???“ I 3’ a.” ‘ , .. '1’ n' .: . 31.." I . {Ema-'1‘. ‘ ,’.=.'4t5:.1 4 13:4. .U 4 1“”,E:'ij'tz‘yz'l;“y' .., i J‘; in ‘ r N 1 “1"“ ' ' “=‘ " --~g ~ it}, ‘4“ ' Tf' 3." ‘ £"uf‘1fiw54" i’a‘i‘ii' 2'7¥“"£ :"""~ -v'="*!'-T's-« m «44-13% 4' 4 F °.“ 4: «MW ‘ i: 4 ' 4 - ' -.- «, 4'. ""‘ ‘ "‘9'.“ ~ .4444»...-—.‘;- ‘ """fit ' ~“v' ’4‘» u_. 4 . ' ‘ . "' ': . '- m 1" Ft. '. 4 4 ‘3' :' fl , s‘J' -' - -. 4 4 ' ‘ 554+!- \ . wad“ “ML” “1"?“ if ('3‘: E; {'1} viii: r o, 1.: i‘.‘ - 4'. A's“. ’ lav "“ ‘4‘ ' ‘ L“‘ 3"“ "°"' 4* 5.4.3511: «:9: :5 "3?: fig 5"- I '% ”(iii—“r574:~.'."'~':"-‘-3 ‘9 .1' r;."‘.-. 4 6;-” I .4... I M a; 4 .2, "r .. $434- .4 .. .-- m " ;, .. 4:2?» v.3“: '.-: 4. 4 . '..r., .. _ ,' . .. ._ .. .; .A . ’-'~. 7'1. - - ,5.- 4 ;. " _;, -' - 1 “t 0‘ , “fa“; I 1' ‘-. 3-3.- '33,. ':. «1‘1, -: "~»‘a“.-e.-1'>-'“"‘:!'“ 2’15':*_"“* 4. 4“ *4- “3.4:; ' “23f“ 1".f 9.4 ' ‘41-: 4 . _ .- .4 '1‘ ‘5. , '44“ '. d L ., - -‘. 44-, .I-_ ._ f ‘., O 4 I I _ -4‘44‘h ,"- 4; " '. - 'Y- - , .‘\,‘p .4 :..' .3 ‘.".' .~1 '4"\' “-4 .4 u. '7 o“‘ .4. "h ' “I” '. ' 4 ‘ “ ‘ ' 4' 4 F I‘ . — 44-731. 4 ~ - 44’4““44’; m" 44': 444:1"; .4 ...sfum’sm 3;; ' m :3». - w. . um , . 14 4‘ .g 'U‘ .4 ‘H , .g , “.t :04 ,--, . 4” ‘90-". v 4 '3 I-( 4. r 3' __'_. . I: 0 _ J! .2. -~ . 4W. .'!.‘?~33:'-1’é ‘ ~- ' 4; ~ 344—44, 4’4 J. v ;~- ;; VH4“; " 05'3“ “ m ' 4 '99“ 4' " "' ‘ s'r“"'.-'.J1 NB“ w ‘9' "4“ “1'4; hyl' “I 4'“ - t ’4- "( “..- g “f." ‘2' 34.45: :“ .‘.' ' 3344“. 41:4 ‘ I '4 -. " ' 0| . 'v ' I ' ~ 44' 0- -' .' I ‘ . 4M. ‘H ‘- "l a" ' '3. ,I:4' ‘ J “4 I ' .4 V :9; ' ~ - ‘ ' .4 .- .» . » an. m.» 444.. w: 22.24.142.94 4 2-4- a; ., J, «4 «3' .“r’v 2 w '« K .4 “" Jl.““’( ' .4“. I“ 4‘ g ‘ ‘3‘; ' “ “ “I '11:,44 cu. ‘ "2“ “#5:"; :31}; ”‘1’ ‘-' 3 :' ‘l' "LI-’1: t3: . " ' '1" i, . “ LL 3 I". "a“ a. “ .1 1.4 :2 "'h’ur' . I . Ems: it IJ'44...-v.:";'»-'v :4 flag... ..fim' -‘-€*t.’--;"44-‘3.":'r : wit"? ‘.. '1' «.11?» "V-T‘ f'..‘ “33$; :4- ' -'3 ‘33. 15' ”Pl: 33:43; “I". 2122.424"”4‘31'; . ' 15" 4 3312’ ‘.-’ J‘Ifi ' u: 4 . “54“.: z“: :“‘.'lr"”ulfi“’ ‘ \,J"a.:’g~::3;tl d124, éEFL““1%,;1‘Miigirgl9‘;?(%.,:.'“L K1338". w‘fi :2: ?'§:' _ ';“3:?:':: g- \ - l '. ' . 4;" . w' :‘v': 4: ._“‘.'fi .4 :—:’< 4‘._.v~?.4‘:1:5€’3.k: 2 . 4? » 4w '4' ‘24.".‘-J-""-. .‘ . I ‘ ' -:-:“ 43:2334'W “’4 ' 7'5- " .‘E'vlfi'f;3§'§4~".'<*~:'f'-'5b 4.9 '3 '- ‘F‘ A 3'44 3"": .' .7373" ~- :44 ..'~ ' 4 ~..‘. "- 3-21: 9.4. mt, '; ’1‘. ‘v w-» : "‘yb'fi'no‘i ~ " 255' ' 595%,“ 3.-‘ ' ‘IV 'E 4.," 1,‘ \0.‘ ,->a~~‘ ~ ,' , r _‘4 I ‘le'l J_ ‘gl'n&i\-‘p \. - ,5 0-,- "“ MW,‘ “.4 “ 73'.” 5",?“ “395311“ E,“ '1’ “i“ :4 1544443,,” (at; f ‘4’ 3.9333 ' “f _ “' ‘4 4h.- 44";1‘ 51.483“: .' “A 5.. '. -4 'L.‘ ‘ ~44} ,..I‘j‘ 44.4934? - "1-. :f" L’l' “ “i F i. ‘ :4 . ‘ 3&4 444%.44-34544 3%.. - ' 5%? ~ "'8 3'13“?" '! 3'”: “"L‘ 4‘ 53% 4'1"” , I ' . ‘.-‘_ ' 4 Iv-n‘ s ' '.H' ‘.-__._M _ It a but 1kg ' 1;. r-r:= W . ““2. 33%} - I}: :4 ...- 1931-“ ,-.-r , $34,. a, h d. 4 ’4 2' 5‘5 4r.-= 543:2- 1-3, 3 3 42;. :4)" 1. -‘—~ ... :% '~ .4. Jtlt «€54 - 5'44445. -.7" $9.5: ‘1 " 3% ' I . in... " 13:54.4,» 5.; 4‘_, 46.40;“- m- " ,_ :4,“ a _' , k ‘ . . \‘—:~1-. boy :4». 14,4311: “d .- s. ' ('L". ' — saw» 7 'Wzt ': T I l “:5 “r- .3 .-—a. A- '_‘; Y .—-. -. _ 4. ... . - . N‘ "fl ‘ . < '. . I_ 43“ ' ‘ ' ' I “ "4 ' ' I . 4 ,_ '. 4J4. -..- .,_ 4. 4 ._ ._ . . A I _. ' .. . . AA 1 . . _ _ ' f}; ‘2'" - ' can .37.. ‘ V. 4 3'1? r- ‘g - s . A. 0", It»: ESIS IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1293 00627 9305 . "-""‘ \*———T Mfi PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this Checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE Aid-92210 ¥%%§ 1:5“wa 2/05 p ICIRC/DateDue indd-p 1 A Study of Membrane Curing Compounds A Thesis Submitted to The Faculty of MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE of AGRICULTURE AND APPLIED SCIENCE by L. T. Oehler W. A. Bradley Candidates for the Degree of Bachelor of Science June 1945 {lasers We would like to acknowledge the aid given to us in this study by the members of the Michigan State Highway Department re- search division, and especially we wish to express our appreciation to Mr. E. A. Finney and to Mr. C. C. Rhodes for the invaluable suggestions and assistance given to us throughout this study. 10 Ki ’ 5 14-8 II. III. IV. VI. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Introduction ................................ 1 Water-Retention TeSt A. Introduction ------------------------- 8 B. Factors affecting test -------------- 10 C. Procedure (Series I & Series II)----50 D. Conclusions ------------------------- 54 Surface Dehydration Analysis --------------- 46 Flexural Test A. B. C. Introduction ———————————————————————— 49 Results ............................. 52 Discussion .......................... 54 Abrasion Test A. Introduction ........................ 57 B. Apparatus ........................... 59 C. Procedure ........................... 61 D. Results ............................. 34 E. Uncertainties ....................... 86 F. Conclusions ......................... 37 Conclusions ................................ 91 Appendix A ---------- Water Retention Test Data Appendix B ------------ Abrasion & Flexure Data IN TRODUC T/ON The coming of the war has brought about many changes in the lives of the people of this nation! Many luxuries have been dispensed with; even some of those articles which were once looked upon as necessities are now disappearing. In every field of endeavor it has become necessary to take short cuts which will involve the use of less and less of certain critical materials which either are unobtainable because of the war or are being used in enormous quantities by the Army and the Navy and by those involved directly in the furnishing of materials to the armed forces. Rubber became precious and nearly unobtainable; steel reinforcement for buildings became rare and steel shapes for any purpose whatsoever were greatly limited in both variety and Quantity; other materials simi- larly were limited. The need for new construction, however, didn't decrease with the same degree of rapidity as did the supply of con— struction materials. New buildings had to be built to hold the industries and to house the families of the workers; new roads were essential for the tranSportation to and from the growing industries; new air bases were needed to provide for the training of pilots to fly the hundreds of planes pouring out of the new industries; and, in turn, new roads had to be built to the bases. Thus, the need rose for the materials while the supply of these goods was decreasing. The engineers and industrialists of the United States soon recognized the problem before them and immediately started the development of substitutes for the no longer obtainable products. The huge roof trusses of aircraft hangars, previously made of steel, were successfully fabricated out of wood; concrete slabs for roadways, instead of being reinforced with steel, were rede- signed to eliminate that essential material; and similarly, all over the industrial nation, substitutes and new methods were found which took the place of the old—-and did the job! One of the problems which soon appeared in connection with the construction of new buildings and roads was that of the maximum strength and durability must be cured for a period of time under controlled conditions of moisture and temperature. 0f the several methods used, the most satisfactory, or at least the most widely used, was the use of burlap sacks, Sprinkled and kept wet for a period of from seven to ten days. Burlap, however, disappeared from use for the curing of concrete soon after the opening of the war. Cotton material and paper can still be used to some extent, but their use is limited for cer- tain classes of work and in some localities. Bituminous curing materials are no longer available at all in the East and the restrictions are spreading to other sections of the country. Of the methods yet remaining for the curing of concrete slabs, the best has not definitely been decided. Ponding and coverings of wet earth undoubtedly retain the water in the concrete during the curing period, but it isn't possible to apply wet earth to the surface of freshly-poured concrete with- out ruining the finish of the concrete; thus, the curing isn't applied until set occurs and by that time, much of the water has been drawn out of the concrete and the damage has already 2 been done. Paper, still used in some cases, also has its problems. As with burlap, a definite period must elapse before application, and during the period, valuable water is lost. Also, water must be sprinkled onto the paper during the curing period, since drying out of the paper will cancel its effectiveness. This continual spraying introduces the human element, which is often apt to introduce error. Another curing method, not entirely new but being pro- moted extensively since the shortage of other materials, makes use of a thin membrane, supposedly quite impervious to water, to secure retention of moisture during the curing period. It is this group of compounds which we have chosen to investigate. The so-called membrane curing materials were used a decade before the development of the colorless membranes of today. Even as recently as 1958, when membrane curing compounds were mentioned, the bituminous compounds such as coal-tar, pitch, cutback asphalt, and aSphalt emulsion, were usually understood. The first patent on membrane curing was granted to Paul Lechler of Stuttgart, Germany (German Patent No. 537,154) in 1921. The first American patent (No. 1,684,671) was issued in 1928. These first products differed greatly from the colorless compounds used today. It is quite natural that these compounds were first used in the semi-arid regions of the West, where it would be difficult to obtain sufficient water for curing purposes. Investigations conducted in various laboratories and corroborated by use, demonstrate that certain of the coal-tar and asphalt cutback materials were quite effective for the retention of-concrete mix- ing water and, in some respeits, a satisfactory substitute for water curing. There were many disadvantages however, to these bitumin- out coatings. First, a bituminous coating is very objection- able for use on surfaces where the natural appearance is de- sirable; for example, highways. Secondly, the black bitumin- ous coating causes very high heat absorption which, in time, produces excessive cracking when it is exposed to the sun's rays.2 Often these bituminous materials would be put on too heavily and would leave a slick black surface, which was dangerously slippery when wet. Emulsified asphalt by its very nature will not form an impervious membrane. Since emulsified nephalt is asphalt snapended by a water solution, when the water dries, there are millions of small openings through which the moisture can escape from the concrete. Another disadvantage of bituminous materials is that the material remains tacky for weeks after its application, even in the summer months. The first clear membrane curing compounds had such low water retention properties that engineers insisted that wet burlap or cotton mats be used for the initial twenty-four or even seventy-two hour period. Of course, this destroys one of the basic advantages of membrane curing compounds, because it is claimed that they may be applied immediately after fin- 1Technical Progress Section, Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Vol. 14, No. 4, p. 577. 28. S. Meissner and S. E. Smith, "Concrete Curing Compounds" Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Vol. 9, May-June 1958, p. 549. 4 ishing, while wet burlap cannot be applied for the first sever- -al hours, The product sold in the West was a paraffin-vegetable 1 These initial products, oil base cut with a petroleum solvent. besides failing to maintain a sufficient amount of water also imparted a blotched discoloration which is ascribed to the re- action of calcium hydroxide with the fatty acids of the com- pounds, resulting in the formation of calcium salts of the fatty acids.2 Besides giving an unsightly appearance to the surface, this reaction was detrimental to the concrete. Since the early compounds failed to give the desired results, fur- ther research was instigated with the following purposes in mind: 1. Immediately and effectively seal the surface against surface dehydration, and provide maxi- mum retention of the original mixing water within the concrete. 2. Be chemically inert to any constituents of concrete. 5. Produce concrete having compressive and flexural strengths equal to 14-day water curing. 4. Produce concrete surfaces having erosion and abrasion resistance equal to 14-day water curing. 5 In several of these purposes the manufacturers have made considerable progress. The water retention properties have been improved, chemically inert compounds are used, and the compression and abrasion resistance are comparing favorably 1Technical Progress Section, Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Vol. 14, No. 4, p. 578. 21bid, p. 578 5Deacon, Wm., President of Solvents and Plastics Co. Taken from a reply to letter requesting information. with water curing. Here are some of the advantages now claimed by the producers for their type of product: 1. High early water retention. The fact that the compound may be applied immediately after fin- ishing (no waiting for concrete to set) gives it at least one to three hour's start on other curing methods such as burlap or cotton mats. 2. Eliminates the burden and expense of prolonged supervision. 5. Its method of application is easy. A Spray gun, hand or pressure type, may be used. It may be applied to vertical surfaces, the under side of concrete bridges, and other places where other curing methods cannot be used. 4. Keeps work area dry and prevents all delay inci- dent to sloppy working conditions. 5. Avoids the possibility of decompaction through wet subgrade. 6. Effects definite economics in cost and adds materially to the speed of construction. 7. No after expense. After the material is applied, the job is completed with no expense of reclean- ing and storage of the materials. 8. It produces concrete of high strength with a maximum performance expectancy. Not all of the above claims of manufacturers are to be taken as established facts, for when the shortage of essential ma- terials necessitated a substitute, every manufacturer pro- ducing a compound which might, by remote chance, find a mar- ket as a curing agent, started to promote it. Many of the claims made for the various compounds were doubtful, and at best only the hopeful dreams of manufacturers expressed in print to serve as come-ens for unwary buyers. In this study, we propose to test some of the better known commercial compounds and to establish, at least in our own minds, which of them best fulfills the requirements of a good curing compound; and incident to this determination we hope to find a suitable method for testing in the laboratory any new compounds which may be brought out in the future, so that they may be evaluated by the same standards as their forerunners. That is, in general, our purpose in this study. WATER RETENTION TEST THE WATER RETENTION TEST Since it has long been recognized that the strength of Portland Cement Concrete is greatly affected by the hydration of the cement, a Water Retention Test seems a logical and fair method of testing the efficiency of various curing materials. The ideal concrete mix is the mix with the least water in re- lation to cement and yet providing a mix which is thoroughly plastic and workable. Abrams' water-cement-ratio law is usually stated as follows: "With given concrete materials and conditions of test, the quantity of mixing water used deter- mines the strength of the concrete, so longas the mix is of a workable plasticity."1 After this mixing water is once added, everything possible should be done to retain it, for this re- tention of water during the formation period of the concrete is the greatest factor affecting the resultant concrete. This, in brief, is the purpose of curing. Water retention is necessary, or the highly complicated chemical reactions taking place during the hydration of the cement will necessarily be retarded due to a lack of suffici- ent water. All the mixing water in the concrete, however, does not chemically combine; therefore these five classifi- cations have been used: 1. There is free water that is only enclosed in the hardened cement and whose vapor pressure is some- what reduced as a result of-dissolved substances, but which is otherwise practically identical with pure water. 2. A certain amount of the water is fixed by the dis- lAbrams, D.A., "Design of Concrete Mixtures", Materials Research Laboratory, Lewis Inst.h§ull. l. 8 solved and solvated substances and more or less firmly attached to these. 5. Further, a part of the water functions as capil- lary-bound water with a vapor pressure varying according to the degree of dryness of the cement and the size of the capillaries. 4. A certain amount of the water is further bound by adsorption at the surfaces of the solid phases and is found engaged in varying degrees according to its nearness to the surfaces and the nature of these. 5. Finally, there is chemically bound water engaged in the chemical structure of the solid elements. The water available for evaporation is affected by the rapid- ity with which these chemical reactions take place, for the gypsum in the cement ties up water in ten to fifteen minutes, the tricalcium silicate, tricalcium aluminate and the tetra- calcium alumina ferrite bind the water in chemical combination in twenty-four hours and the dicalcium silicate may continue to bind water for several years. If an evaluation of the quality of various membrane curing compounds is desired, a fair and equitable water re- tention test seems to be the logical solution. The problem at the first casual glance seems to be only a matter of labora- tory technique, but in the ultimate analysis there are so many factors acting to influence the solution, that many variables have to be studied and analyzed, and others converted to laboratory controlled constants. As the American Society for Testing Materials is usually considered the authority in matters of testing procedure, a trStaff of Research Division, Michigan State Highway Dept., Membrane Curing Report, May 28, 1942 study of their Tentative Method of Test for the Efficiency of Materials for Curing Concrete (C 156-4OT) is of primary im- portance. This tentative test procedure, however, is looked upon by many laboratories with disfavor. They usually explain that it was disregarded by their laboratory because it was not definite enough on several important points, that it requires too large specimens, and that uniformly consistent results cannot be obtained. Perhaps this test procedure does need more clarification. Its inadequacy is probably due to the fact that it was not specifically designed for membrane cur- ing materials, and such a broad test cannot give the required ' results. This has led to a confusing array of testing pro- cedures. Diversity is the rule rather than the exception. To give only a few examples: Battenfield's Laboratory suggests slight modification of A.S.T.M. C 156—4OT; Truscon Laboratory uses greater variations from A.S.T.M.; The War Department, represented by the Cincinnati and Mount Vernon Testing Labora- tories, and also the Bureau of Reclamation, have still more variations. With this labyrinth of diversity the only logical way that an analysis of such testing procedure can be made is to consider the factors that influence the test, and then point out how the different testing laboratories have tried to con- trol these factors. In my opinion the most important of these are: l. Proportioning of mix 2. Aggregate grading 5. Shape of moulds IO 4. Size of Specimens 5. Methods of finishing (a) Strike-off (b) Troweling (0) Wood float (d) Brushing 6. Time of application of membrane 7. Rate of application 8. Methods of applying membrane 9. Storage of specimens—~Control cabinet (a) Temperature (b) Humidity (c) Air flow The following discussion will center about these points, and taken up in the order necessary in the organization of the test. It is generally recognized that the storage of the specimens during the test will greatly affect the water lost. However, several laboratories do not seem to take a suffici- ent interest in the matter of developing a test that may be repeated time after time with the same results. By this, I mean that they have tests which may compare various materials at the same time, but the results are not reproducible, be- cause the conditions are not held constant. The three con- ditions that must be held constant are the temperature, the humidity, and the air flow. The A.S.T.M. Test specifies that these conditions must be as follows: "Immediately after moulding, the mould and the specimen shall be weighed to the nearest gram and placed in an atmosphere maintained at a temperature of one hundred degrees Fahrenheit (100°F.) plus or minus five degrees (5°F.) and at a relative humidity con- II trolled within the limits of thirtyflto thirty—five percent (30-55%). Means shall be provided for circulating the air."1 If a test is to be designed that may be used in every labora- tory in the country at different times with as nearly as pos- sible comparable results, the conditions must be controlled more closely than this. We will consider first the temperature. Since this is easily regulated, it seems careless for several laboratories to fail to attempt more accurate control. Truscon has im- proved on the A.S.T.M. Test in this respect by stating in their test that the temperature must be regulated to plus or minus five-tenths degree (.50 F.).2 The War Department speci- fies that the temperature of the cabinet should be ninety de- grees plus or minus two (90 :_2° F.). The control range is satisfactory, but I see no reason why the temperate should be changed from the 100° F. of the A.S.T.M. procedure. The Bureau of Reclamation's procedure is probably the easiest to comply with, and one which would give only a comparison test under varying conditions. They use no cabinet, but state: "The room temperature should be operated on a 24 hour cycle, alternating between 120° F. maximum and 75° F. minimum.”5 It is presumed that this variation is to similate the temperature lTentative Method of Test for Efficiency of Materials for Curing Concrete, American Society for Testing Materials, 1940 Supplement, p. 264. 2Truscon Laboratory uses an incubator as for hatching eggs, as their control cabinet and endorses its use (Brower Cabinet No. 42-600). 5Bureau of Reclamation Specifications for 45—Percent Solids Clear Curing Compounds. [2 range of the desert regions of the West, but since the Speci- mens lose moisture much more rapidly the first few hours, it would be necessary to mix the specimens at exactly the same time each day or comparable results between different tests would not be obtained. The next important factor that must be controlled in the storage of the specimens is the humidity. Again various laboratories differ. As noted before, the A.S.T.M. Test desig- nates that the relative humidity should be 50 to 55%. Truscon Laboratory specifies 50% plus or minus 5%. The Cincinnati Testing Laboratory states it should be 45% plus or minus 5%. It is said that the Bureau of Reclamation has done consider- able research in the membrane curing field, yet their test seems worthless to me. Their specification reads as follows: "The relative humidity range shall be approximately 15 to 255%.”L (The word "approximately" is added, I presume, in case the rel- ative humidity should ever stray from this 20% range.) Need- less to say, a specification like this is useless if the pur— pose of the test is to obtain reproducibility. A control cabinet seems to be an absolute necessity if the relative hu— midity must be controlled very accurately. The third important factor, the air flow over the speci- mens, is not definitely Specified in any proposed test. The A.S.T.M. Test merely states that, “Means shall be Provided for circulating the air." The Truscon Test states the same. The Bureau of Reclamation and the War Department tests do not 1Bureau of Reclamation Specifications for 45-Percent Solids Clear Curing Compounds. [3 even mention this item. The Battenfield Laboratory, Manufact- urers of Satisfaction curing compound, specify: "The incubator shall have a small fan which slowly causes air movement, rather than a large fan that causes excessive evaporation, or air movement."1 In considering the design of a control cabinet, a funda- mental question is, "Shall the air flow be an open or closed system?" Perhaps a satisfactory control cabinet can be de- signed with either type, but it seems as if the easier and better control method would be the closed system. This appears logical, since after the conditions are once stabilized, the air must be conditioned only slightly each time that it passes the conditioning agent. However, if an open system is used, there is continually new and unprocessed air passing over the conditioning agent and the conditioning agent has only one chance to regulate the air before it passes over the speci- mens. This would be a more expensive method and more diffi- cult to control, since the entering air may vary greatly according to conditions outside the cabinet. In a closed system, however, if the conditioning agents are adequate for the size of the cabinet, a stabilized condition is not diffi- cult to maintain. Following this line of reasoning, the control cabinet designed for this thesis was of the closed system type. It was designed to accomodate six specimens of the A.S.T.M. type with sufficient additional Space for the conditioning agents. 1Concrete Curing Compound Specifications in Use and Recommended, published by the Battenfield Grease and Oil Corp., p. 2 l4 _ CON TROL CAB/NE T l5 Of course, the size, expense, and the time element involved, controlled the design; but it was recognized that the larger the cabinet, the smoother and more regular the air flow would be. A cabinet 5' - 7 1/2w wide, 2' - 5 5/4" in depth, and 2' - 5 1/2" high was built, with structural wood frame and a celotex covering. To obtain as nearly as possible an air- tight cabinet, a double celotex covering was used with an air pocket between the layers of celotex. It was desired that building paper be placed between the celotex layers, but this was not done, and it later proved satisfactory without it. The doors were of rabbitted construction and sufficiently air-tight for the purpose. The Carpenter Shop on the Campus constructed the cabinet from the sketches furnished them. While the cabinet was under construction, the wiring arrangement was designed. The most satisfactory control of temperature is of course, obtained electrically. A resist- ance coil or electric lights were considered, but it was de- cided that light bulbs controlled by a thermostat would be the most satisfactory. The lights were wired in two banks, one bank of lights being controlled only by a switch on the outside of the cabinet, while the other bank was controlled by a thermostat within the cabinet and by a switch on the outside. It was intended that the one bank be used constantly and the other to regulate the temperature as close to 1000 F. as possible. After the cabinet was completed, however, it was found that the thermostat—controlled bank, while working only infrequently, was sufficient to keep the temperature at the desired value. An outlet was needed inside the cab— 16 inet to connect an electric fan, which might also be controlled by a switch on the outside. To take temperature and humidity readings, a reading light, controlled by another switch on the exterior, was placed in the top of the cabinet, to be used only infrequently.1 An inexpensive electric thermostat, taken from a water bath, was used in series with the light bulbs to regulate the temperature and, after the preper adjustment, controlled to 100° plus or minus 1° F. Since this method is very simple and inexpensive, it appears to me that every laboratory in the country should run its tests with the smallest control range possible, instead of the wide ranges (100 F.) speci- fied at present. As stated previously, the only comment in connection with the amount of air flow over the specimens was that it should be sufficiently small to prevent excessive evaporation.2 In line with this reasoning, a small Sterling electric fan with an eight—inch blade was used. The Air movement in the cabinet was first measured without using air baffles. This was done by the use of a Velometer (Boyle system).5 It was found that the air movement was greater near the top. At Mr. Reuling's4 v. 1The wiring for the cabinet was done by the Electrical Shop of the college from the sketches furnished them. ZBattenfield Laboratory, 0 . cit., p. 2. “This Velometer was borrowed from the Power Lab., Olds Hall. 4A professor in the Michigan State College Mechanical Engin- eering Department. I7 suggestion, air baffles were designed for the corners of the cabinet. After these were installed, the air flow was again tested and proved satisfactory, being approximately two feet per second (1.56 m.p.h.).1 It is said that the Cincinnati Testing Laboratory is using a wind tunnel costing approxi- mately $15,000 to regulate the air flow to 15 m.p.h..2 This air flow seems excessive as even field conditions would rarely be so severe. Truscon Laboratory is using an air flow slight- 1y less than our own.5 Controlling the humidity to the de- sired range is the most difficult. It was not until the middle of the testing period before it was solved satis- factorily. During the tests under Series I, calcium chloride or water was placed in pie time (10 1/2“ dia.), according to the regulation desired. It was necessary under this method to watch the humidity of the cabinet rather carefully, especi- ally during the initial stage of the test, when the specimens were losing moisture rapidly. However, an error caused the control range to be lower than desired. There are five methods of measuring humidity, but the one simplest and most generally used depends upon the lowering of temperature of a wet bulb thermometer due to evaporation. This method was used and the relative humidity was controlled as close to 55% as possible. It was discovered later however, that this was not actually ;See datum on Heasurement of Air Flow in the Control Cabinet. 2From a discussion with Mr. Fairbrother of Truscon Lab., Jan. 19, 1945. 5From a discussion with Mr. Fairbrother, of Truscon Lab., April 19, 1945. [8 giving the correct humidity reading, because the air flow over the wet bulb thermometer was not sufficient to obtain accurate results. To obtain accurate readings the air velocity must be three meters per second. Since it was much less than this, the actual humidity was approximately 22%. The necessary cor- rection was obtained by use of a Dew Point Apparatus.1 After the error was discovered, it seemed best to continue with these conditions until all the materials were tested, so that a comparison between the compounds could be obtained. However, by the time that Series II was started, a better method of controlling the humidity had been found.2 Any aqueous solution which has a vapor pressure close to 0.649 inches of mercury at 1000 P. will work satisfactorily if a sufficient surface is exposed to the air. For our test an area of 628 square inches of saturated magnesium chloride was used for a cabinet of 12.55 cubic feet. The solution of magnesium chloride must have some excess crystals at the bottom of the container, but any excess salt above the solution will cause the humidity to drop below 55%. In connection with the variations that will be caused in water loss by changes in humidity, Test B, Series I, furnishes a good example. After the first several days a specimen will lose moisture in approximately equal amounts each day. (This may be seen from the graphs on Percent Water Loss in the con- 1The Dew Point Apparatus was borrowed from the Physics Department of the college. 2llr. Cecil Rhodes was the first to suggest and try this method of humidity control in the cabinet. 19 clusion.) The fourth day of the test the relative humidity was 22% and the average water loss was 5 1/4 grams. The next day the humidity was only 2% lower, yet the average water loss was 11 5/5 grams. This may not be a quantitative ap— proach to the problem, but it does illustrate the fact that every attempt should be made to control the humidity as finely as possible. Each laboratory has again adopted its own ideas in the proportioning of the mix for the Specimens. The A.S.T.M. Test states: The mortar for making the test specimens shall be of plastic consistency and gaged to a definite water-cement ratio. The proportions of cement and sand shall be determined by adding to a paste hav- ing a water-cement ratio of 0.40 by weight, a suf- ficient quantity of saturated, surface-dried sand to produce a flow of 50 percent as measured on the 10 inch flow table usinglthirty one-eighth inch drops in thirty seconds. Truscon Laboratory uses exactly the same words in its pro- cedure, except for the fact that they substitute a 15% flow in place of the 50%. The Cincinnati Testing Procedure is, in effect, the same as the A.S.T.H., but the Bureau of Reclam- ation uses a concrete made of well rounded, sound, natural aggregate (5/4“ max.) and modified portland cement in a mix proportioned by weight of l:2.65:2.65 with a w/c of 0.55. A 50% flow is objected to because of the great amount of fin- ishing water brought to the surface before a smooth surface is obtained. This finishing water forms a laitance on the surface of the specimen, which, after the application of the leSoTeMo C 156’401‘, 910 Cite, P0 264. 20 membrane, may dry further and crack, leaving small openings for the water to escape. Reducing the amount of mixing water may remedy this somewhat, but the finishing operation still brings up water which may form a surface laitance. The grading of the sand used in preparing the mortar may also affect the water retention of the specimen. The A.S.T.M. Test states that an approximate grading should be: Sieve Percent Passing No. 4 (4760-Micron) 100 n 16 (1190- n so " 50 ( 297- ' 15 ' 100 ( 149- ' 2 In order to make sure that the grading was not affecting the results, the sand for every specimen in both series of tests was sieved and then recombined exactly to the desired pro- portions. After recombining, the sand was saturated and then surface-dried. While the sand is in a saturated, surface- dried condition it has a tendency to segregate, which may again cause variations in specimens; therefore for future tests I would recommend that the sand be oven-dried, sieved, and then recombined separately for each Specimen or each mix. (By oven-drying the sand the amount of additional mixing water needed to correct to a surface-dried condition may be obtained.) The size of the specimen is another feature over which there has been much discussion. The larger specimen (approxi- mately 12“x6'x2") of the A.S.T.M. Test is not very widely used. Instead the Truscon and Cincinnati Laboratories use a speci- men with a top diameter of 5 5/8", a bottom diameter of 4' and 15/16” thick (approximately one-tenth of the size of the larger specimens). It is said that the larger specimen is objection- 2/ able in several respects. 1. The specimen is so thick that the water loss is not a true measure of the surface dehydration. 2. Accurate balances cannot be used with such large specimens. 5. The larger Specimens require much more work and only a few specimens may be run at the same time. The last reason seems to be the most logical basis for chang- ing the size of the specimen. Our cabinet would allow the use of six A.S.T.M. Specimens or sixteen of the smaller ones. This means that if two blanks were used as controls only two curing materials (two specimens per curing material) could be tested at the same time, while with the smaller specimens four blanks and four curing materials (three Specimens per curing material) could be tested simultaneously. In the tests under Series I the large Specimens were used, but the smaller Specimens were tested under Series II. Smaller variations were obtained with the larger specimens, but this will be discussed in greater detail later. The A.S.T.M. moulds are further objected to be- cause of the one-half inch ridge projecting above the surface of the specimen. It is quite logically claimed that this causes a dead air space above the specimen, which is not af- fected by the movement of air in the cabinet. Another variable affecting water retention is the type of finishing used. In this it seems the manufacturing labora- tories have experimented until they found the finish which gave the greatest water retention, and then used it in their tests. The first question is, "Should the laboratory finish similate field conditions?" In my opinion this is not neces- 22 FINISHING -W/ TH S TRIKE- OFF SERIES I SPRA YIN G MEMBRA NE 23 yr‘rfi FINISH/N6 WITH WOOD FLOAT SERIES 17 APPLY IN G MEMBRANE 24 sary, for this test is artificial in many respects, and if the _ finish in the laboratory were similar to that in the field, it would not yet prove that the concrete slab in the field would lose water in the same proportion as the laboratory specimen. Therefore a finish which is simple and reproducible is suf- ficient for the purpose. It might be worthwhile to discuss the effect of the different methods of finishing on the water retention properties. The membrane applied to a brushed sur- face will give the least water loss. A steel troweled surface will lose the greatest water, and a wood float finish gives it 1 In Series I the strike-off method as an intermediate value. Specified by the A.S.T.M. was used, while in Series II the surface was finished with a wood float and later brushed, as is done in the Truscon Procedure. A finish to the specimen which has distinct ridges and low Spots is to be avoided, be- cause the membrane when applied is quite fluid and the low Spots get an excess amount of material, which is definitely detrimental to the water retention properties. Nearly all the water retention tests now used specify that the membrane should be applied after the surface moist- ure has disappeared. The A.S.T.M. Test, however, specifies that the membrane should be applied after a storage period in the cabinet corresponding to the time the concrete in the field would be exposed without curing. Since in the field there is not much moisture brought to the surface when fin- ishing, the membrane may be applied immediately. The speci- From a discussion with Mr. Fairbrother, Jan. 19, 1945. 25 mens in the laboratory are, however, in a closed mould and when the specimens are finished a great deal of water comes to the surface, especially with the wetter mixes. Several of the curing compounds, if sprayed on this surface water, form very poor membranes.l With a drier mix, Serieslfl, the com- pounds Aquastatic l-C-Red, Klearcure 60, Truscon 205, and Satisfaction 45 were tested, applying the membrane immediately. The water retention qualities were comparable with the results obtained when applying the membrane after the surface moisture disappeared.2 If the curing material is not applied soon enough, the membrane will penetrate the surface of the mortar and the resulting membrane will be very poor. This is es- pecially true of the more viscous materials. In some Speci- fications, if the concrete has dried too much, it is specified that the concrete must be Sprinkled before the membrane may be applied. In the laboratory it seems best to wait until the surface moisture disappears, but in the field the best prac- tice indicates that it should be applied immediately. The present Specifications usually indicate that the membrane should be applied at the rate of two hundred square feet to the gallon. In Series II, Test P, the specimens were sprayed at the rate of 100, 200, 400, and 600 square feet to the gallon. The graph on the following page clearly indicates that two hundred square feet to the gallon is the most logical coverage. However, if the coverage is not uniform, the con- 1A notable exception is Klearcure 60, which forms a strong, dense film over this surface water. 286s data on Series 11, Test N. 26 IOO E E PERCENT WATER LOSS= '20 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST SERIES 11 "' TEST P PERCENT WATER LOSS VARIATION WITH RATE OF COVERAGE. 24 I / ' / ’/ I00 zoo ' 400 COVERAGE SQUARE FEET TO THE GALLON 27 crete will also vary in strength and durability. A rate sub- stantially greater than that specified does little in improv- ing the water retention, but a rate substantially less is very harmful. In the field a uniform coverage with the old type of spraying equipment was very difficult, but the Truscon Laboratory has, during the winter, developed a new type of spraying equipment which should give much better results. On large Jobs the most efficient method of applying the membrane curing material is, of course, by power-spray equip- ment, but if necessary, on small jobs the membrane may be ap- plied by brushing. Spraying with an atomizer seems to be the best method of applying the membrane on the laboratory speci- mens, as the amount applied may be measured quite accurately. If the atomizer is connected to a low pressure air line, a steady, uniform spray can be obtained. This method was not used in any of the tests, but it appears to be the best method so far developed for laboratory specimens. The Truscon Laboratory has dispensed with the idea that the edges of the specimen must be sealed with a foreign ma- terial to prevent water loss other than through the membrane. Instead they use the membrane itself as the sealing for the edges. This may be satisfactory under certain conditions, but in the wetter mixes the specimens shrink slightly, pulling away from the mold and leaving a small crack through which water may escape. As a precautionary measure, it seems best to use some other material to seal these edges. In Test Q, Series II, two specimens with sealer and two without were tested using the same curing material. The Specimens without 28 sealer lost about twice as much water as those with sealer placed on the edges. The next few pages will take up the procedure used in the tests under Series I and II; a summary of the results and conclusions will follow. 29 LABORATORY PROCEDUREl Water Retention Test Series I Scope - This method is intended for laboratory use in testing the efficiency of membrane curing products for the cur- ing of concrete. Apparatus - Cabinet — The cabinet has been described previously. Moulds — Moulds shall be water-tight. They shall be rigidly constructed so as not to distort when the specimens are handled at early ages. The moulds shall be 2 1/2» in depth (1/2» deeper than the thickness of the specimen in order to allow for proper sealing of the curing material), and the sides shall be beveled in order that the specimens may be readily removed. Test Specimens - Test specimens shall be approximately 12" in length, 6" in width and 2" thick. Proportioning and Mixing Mortar - (a.) Proportioning - The mortar for making the test specimens shall be of plastic consistency and gaged to a definite water-cement ratio. The proportions of cement and sand shall be determined by adding to a paste having a water—cement ratio of 0.40 by weight, a sufficient quantity of saturated, surface- dred sand to produce a flow of 25 percent as measured on the ten-inch flow table using thirty one—eighth inch drops in thirty seconds. (b.) Mixing - Cement and water in quantities which will give a water-cement ratio of 0.40 by weight shall be placed in an apprOpriate vessel and the cement permit- 'ted to absorb water for onesminute. The materials shall then be mixed with a trowel into a smooth paste. Sat- urated surface-dried sand shall be added to the mixture , until the mzrtar is at the desired consistency (25 per- cent flow). loulding Specimens - After the mortar is thoroughly mixed, it shall immediately be placed in the mould and puddled 1rhis procedure is almost identical with i.S.T.M. 0156-40T. 2The A.S.T.M. Test states 50% flow; reasons for changing this have already been discussed. 5The A.S.T.M. Test designates a Spoon, but this minor mat- ter will not effect results and a trowel is much handier for larger mixes. ‘rhe i.s.r.u. Test states that a final mixing with the hands for two minutes should be used, but this was con— sidered superfluous if the mortar was thoroughly mixed with a trowel; however, it was used in the tests under Series II. 30 with the trowel. It shall then be struck-off with a wooden template. Storage 3; Specimens ~ Immediately after moulding, the mould and Specimen shall be weighed to the nearest gram and placed in an atmosphere maintained at a temperature of 100° plus gr minus 1° F. and at a relative humidity of 20 to 25%. The air flow over the specimens shall be approximately two feet per second. Procedure - (a.) Application of Curing Material - After a sufficient period has been allowed for the disappearance of the surface moisture (approximately 5 hours) the speci- mens shall again be weighed. The liquid curing material shall then be Sprayed on the Specimen uniformly with an atomizer at the rate of 200 square feet to the gallon. (This was measured as follows: the atomizer was parti- ally filled with curing material and Sprayed until no more could be exhausted. Then the desired amount, 9.5 ml. for 72 sq. in., was measured in a glass graduate and placed in the atomizer. The Specimen was then sprayed until the atomizer was again exhausted. An additional check was used in that, the atomizer and contents were weighed before and after spraying the specimen.) After the application of the curing material, the specimen shall be weighed and replaced in the storage cabinet. After approximately 1/2 hour the specimen shall be taken from the cabinet, weighed, and the edges of the Specimen sealed to the mould with a latex material. The specimen is again weighed and replaced in the control cabinet. (b.) Determination of Water Loss - The Specimen shall be weighed daily for the duration of the test. In determining the water loss, corrections shall be made for the loss in weight of the curing material and the sealer compound. At the end of seven days the specimen shall be taken from the cabinet and the final weighing made. 5The reason why the humidity range was 20 to 25% was explained previously under the humidity control of the cabinet. 3/ LABORATORY PROCEDUREl Water Retention Test Series II Scope - This method is intended for laboratory use in test- ing the efficiency of liquid materials for curing concrete. Apparatus - Moulds - Moulds shall be made of metal and shall be water-tight. They Shall be rigidly constructed so as not to distort when the specimens are handled at early ages. The moulds shall be in the shape of a frustum of a right cone having a top diameter of 5 5/8", bottom diameter of 4" and depth of 15/16”. Test Specimens - Test specimens shall be of a size which completely fills a mould to its upper rim. Proportioning and Mixing Mortar - (a.) Proportioning - The mortar for making the test Specimens Shall be of plastic consistency and gaged to a definite water— cement ratio. The proportions of cement and sand shall be determined by adding to a paste having a water-cement ratio of 0.40 by weight, a sufficient quantity of saturated surface-dried sand to produce a flow of 25%2 as measured on the ten-inch flow table using thirty one-eighth inch drops in thirty seconds. This flow test is described in the Standard Method of Test for Flow of Portland-Cement Concrete by Use of the Flow Table (A.S.T.M. Designation C124) of the American Society for Testing Materials. The sand to be used in the proportioning and mixing of the test specimens shall be sieved through 0.8. Standard Sieves. After sieving and separating the retained portions, the sand shall be re-combined in the following exact proportions: Sieve Percent Passing No. 4 (4760-Micron) 100 " 16 (1190- ' 60 “ 50 ( 297- " 15 " 100 ( 149— " 2 (b.) Mixing - Cement and water in quantities which will give a water-cement ratio of 0.40 by weight shall be placed in a non-absorbent vessel and the cement per- mitted to absorb water for one minute. The materials 1Truscon Procedure with only Slight modifications. 2Truscon Laboratory uses a 15% flow. 32 shall then be mixed with a spoon into a smooth paste. Saturated surface-dried sand Shall be added to the mix- ture until the mortar shall be of 25% flow. Final mix- ing shall be accomplished by continuous squeezing and kneading with the hands for two minutes. Rubber gloves shall be worn during the mixing operation. Moulding Specimens - The Specified moulds Shall be weighed to the nearest 0.1 gram. Portions of the batch of mor- tar shall be placed in weighed moulds, tamped and leveled off even with the rim of the moulds with a wood float. The edge of the Specimen shall be grooved slightly so that the sealer may be applied later in this groove. The rim of the mould Shall be wiped to remove any excess mor- tar. Storage pf Specimens - Immediately after wiping, each mould and specimen shall be weighed to the nearest 0.1 gram and placed in a storage cabinet. The storage cabinet Shall be maintained at 100° plus or minus 1 r. and 53% plus or minus 1% relative humidity. The air flow shall be approximately two feet per second. Procedure - (a.) Application of Curing Compound - After ap- proximately 1 1/4 hours, the specimens shall be removed from the cabinet, weighed, and the surface of the speci- men brushed to remove any laitance. The specimen shall be weighed after brushing, and a latex sealer applied to the grooved edge of the specimen to privent any water loss, other than through the membrane. The Specimen Shall be reweighed and placed in the cabinet for an ad- ditional thirty minutes. It should then be removed, weighed, and the liquid curing material applied uniformly by Spraying on the Specimen at the rate of 200 square feet to the gallon. (The amount of curing material ap- plied to the specimen shall be measured by weighing the atomizer and contents before and after spraying the speci- men.) The Specimen shall then be replaced in the cabinet. (b.) Determination of Water Loss - The Specimen shall be weighed at 24 and 48 hours after the curing ma- terial is applied. In determining the water loss, cor- rections must be made for the changes in weight of the curing material and the sealing compound. 1Truscon Laboratory uses no additional sealer other than the Imembrane itself. The results of these tests indicate that the quality of the commercial membrane curing products varies a great deal. (Please refer to the tabulated data and graphs which show the results obtained much more clearly than they can be stated). The product manufactured by the Horn Company is practically useless in retaining the mixing water. It was found upon an- alysis to be sodium silicate, a material previously discarded because of its inefficiency. The results of the tests under Series I were probably affected by a relatively poor control of humidity. In Series II the tests were run with much better control and laboratory technique. It will be noted that the Percent Variation of the Percent Water Loss is much smaller in Series I. Considering the fact that these tests were run over a longer period and there were moresvariables to effect the results, I believe the conclusion may be drawn that the larger Specimens will give more uniform and consiStent re— sults for the same material. The smaller specimens lose so little water and the better materials are so closely bunched that it is quite difficult to determine the relative effici- encies. The tests under Series II have the advantage in that more samples may be run in a given length of time, but the fact that wider variations in results were obtained is a def- inite disadvantage. The data was not conclusive enough to prove that one certain material is definitely better than all others as variations may be noted between Series I and II. However, two materials, Satisfaction 45 and the Horn product, may be regarded as definitely inferior, even though their manufact- 34 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Averaged Results Series I (7 day period) Percent water loss = Percent efficient = 100 F (100 - 100 FZE ) E ( F/E (blank) ) Aquastatic l-C-Red 16.6 % 63.7 % Klearcure 60 I 21.0 53.2 Aquastatic Slab Cure Red 22.7 52.3 Truscon 203 23.1 47.6 Truscon 223 29.8 32.6 Satisfaction 45 ' 39.5 16.30 Horn 44.2 1.20 Blank 45.5 Series II (2 day period) Truscon 203 2.22 96.10 Klearcure 60 3.64 93.66 Aquastatic Slab Cure Red 4.09 93.14 Truscon 223 4.35 92.22 Aquastatic 1-C-Red 5.72 90.05 Satisfaction 45 17.74 69.1 Blank 57.60 Percent Variation of Percent Water Loss from that of average speci- men of each material Series I - 6.66 % Series II - 11.73 % 35 . m>995 «oz—mac ”24352 On 3 . . IYb'dt‘ asso1 SBlVM iuaosad 2 'ON 37 . who 2. m1: ” . uwle \“T‘I . llllllulflmn l‘il\\L1\x\.\\HH\ IIIIIVTilfl TIIsL‘n To rIIlIIII . Ola .. 8" O we: ucfio cad I .2133 . .W’oi ooooo 333 e-.. . 1 1- 1 1 . . a emu» _. musmm . Sm». zoizmemm 553 >03Pm 02.130 ”yam—GEMS 3 El x 66F - 5501 33mm license a on m> i "o~ 20 p 40‘ -' so ‘ so IOO ”PERCENT, EFFICIENT ‘ SIERACE or Two SPECIMENS FOR EACH COMPOUND 4/ IOO E WATER LOSS 3 PERCENT 40 m 30 MEMBRANE CURING ST UDY WATER RETENTION AVERAGE OF AT TEST ‘ SERIES 2 LEAST THREE SPECIMENS G / / / - T SOON zos - m. ARCURE so CURE A UASTATIC SLAB T USCON 223 RED I - C - REO' nsncnow as A UASTATIC ‘ S " BLI ANK TIME IN DAYS 42 "MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST SERIES 2 WATER RETENTION EFFICIENCY OF VARIOUS MEMBRANE CURING MATERIALS o 20 so so so we so lures LOSI' TRusICON 20: ee.{ KLEA RCURE so 993.7 AOUAHSTATIC sLAIe CURE n+0 Jose musICON 223 lezz aouaisnmc I‘C'AED e01 SAT]SFACTIC N 45 J 69.: 0.0 NO C mm 20 so so so ‘ I00 PERCENT EFFICIENT AVERAGE OF THREE SPECIMENS FOR EACH COMPOWD 43 urers claim results comparable with the better curing materi- als. In fact, a better product such as Truscon 203 can be applied at the rate of 400 square feet to the gallon with a Percent Water Loss of 16.5%, while Satisfaction 45 applied at twice the coverage, or 200 square feet to the gallon has a water loss of 17.7%. The better curing compounds tested, Truscon 205 and 225, Aquastatic l-C-Red and Slab Cure Red, and Klearcure 60 are close enough together to make it diffi- cult to predict which is the best material to use. The indi- vidual characteristics of the different materials must be in- vestigated before the best all—purpose curing compound may be ‘found. For example, Truscon 225, if applied at the right time, will give good results;_but if it is applied too soon the efficiency is greatly reduced. The War Department specifies that materials may be used which equal Klearcure (No. 70), Sealkure, Trucure (No. 199 or 205), or Aquastatic (1-0, 1 FMST, or Black) in laboratory tests or field performance. The specifications as to the Percent Water Loss allowable are still in a formative stage due to the fact that the variation in testing procedure of different laboratories makes uniform results impossible. As soon as a Standard Test can be developed which every labora- tory will abide by, the sooner a definite allowable Percent Water Loss can be specified. From the data obtained from these tests, a few recommendations in regard to the develop- ment of an authoritative water retention test will be at- tempted. 44 l. The storage conditions of the test Specimens must be very carefully regulated. Recommended ranges. (a.) Temperature 100° t_l° F. (b.) Relative Humidity 557; j: 2%, but finer regulation if possible. (c.) Air Flow - A definite Specification as to the amount, preferably less than 4 mepohe 2. The proportioning of the cement and sand should be reduced from 50% to a lower value; further invest- igation is necessary to determine the best value. 5. An exact grading of the sand should be specified, or further investigation should be made as to the effect of this variable. 4. The larger Specimen (A.S.T.M.) is, in my opinion, the best, because more uniform results may be Ob- tained from it. 5. The A.S.T.M. mould should be changed in that the 1/2" projection above the surface of the specimen should be removed, and a flat rim substituted, for sealing purposes. 6. Every material should be tested by applying the material at different intervals after finishing, so that the effect of the moisture Of the surface upon the water retention properties of the mem— brane may be determined for various compounds. If a standardized test is not developed quickly so that the inferior materials may be eliminated from the market, poor results in the field may cause engineers throughout the country to distrust this new type of product. The sooner these inferior materials are exposed and condemned, the greater will be the chance for the better products to compete successfully with the Older methods of curing. 45 SURFACE DE H YDRA T/ON ANALYSIS The results of poor curing are most apparent in the upper surface of a concrete slab. In many reapects, the strength of this surface is the most important element in the concrete slab. If it is not properly cured, the surface will suffer from scaling and abrasion. A test which would evaluate the surface dehydration of the speci- men with different methods of curing would be very useful to correlate with other tests, such as the Water—Retention Test and the Abrasion Test. In order to analyze the amount of surface dehydration that took place, the specimen, after being broken in the Flexural Test, was immediately Sprayed along the fractured surface with phenolphthalein. This indicator gave a red- dish color to the surface which contained moisture, but the areas which had been dehydrated remained a natural color. The specimen was then photographed - the surface dehydration is indicated on the print by the lighter color. This procedure was originated by the Truscon Laboratory. The results of this study show clearly that the better membrane curing compounds successfully retard surface de- hydration, while the inferior membranes show a distinct line of surface dehydration which is almost as deep as those of uncured specimens. (Please refer to the photo- graphed specimens on the following pages). 46 s- ‘ V ‘ i“ V, .I- "‘ “' '. ~- . '. -. W I" ' f“? n ’ ,. . . sex-19.....e» . . - W, .. .. .. . , a“. ' 5.‘J‘ ‘ . 9:.- ,h.:. " 4 . 2!}. r: I v , " . l ' , ,O ' ‘ ' . g .. . . \ SERIES I ma ran (.03: :Homv PIC TOR/ALLY TOP - NO COMPOUND ‘ CURED IN MOIST ROOM CENTER - AQUASTAT/C l-C-RED BOTTOM - NO COMPOUND - CUREO IN CAB/NE T 47 NO COMPOUND - cunt-0 IN CABINET m ran LOSS - 31.3 amus- HORN COMPOUND - CURED IN CAB/NE 7' WATER LOSS-25.5 CRAMS AQUASTA TIC /- C-RED - - WATER LOSS- 5.4 CRAMS 48 FL EXURAL 755 7' In an effort to determine what relation the curing com- pound used bore to resistance to a flexural force, we have in- cluded in this study a flexural test, to be used on the larger A.S.T.M. Specimens. Concrete placed in slabs, as well as in various members of concrete building structures is continu- ally being subjected to flexural stress, and since the makers of the various membrane curing preparations advocate the use of their individual and collective products in the curing of buildings and Slabs, it is of importance Just what effect, if any, the various types of curing have on the flexural strength. Very little has been done regarding flexural strength of mem- brane-cured concrete, and of the specifications recommended up to this time, none, to our.knowledge, refer to any flexu- ral tests which have been conducted as aids to evaluation of compounds. The Specimens used are the same ones as used in Series I for the water retention test and later used in the abrasion test. They have a top surface of 72 square inches, being 12 inches long and 6 inches wide; they are 2 inches thick, and the edges are slightly beveled to enable the finished speci- men to be easily removed from the molds. The apparatus used in the test for breaking the speci- mens is pictured in an accompanying photograph. The pressure was applied through the steel ring, transmitted to the two knife edges and thence through the specimens to the lower knife edge. Pressure was applied by means of the hydraulic jack. The distance between the two upper knife edges was nine inches with the lower knife edge being 4% inches from 49 FLEXURAL TES T APPARA TUS 50 each of the two upper ones. Before starting the test, the steel dynamometer ring was calibrated using the Olsen testing machine in the Olds Hal testing laboratory. A Federal dial, sensitive to the variation of one-ten thousandth of an inch was mounted in the ring and adjusted to zero; known loads were then applied and the vertical compression of the ring, as registered on the dial, was noted and recorded. After two cycles of application and releasing of the test load, a cali- bration curve for the dynamometer ring was drawn, to be used in the flexural test on our specimens. This test was run on each Specimen seven days after re- moval from the test cabinet or the moist room, as the case might be, and in all cases, this was fourteen days after preparation. Since concrete is weakest in tension and any variation which might be present between the various speci— mens would occur in the surface region due to varied curing methods, the test was run so that the surface would be put in tension on application of the load. After the Specimen was broken and results recorded, the two halves remaining were marked and kept for the running of the abrasion tests. The results obtained in this test are shown on the fol~ lowing page in tabular form; the modulus of rupture was com— puted from the formula, M c S : I stress in the extreme fiber of the specimen in which 3 0 distance from neutral axis to extreme fiber M==bending moment at the section I-moment of inertia of the section about its neutral axis 5/ FLEXURAL TEST RESULTS Curing No compound-cured in moist room No compound-cured in moist Horn-cured in cabinet Horn Klearcure 60 Klearcure 60 room No compound-cured in cabinet NO compound-cured in cabinet No compound-cured in cabinet Aquastatic l-C-Red Aquastatic 1-C-Red Aquastatic Slab Cure Aquastatic Slab Cure No compound-cured in cabinet Ho compound-cured in cabinet Truscon 225 Truscon 225 Truscon 205 Truscon 205 No compound-cured in cabinet No compound—cured in cabinet Mo compound-cured in moist No compound—cured in moist NO compound—cured in moist No compound-cured in moist room room room room No compound—wet burlap curing No compound—pended 52 Load at rupture 925 pounds 925 970 1050 1150 1225 925 925 925 1075 1210 1200 1125 850 1000 1025 1125 1075 1065 775 815 975 925 975 815 1100 815 Modulus of rupture 529 lb./in. 529 554 600 656 700 529 529 529 614 690 685 642 485 570 595 642 614 607 442 464 556 529 556 464 627 464 2 Compound used 1 Modulus of rupture in pounds / square inch Klearcure 60 678 Aquastatic Slab Cure 664 Aquastatic 1-C—Red 652 No compound-cured under burlap , 627 Truscon 225 614 Truscon 205 610 Horn 577 No compound-cured in moist room 527 NO compound-cured in cabinet 507 The values in the above table are the averages for all specimens cured by like methods or compounds. 5.3 DISCUSSION The results given here for the performance of specimens cured by the use of several different curing compounds and methods are in no way intended to represent the flexural strengths of concrete used in construction work. Structural concrete contains not only the mortar but also aggregates of various size and composition, and Since the purpose of this test was to evaluate the efficiency of the membrane tested in retaining the water necessary for the cement to properly hy- drate and develop full characteristics of strength, coarse aggregates were omitted and merely a mortar of cement, graded sandiland water was used. It will be seen that the results obtained are not entirely consistent; for example, of the tests run on Klearcure 60, one Specimen had a modulus of rupture of 700 pounds per square inch and the other broke at 656 pounds per square inch. This variation may be caused by several different factors: 1. The arrangement of the aggregates may be such as to cause differences. 2. The curing may not be the same for all specimens. This idea is substantiated by the fact that on the water retention test, specimens cured at the same time under identical conditions did not lose identical amounts of water. 5. Variations in surface smoothness will alter the results. 4. Variations in thickness or other dimensions, in- cluding effect of shifting of the mortar in the pan before set occurs, or sagging of the bottom of the pan due to weight of mortar. 5. Differences in temperature between the cabinet 1For the gradation of the sand, see Water Retention Test. 54 (100 F.) and the moist room (70 F.) may cause a variation in curing. If this is true, the moist room cured Specimens could not be compared fairly with the membrane cured ones. 0f the above, probably the last two are relatively in- significant, and the most important is probably the second. Even with exactly identical conditions of curing, however, it is probable that results would vary. Concrete acts incon- sistently at times, and in the testing of beams, cylinders, briquets, and other similar samples of concrete, the individ- ual result cannot be taken as representative, but a series of Specimens must be made up and the average result taken. The Bureau of Reclamation suggests the use of one hundred speci- mens in a compression test}-conclusions to be made only from the composite results of all these specimens. The use of one hundred Specimens of each curing compound is of course out of the question in this study, but we feel that the test does give an indication of the relationship existing between cured and uncured specimens. On examination of the results given in the foregoing table, it will be seen that, as would be expected, the poorest results were Obtained on these specimens which were exposed to drying without the benefit of burlap, compound, or moist room curing. The best results were shown by the Specimens that were cured by compound and the one cured under burlap; this last result must be taken lightly, however, since only one such specimen was tested and the use of further tests might bring this average result up or down somewhat. Enough lQpncrete Curipg Compound; a publication of the Bat— tenfeld Grease and Oil Co. p. 6 55 tests were run on the Specimens with no-compound (seven in number) and those cured in the moist room (six) to compare these with the various membrane cured Specimens, and when this comparison is made, it will be seen that the compounds are far superior in results to no compounds whatever, and it would ap- pear that the specimens cured by membrane are also superior to moist room cured specimens, although the heat element mentioned before may alter this result. It must be remembered, also, that the above results are for 14 day tests and the water cured specimens might, on fur- ther curing, continue to gain in strength to a greater degree than those cured under the membrane. 56 ABRAS/ON TEST INTRODUCTIOM It is a generally assumed fact that the value of a mem- brane curing compound lies in its ability to retain, during the curing period, that water which was used in the preparation of the concrete. However, the value of a concrete structure is not measured by the amount of water that was retained during curing, but rather by the performance of the concrete after it is put into use. For example, in highways, sidewalks, floors, and other structures making use of concrete slabs, the resis- tance to certain flexural stress and abrasive force is the yardstick by which the value of the concrete is measured. Thus, before it can be said conclusively that the mem- brane is effective as a curing agent, the resistance of mem— brane cured concrete to some outside force must be compared with the resistance of specimens cured by some other method when subjected to the same force. One of the tests used to compare the qualities of various concretes is the flexural test, the results of which are given in another section of this study. The other test being used to evaluate various curing compounds is the abrasion test; this test also measures an important property of concrete. Although a compound may very effectively retain the water during the curing period, it is very possible that it also might react unfavorably with the cement constituents, thus producing a finished concrete product of inferior quality with little resistance to wear. The abrasion test has been used to some extent in previ- ous studies to measure the quality of concrete produced by different methods of curing. The Bureau of Reclamation, one 57 of the earliest experimenters in the field of curing compounds, made use Of an abrasion test which utilized steel grit. The grit was blasted from a nozzle at an angle Of 45 degrees with the surface Of the specimen and 4 inches away from it. After a given period, the blasting was stopped, the surface brushed, and the loss of weight was determined.1 Another wear test of a different type is used by the Cincinnati Testing Laboratory of the War Department. A special tool fastened in the chuck of a drill press is run for three two-minute intervals. After each interval, the specimen is brushed, and the loss in weight is measured; the result is the average loss in weight for the three intervals. Other experimenters have devised other abrasion tests but they operate, in general, on the principles of the two outlined above, and they all have the same object-to evaluate the ab- rasive properties of the curing compounds being produced. This, along with an attempt to gain some idea of the correlation between water loss and wear in concrete, is the purpose Of this abrasion test. APPARATUS The apparatus used in the abrasion test was built up using the drill press as the basis. Two photographs are in— cluded on the following page which illustrate the set-up. The wear tool itself was constructed as follows. The Shaft was H. S. Meissner and S. E. Smith, "Concrete Curing Com- pounds", Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Vol. 9, May-June 1958, p. 555. ~ 58 ABRAS/ON TEST SET-UP CLOSE-UP OF WEAR TOOL 59 made of such a size that it could be mounted in the chuck of the drill press; to this shaft was hinged the main part of the tool, the hinge permitting uniform transfer of the load to the Specimen being tested. The pointed wheels which were in con- tact with the concrete surface are No. 0 Huntington emery wheel dresser cutters, and ordinary washers were used to keep the wearing wheels in the proper position. During the pre- liminary tests, some difficulty was encountered with the shaft on which the wheels rotated, due to the fact that the shaft wore nearly as fast as the concrete. After substituting a case—hardened shaft, however, the trouble was completely remedied. For measuring the amount Of wear, several methods were considered. The one finally adopted made use of the Federal dial with calibrations to the thousandths Of an inch. The dial was mounted from a stationary part of the drill press fréme and an arm was secured to the main drill-press shaft sleeve. This arm moved downward as the Specimen became worn, and the end bearing against the dial Shaft caused the amount of wear to be registered on the dial. The drill press operating arm was twelve inches long and a weight of one pound was suSpended twelve inches from the center Of rotation of the arm. This caused a force of ap- proximately 24 pounds tO be transmitted to the specimen through the wheels. The speed of operation of the press for this test was about 575 revolutions per minute, varying slightly at the different periods of the test; that is, as the tool wore down slightly into the specimen, a slight amount of binding between 60 the tool and the specimen occured, and the Speed was slightly reduced. This reduction, however, was small and thus was neglected. PROCEDURE In this test, as well as in the water-retention test, there are two main series of Specimens, logically known as Series I and Series II. The specimens in Series I were made according to A.S.T.M. specifications-~they are 6 inches wide, 12 inches long, and 2 inches thick--and two tests were run on each specimen. In Series II, the specimens were made in the small round molds, as explained in the water-retention test, and only one test was run on each. The procedure was prac- tically the same for both Series I and Series II, and the fol- lowing explanation will apply for both unless otherwise stated. In Series I, the various specimens were cured in the cabinet under controlled conditions1 for a period of 7 days and were allowed to cure further in the laboratory for another 7 days, at which time they were subjected to the flexural test and then tested to determine abrasion resistance. The Speci- mens in Series II were cured for two days in the cabinet and the abrasion test was run immediately except in two cases. Thus the large specimens of Series I were cured 14 days before test- ing, and the smaller specimens of Series II were cured 2 days. At the start of the test, the Specimens were clamped se— curely to the table of the drill press and leveled, using a small carpenter's level. The abrasion tool was then brought AISee Water Retention Test for the exact conditions. 6! down onto the Specimen and the table was adjusted so that the drill press arm formed an angle of about 10 degrees with the horizontal. As the specimen wears, the arm drops, and this slight elevation is to allow for the drop; the 10 degrees will cause a difference of only 1.5 percent in the horizontal lever arm, and this will be reduced since the arm swings through the horizontal as the Specimen wears. The next step in the procedure is to take the initial dial readings. The tool was rotated one complete revolution and readings were taken at each of the four quarter points; the average result is that used. As soon as preliminary readings were taken, the drill press was started. An Eastman timer was used to time the test and readings were taken at the one, three, five, and ten minute points in Series I and the one, three, five, and eight minute points in Series II. These readings were taken in exactly the same manner as at the beginning of the test, and were recorded for use in plotting the result curves. Because the emery wheel cutters used in the test showed a tendency to wear, after each test, the tool was dismantled and the worn cutters were replaced. Since the outer cutter showed the greater wear, this cutter was removed each time and a new cutter put at the inside. This kept the cutters working from inside to outside and insured uniform conditions for each test. 62 SPEC/MEN AFTER WEAR RESULTS The results of both Series I and Series II tests are shown by the graphs which are drawn up on the following pages. For each specimen, there is a separate curve, and also a sum- mary graph is given which Shows the average curves of all Of those specimens cured under the same conditions. Before drawing any final conditions from the curves, cer- tain factors must be considered. The fact that, during the five minute interval, one specimen suffered a slightly greater depth of wear than another does not necessarily prove that it is less resistant to wear than the other, because on the sur- face of every specimen, there is a certain amount of laitance and irregularities which may wear off rapidly. After these irregularities are worn off, however, the abrasion resisting Qualities may be of the highest order. So, besides noting the total wear of each Specimen, the slope of the wear curve should be examined when final evaluation of the various curing methods is made. 64 INCHES DEPTH 0F WEAR- .I50 .I40 . [.70 . I20 .IIO .I00 .090 .060 .070 .060 .050 .040 .030 , .020 .0/0 MEMBRANE C UR/NC S TUDV ABRASION TEST SERIES I NO COMPOUND fl/ / // / / my / x1 2 .3 TIME- MINUTES ‘ 65 DEPTH OF WEAR-INCHES MEMBRANE CUR/N6 5 may ABRASION TEST SERIES 1 . I50 N0 COMPOUND -CURED IN MOIST ROOM .I40 . I30 . I20 .IIO .I00 .090 .060 .070 .060 .050 .040 F’ .030 \ F" \I“ \‘ .020 \-\\ \\‘ .0I0. 0 I 2 3 TIME- MINUTES 66 0. DEPT/“I- OF WEAR - INC/1E5 .I50 . I40 .I30 .I20 .IIO .I00 .090 .080 .070 .060 .050 .040 .030 .020 .0/0 ABRASION TEST SERIES I MEMBRANE CURING S TUDV NO C OMPOUND-CURED AS SHOWN TIME -MINUTES 67 / flaw/Ru" / y 6 / / I 2 3 4 5 DEPTH OF WEAR-INCHES . 150 . I40 .130 .120 . 110 .100 .090 .050 .070 , .000 .050 .040 ' .030 .020 .0IO MEMBRANE C URING ABRASION TEST SERIES I KLEARCURE 60 STUDY I 2 3 TIME - MINU TE S 00 MEMBRANE C URING STUDY ABRASION TEST SERIES I . 150 ”0”” . I40 .130 / .120 / .110“ % /// .100 6y 6 b 8 \ § \. o 8 k E o DEPTH 0F WEAR - INCHES Q \I Q \ \\\ .040 // .030 .020 .0/0 0 1 2 3 4 ' TIME - MINU TES 69 DEPTH OF WEAR-INCHES .ISO . I40 .130 T .120 .IIO . I00 .090 .000 .070 .060 .050 .040 030 .020 .0 I0 MEMBRANE CUR/N6 STUDY ABRAS/ON 7‘55 7 SERIES 1 5A TISFAC TIC/V // f 1 I 2 3 4 TIME - MINUTES 70 DEPTH OF WEAR-INCHES ME MBRA NE C UR/NG STUDY ABRAS ION TE S T SERIES I . ’50 AQUASTA TIC I-‘C-RED .I40 . I30 . I20 .//0 . [00 .090 .000 .07 0 .060 .050 .040 \\ / D" M 0'2 / V, / .020 / / .0/0 , 0 I 2 3 4 TIME -MINU TE S 7/ DEPTH OE WEAR-INCHES MEMBRANE CUR/NC STUDY ABRASION T E S T SERIES I ’50 AQUAS TA TIC - SLAB CURE .I40 . I30 .I20 .I/O . I00 .090 .080 .070 .060 .050 .030 .040 D" 6.4 %// .020 17 / .010 // 0 1 2 3 4 ' rm: - MINUTES 72 DEPTH OF WEAR-INCHES . I50 .I40 . I30 . I20 .IIO .I00 .090 .070 .060 .050 .040 .030 .020 .0I0 MEMBRA NE CURING 5 TUDV ABRA 51011 TES 7 SERIES I ' TRUCURE 223 I 2 3 TIME - MINUTES 73 DEPTH OF WEAR- INCHES . I50 . I40 . I30 .I20 .IIO .I00 .090 .080 .070 .060 .050 .040 .030 .020 ME MBRA NE C UR/N 0 STUDY ABRASION TEST SERIES 1 TRUCURE 2 03 W _ I 2 3 TIME - MINU T65, 74 DEPTH OF WEAR-INCHES .I50 . I40 .I30 . I20 .IIO . I00 .090 .060 .070 .060 .050 .04 0 .030 .020 ' .0I0 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY ABRASION TEST SERIES I TEST H @ \ “\‘\\‘b\\\\~ £7 000” 30' / / / / .// f / TIME - MINUTES 75 DEPTH OE WEAR-INCHES MEMBRANE C UR/NG STUDY ABRAS ION TE S T SERIES 3' .150 TEST I \m / . I30 / . I20 .IIO . I00 _.,... ______{.________ 4L..._..___1+__ r(”mm/190 .090 1v .\0 .080 \ .070 .060 .050 , A .040 X . w" / \\ 10"“1 /% / ; ..../ / / , .020 / /,// .0/0 / \\\ \ 0 0 I 2 3 4 TIME - MINUTES 76 % %’ SERIES 3 TEST J / ABRAS ION TE 5 T 1tIZEVLI£?I2/4/VQE' C?£II?IAVZ? JYIWLACII’ 009VOU .0/ \Q Idwqurlllll .I50 .I40 .130 .I20 .IIO 0000000 ,1 nu mmoowmm o Whtgs IQVMs: K thMQ . I00 RIC KL" 77 TIME -MINU TES 23 .020 .0I0 , DEPTH OF WEAR- INCHES .I50 .I40 . I30 . I20 .IIO . I00 .090 .030 .070 .060 .050 .040 ' .030 .020 .0I0 1vncv~1z91a1u~n5‘ «CZ/%?IAIC? .SWVZIZJI’ ABRA $101v TEST SERIES .U TESTK / CO I N“ %% AGU‘S VAT“: SLF 2 TIME - MINUTES 76 3 DEPTH OI" WE AR - INCHES MEMBRANE C UR/NG S TUD Y ABRAS I ON TE S T SERIES II .150 TEST L . I40 / ... / .IIO 000 . I00 .090 .080 \ .070 . 060 .050 g / / /// .... / A // .020 / 00 I 2 3 I 4 TIME - MINUTES 79 DEPTH OF WEAR-INCHES AAQEU¢IZ9I?74IV2?' (Tl/I?IAIC? 5?TYQZ?I’ ABRASION TEST SERIES 11' 150 TESTM // // . 120 i I/ .r . 110 .e°// 0/3' .100 » ‘ 6.? s /‘ .090 J1? 5 .000 G .3? .070 /7/ .000 I 1/ / .05 0 1‘ AYS "I ‘F 040 1 £04” I Vfliffio r .030 ' / ) .020 4' .0I0 1 2 3 '4 5 TIME - M INU 72's 00 DEPTH OF WEAR-INCHES .I50 .I40 .I30 . 120 . 110 .100 .090 .000 .070 .000 .050 .040 .030 .020 .0I0 MEMBRANE C URIN G S TUDY ABRAS ION TEST TE STN COM TWO I”OUND DA Y S IMMEDIATE? IN CA INET— APPI. I? TES TE .7 9 01V known N-I N-Z KLEAR URE AOUAS A TIC 10 1-0-32'0 N-J N-l muse 1v 20:1 54 TI 0710 \\ ‘\\\ // \ \@"\\ 1/3 / \\\ /. // 2 TIME - MINUTES OI 3 DEPTH OF WEAR-INCHES .I50 . I40 . I30 .I20 .IIO .I00 .090 .070 .060 .050 .040 .030 .020 .0I0 MEMBRA NE CUR/N6 STUDY ABRA 51011 TES 7' SERIES II TEST 0 Z / 043 \flo \\ 2 3‘4 5 TIME - MINU TE S 02 DEPTH 0F WEAR-INCHES MEMBRA NE CUR/NC 0 mm ABRAS ION TEST TEST R .I50 .I40 .I30 - cou 0111\10 APPLIED IM 5011: ray 7070 0.4 r: 11v CABINET - 7:5 7:0 FIVE 4?”: AF r019 921.10%. .I20 17-1 AQUA: ATIC 1-c-mr0 / . [/0 13-2 (1.52100: 0 / 13-3 rnusc N 200 . / R-l SA 715 07101? ‘ .100 / ' / / .090 / / .000 / - J ' «I» “.5 / / .070 x// / / >./$ .\ / .000 / //f V .050 / / / // / .040 . Z / /%K .030 .020 .0I0 0 0 ' I 2 3 4 .‘5 TIME- MINU r53 03 DEPTH 01r WEAR + INCHES MEMBRA NE CUR/N6 5 1710 Y ABRASION TEST SUMMARY OF SERIES I TESTS .I50 / .I40 ‘ r - 1 — 140112574710 1‘0-950 2 - KLEARCURE 00 . J30 3- 14011115741710 sma cunt / / 4 - MD cougouwo-mwsr 90014 / 5- r 0000 203 / J20 0- rgusco 223 / 7- SF r1554 r101v / , [/0 g: 213%.. 001m / / .100 / // / . / .090 °’ ./ ‘/ / / / 6 .080 I / I / / .0 70 // // .000 / / / 5 / f / .050 / / ,/ / f / f / ‘ .040 / / /J // 1 f/ / - / ézéy .030 / / Z / .020 / / .0/0 0 0 I 2 3 4' TIME - MINUTES 04 DEPTH OF WEAR - INCHES ME MBRA NE CUR/N6 STUD Y ABRASION TEST SUMMARY OF SERIES 11' TESTS ‘ .I50 .I40 1 - AOVASTAT c SLA can: 2 - KLEARCUJE 00. , [30 3 - AOUASTANC 1 - r-RED 4- TRIISCON 203 ’T‘ 5— SAIP'ISFACIVION , [20 0- uavsr no 014- TESTED 710Ars I/ 7-mt1500N 223 0- N0 COMPOUND . [/0 j] 9- 1.10157 ROOM- 719750 2 DAYS // .090 1 ‘ I .080 // / .070 K/ 1/ 1 .060 / / 050 f/ y?///—— .040 f// /4/;,M .030 j / // V / x r .020 // .0I0 0 0 I 2 3 4 85 TIME - MINU TE 5 UNCERTAINTIES In this test, as in any other, there are certain uncer- tainties introduced during the test which must be considered. .These are not due necessarily to any fault of the tester (although there may be error introduced by the carelessness of operation,) but are caused rather by the nature of the ele- ments being tested and the testing apparatus. In the abrasion test, some of the uncertainties arising are as follows: 1. Variations in the specimens themselves due to non— uniform water loss on curing. If the membrane is not evenly applied, one part of the specimen may lose more water than another part, and therefore, wear faster. 2. Differences in the surface characteristics of the various specimens. Irregularities, such as roughness, will cause a variation of the results. 5. Variations in the speed of the drill press oper- ation. This error is small. 4. Aggregate in a specimen will introduce error ' since most aggregates will not wear as fast as the mortar itself will. Although fine aggregate was used in the preparation of the specimens for this study, in a few cases the arrangement was such as to cause uneven wear. 5. impact effect of the tool. On a rough Specimen, the tool showed a tendency to bounce; this might cause accelerated wear. The results as shown in the accompanying graphs seem to be quite consistent; for example, the curves representing the wear of the specimens cured with Klearcure 60 vary only a little over one per cent. The widest variation is shown on the specimens which had no compound, and on these, the results 'are in close enough agreement to show a very definite trend. Since the results do seem quite consistent, we feel that it is safe to proceed to draw definite conclusions from the test results. 86‘ CONCLUSIONS From the results of the abrasion test, the following can be safely concluded, we believe: 1. 2. 3. 4. Membrane cured concrete can be depended on to give good wearing qualities to approximately the same degree as water cured concrete. This does not apply, of course, to all of the membranes, but to only the more efficient preparations. Not all membranes are effective. In Series I, Horn curing compound and Satisfaction gave results which are but little better than those obtained with no special curing. Truscon 225 is somewhat better and Truscon 205 gave fairly good results. The best re- sults were given by Aquastatic l-C-Red, Klearcure 60, and Aquastatic Slab Cure, all of which gave nearly the same results as the moist room cured specimens. In Series II, the order of merit was changed slightly, as shown on the summary graph. For a graphic picture of the relative effectiveness of the various compounds, see the summary graphs included with this test. The wear of a mortar which receives no special curing will be about four times that of water- cured or good membrane cured mortar. There is a definite correlation between the water loss and the resistance to wear in a membrane cured Specimen. Using the statistical method of least squares, a correlation coefficient of .74 87 5. 6. was obtained for this relationship. The graph on the page following also illustrates this cor- relation. lembranes should not be applied immediately upon molding. Tests N and R in Series II were those in which the membrane was applied immediately after the Specimen was molded; in the other tests, a period of about three hours elapsed between mixing and application of the compound. The increased wear on those specimens which were sprayed immedi~ ately may be due to chemical reaction between the compound and the cement in the mortar. Whatever the cause, however, a definite weakening of the surface is indicated. Membrane cured specimens develop their wear- resisting qualities in a shorter period of time than the water cured specimens. Test M in Series II shows the wear curves of specimens cured in the moist room with no compound. Those specimens tested at two days gave results practically the same as for specimens cured in the cabinet with no compound. When tested at seven days, however, the water cured specimens gave the same results as the two day membrane cured specimens. It may be claimed that the specimens cured in the cabinet with no compound would show good wear resisting qualities at seven days just as the moist room cured specimens did. The results of Series I 88 DEPTH OF WEAR IN INCHES' 5 MINUTES .I50 . I40 . I30 .I20 .IIO . I00 . 090 .080 .070 .060 .050 .040 .030 .020 . 0/0 MEMBRANE C URING STUDY WATER LOSS - WEAR CORRELATION O f . / . / I0 20 89 30 40 PERCENT- WATER LOSS- 7 DAYS 50 show that this is not true. 0f the six points stated, the first two important findings of the abrasion test, and seems that membrane curing compounds are not facturer's dreams, but on the contrary, have in concrete work, and if the results of this contain the most from these, it merely manu- a definite place study can be taken as an indication (and we naturally believe it can) the future of membrane curing materials is anything but gloomy. 90 CONCLUSION In this report, even though we have made several definite conclusions, we do not wish to convey the idea that the investigation was as extensive as we might have desired. The time element hindered our investigation of many important items in connection with the relative merits of membrane curing compared with the older types of curing. The Abrasion Test, in particular, has opened up new possibilities in the testing of various curing methods. The cycle of testing, Water-Retention Test, Flexural Test, Surface Dehydration Analysis, and the Abrasion Test, has many advantages and we heartily recom- mend its use in future testing. By running several dif- ferent tests on the same specimen, the correlation between tests is obtained, and the several tests may substantiate the validity of results. We realize that many important items have been touched only lightly, but we feel that this study might form a basis for future work and a sug- gestion for more thorough investigation in the future. 9/ APPENDIX A - WATER RETENTION TEST DATA I. II. III. APPTEDIX A - WATPR RFTVETION TEST DATA Table of Contents of Data Control Cabinet A. Humidity con. trol of cabinet. . . . . . B. Teasurement of air flow in cabinet . . Page (Ni-J Minor Tests in Connection with Water Retention Test SUrfaCe-dried COleitiOne e e e o e o O . Percent solids of later sealer . . . . . Evaporation of moisture while mixing . wtj <3Ui> Water Retention Test Q 1. Data applicable to every specimen series. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Test 2. A. O O O I O O I O O O O O O 3. Test B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. TeSt C. e e o e o e o e o e e 0 e 5. TeSt De 0 e e e e e o e e e e e e 6. TeSt E. O 0 O O O O O 0 O O I O O 7. Test F. . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. Explanation of computations under lated data. . . . . . . . 9. Tabulated. data (Test A - Test F). B. Series II 1. Data applicable to every specimen this series . . . . . . . . . . . 2. TeSt II "' 11851: R o e e e o e e e e . Specific gravity of membrane curing compounds. Percent solids of :nemorane curing compounds. Water content of oxford sand at saturated under O'lri> o "Q0303 this . 8 . 16 . 2O . 26 . 52 . 38 . 4O Trial Dew Dew Point Point (Going (Going down) up) 1 8.000. 10.000. 9.000. 1 8.5 9.0 2 9.0 9.3 2 8.5 9.5 3 8.8 9.5 3 8.8 9.4 Trial Dew Vapor Point in Air gr. per Average cu.ft. 1 48.20F. 3.871 1 47.7 3.804 2 48.5 3.911 2 48.2 3.871 3 48.5 3.911 3 48.4 3.898 IFII‘IBQAVE CURING STUDY WATER QETENTION TEST Humidity Control 9: Cabinet Dew Point 8.75 9.15 9.0 9.15 9.1 Air Temp 0 Back of Fan Air Temp. Wet Average (Dry bulb) Bulb (Dry bulb) 100.50F. 99.8 100 97 100 97 Vapor for Sat. gr. per Average cu. ft. March 23, 1943 Front of Fan Air Temp. Wet Bulb 74.80F. lOlOF. 730F. 74.6 101 73 74 101 73 73 98 72 74.5 101 73 73.5 98 72 Humidity Wet & Dry Bulb Humid. 100.750F. 20.38 100.4 20.19 100.5 20.25 97.5 18.65 100.5 20.25 9705 18.65 from Dew Back of Front of Point Fan Fan 19.0% 29% 25% 18.8 31 25 19.3 29 25 20.8 31 28 19.3 30 25 20.9 32 28 Average correction to be applied to wet and dry bulb apparatus in back of fan is: 10.8 % Average correction to be applied to wet and dry bulb apparatus in front of fan is: 6.3 % MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Humidity Control 9: Cabinet Dew Point Back of Fan Vapor Trial Air Wet in Air 0C. 0F. Temp. Bulb gr./cu.ft.. 1 17.8 64 100 80 6.65 2 17.6 63.7 100 79 > 6.58 3 17.0 62.6 100 80 6.35 4 18.0 64.4 100 80 6.73 from Dew Pt. Dry Bulb 34.2 33.8 32.7 34.6 April 2, 1943 Humidity Humidity Wet & Difference 2+2 40 42 42 Average 7i3 6.2 9.3 7.4 7.7 Since the dew point apparatus which gives a correct humidity reading cannot be used, as it was borrowed, the humidity will be maintained by correcting the wet and dry bulb reading and then maintaining the humidity at this desired level. should be maintained at 32.5 %. the wet and dry bulb reading to maintain this desired humidity is 40.2 %, Since the humidity or the wefi'bulb reading should be between 79 and 80° F., if the air temperature is 1000 F. *1 M HBRANE CURING STUDY L WATER RETEKTION TEST Measurement of Air Flow in Control Cabinet Instrument - Velometer (Boyle system) Date Tested Serial No. 3314 2-19-43 Type No. 3002 Readings taken at 3 l/2" height Across right edge Depth from Front Velocity of Air of Cabinet Feet per Min. 3 " 101 6 101 9 95 12 101 15 101 18 7 ' 117 Across center Depth from Front Velocity of Air of Cabinet Feet per Min. 3 " 101 6 . 117 9 101 12 9O 15 ' 95 18 106 Across left edge Depth from Front Velocity of Air of Cabinet Feet per Min. 3 II 143 6 154 9 154 12 148 15 143 18 148 These readings are corrected for temperature. MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Minor Test in Connection with WATER RETENTION TEST SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF NEKBRANE CURING COKPOUNDS Curing Material Wt. of Wt. of Flask Wt. of 250 ml.. Specific Flask a 250 c.c. C.C.. Curing Compound Gravity Truscon 223 97.8 g. 297.7 g. 199.9 g. .800 Truscon 203 97.8 ‘ 307.7 209.9 .840 Truscon 214 97.9 312.9 215.0 ‘ .860 Truscon 199 97.9 317.8 219.9 .880 Klearcure 60 97.7 330.1 232.4 .929 Satisfaction 45 98.1 315.8 217.7 .871 Horn 97.7 420.5 322.8 1.291 Aquastatic Slab Cure Red 97.8 307.0 209.2 .837 Aquastatic l-C-Red 97.8 328.5 230.6 .923 Curing Material Klearcure 6O Aquastatic l-C-Red Aquastatic Slab Cure Red Horn Satisfaction 45 Truscon 203 Truscon 223 Truscon 199 Truscon 214 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY MINOR TESTS in connection with WATER RETENTION TEST PERCENT SOLIDS OF CURING MATERIALS Weight Weight Percent Liquid Dry Solids Solids 3.3243 g. 1.8916 g. 56.90 g. 2.7740 ' 1.3063 47.09 3.3645 1.4693 43.67 6.0959 2.3452 38.47 45.00 3.4417 1.5758 45.79 2.5832 0.6904 26.73 2.6108 1.1472 43.94 1.8322 0.8148 44.47 NENBRANE CURING STUDY MINOR TESTS in connection with WATER RETENTION TEST WATER CONTENT OF OXFCRD SAND AT SATURATED SURFACE DRY CONDITION Wt. of can - 78.59 g. Wt. of can and sand (moist) - 614.70 11:00 a.m. March 12, 1943 Wt. of can and sand (dry) - 607.73 11:50 a.m. Earch 16, 1943 614.70 - 78.59 = 536.11 3. 607.73 - 78.59 3 529.14 g. Wt. of sand (moist) Wt. of sand (dry) 536.11 - 529.14 - 1.1282 % 529.14 Percent of moisture PERCENT SOLIDS CF LATEX SEALER Wt. of can - 19.88 g. Wt. of can and latex (liquid) - 26.73 4:45 p.m. 3-2-43 Wt. of can and latex (solids) - 21.93 12:30 p.m. 3-3-43 Wt. of can and latex (solids) - 21.93 12:30 p.m. 3-4-43 Wt. of latex (liquid)= 26.73 - 19.88 = 6.85 9. ft. of latex (solids)8 21.93 - 19.88 = 2.05 3. Percent of solids z 103 x 2.05 2 30.0 fl H.25 in connection with WATER RETENTION TEST Series I EVAPORATION CE YCISTYR? WRIIE VIKING This test is to determine the amount of water lost, due to evaporation while mixing. Mixing takes approximately thirty minutes. 4750 g. sand 475 g. water 5225 g, at 11:30 a.m. Karch 16, 1943 - 5204 g, at 12:00 m. March 16, 1943 21 5. water evaporated Since in each specimen there is approximately 4500 grams of material, excluding water, the allowance for evaporation is 4500 x 21 9 4700 is 20 grams. Therefore in the computations 20 grams will be subtracted from the mixing water to determine the original water in the specimen. HEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Data applicable to every specimen under this series. Mortar Data Brand of cement - Huron Standard Sand (a) Source - Oxford, Michigan (b) Grading - Absolute Passing No. 4 100 % 16 6O % 50 15 76 100 2 % (c) Moisture (saturated surface-dried condition - 1.128 % Proportioning of Mix Cement 2700 g. Water 1080 g. (.40 of cement by weight) Sand 7460 g. (sufficient for 25% flow) Total 11240 g. Percent water - 9.60854% This batch is sufficient for two specimens. Application of Membrane Curing Compound After sufficient time had elapsed after finishing the specimens for the surface moisture to disappear (approximately 3 hours), the membrane was applied by spraying with an atomizer at the rate of 200 sq. ft. to the gallon. ‘ Sealing g: Edges The edges where the mortar met the pan were sealed with a Latex material as soon as the membrane had dried. (approximately 1/2 hour after the application of the membrane). Weighing 2: Specimens The specimens were weighed daily to determine the water loss. This weighing was done as close to the time of day of the application of the membrane as feasible. 6 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test A Specimen A-l Date February 6, 1943 Curing Method Moist Room Tested by L. T. 0. TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight of floist Room Specimen Temp. Humidity 2-6-43 4:00 p.m. 6063 g. 660 F. 100% First day Second day 2-8-43 2:30 6068 n n Third day 2-9-43 2:00 6074 n a Fourth day 2-10-43 2:00 6081 u " Fifth day 2-11-43 4:30 6085 " « Sixth day 2-12-43 2:45 5093 n n Seventh day 2-13-43 2:00 6099 II n Wt. of mortar and pan 6063 g. Wt. of pan 1066 g. Wt. of mortar 4997 g. 460.1 g. Original water in specimen 4997 x 9.60854% - 20 Specimen A-2 Moist Room MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test A Date February 6, 1943 Tested by L. T. 0. Curing Method . TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight of Moist Room Specimen Temp. Humidity 2-6-43 4:00 p.m. 5899 g. 66° F. 100% First day Second day 2-8-43 2:30 5908 n u Third day 2-9-4} 2:00 5912 N u Fourth day 2-10-43 2 :00 5916 H :3 Fifth day 2-11-45 4:30 5924 " " Sixth day 2-12-43 2:45 5927 n u Seventh day 2-13-43 2:00 5938 n n Weight of mortar and pan 5899 g. Weight of pan 1038 5, Weight of mortar 4861 g. Original water in specimen 4861 x 9.60854% - 20 = 447,1 8. IO MEXBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test E Specimen 3': Date March 254 194} Curing Katerial Truscon 203 Tested by L. T. O. Position in Cabinet 3 TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight Temp. Wet & Correct of of Dry Bulb Humidity Specimen Cabinet Humidity Reading 3-25-43 10:05 a.m. 6054 g. 1000 F. 33% 22% Before membrane 3-25-43 1:15 p.m. 6009 100 36 25 After membrane 3-25-43 1:20 6014 100 36 25 Before sealer 3-25-43 1:50 6011 100 36 25 After sealer 3-25-43 1:55 6018 100 36 25 First day 3-26-43 4:00 5965 100 31 20 Second day 3-27-43 12:00 m. 5949 99 34 23 Third day 3-28-43 3:30 p.m. 5936 100 33 22 Fourth day 3-29-43 12:00 m. 5929 100 34 23 Fifth day 3-30-43 1:45 p.m. 5923 100 33 22 Sixth day 3-31-43 1:15 5918 100 35 24 Seventh day 4-1-43 1:00 5913 100 35 24 Weight of mortar and pan 6054 g. Weight of pan 1065 g. Weight of mortar 4989 g. Original water in specimen 4989 x 9.60854% - 2O - 459.4 g. Membrane Applica tion Exposed area, 12 sq. in. Amt. of mat'l. applied 9.5 ml. Sp. Gr. of mat'l. . 0 Checking by weight 28 EEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test B Specimen B-2 Date February 20, 1943 Curing Mat'l. Klearcure 60 Tested by L. T. 0. Position in Cabinet 6 TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight Temp. Wet & Correct of of Dry Bulb Humidity Specimen Cabinet Humidity Reading 2-20-43 2:58 p.m. 6039 5. 98° F. 36% 25% Before membrane 2-20-43 6:00 p.m. 6009 100 36 25 After membrane 2-20-43 6:10 p.m. 6016 100 36 25 Before sealer 2-20-43 6:45 p.m. 6008 100 40 29 After sealer 2-20-43 6:50 p.m. 6012 100 40 29 First day 2-21-43 4:15 p.m. 5987 100 33 22 Second day 2-22—43 2:30 p.m. 5967 99 33 22 Third day 2-23-43 2:00 p.m. 5956 99 33 22 Fourth day 2-24-43 2:45 p.m. 5951 99 33 22 Fifth day 2-25-43 12:15 p.m. 5939 100 31 20 Sixth day 2-26-43 2:45 p.m. 5932 100 34 23 Seventh day 2-27-43 2:30 p.m. 5927 99 32 21 Wt. of mortar and pan 6039 g. Wt. of pan 10 1 g. Wt. of mortar 4998 g. Original water in specimen 4998 x 9.60854% Membrane Application Exposed area, 72 sq. in. Amt. of mat'1.—§pplied 9.5 m1. Sp. Gr. of mat'l. .929 .Checking by weight 9.0 So [2 20 = 45901 8. I‘TEIIIBRAI‘IE CUR INC} STUDY' WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test D Specimen D-2 Date March 13, 1943 Curing Materia1_Aquastatic 1-C~Red Tested by L. T. O. Position in Cabinet 6 TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight Temp. Wet & Correct of of Dry Bulb Humidity Specimen Cabinet Humidity Reading 3-13-43 1:15 p.m. 6079 3. 100° F. 29% 18% Before membrane 3-13-43 3:50 6045 100 39 28 After membrane 3-13-43 3:55 6052 100 39 28 Before sealer 3—13-43 4:50 6048 100 39 28 After sealer 3-13-43 5:00 6054 100 39 28 First day 3-14-43 4:15 6028 99 34 23 Second day 3-15-43 4:00 6016 100 33 22 Third day 3-16-43 4:00 6006 100 33 22 Fourth day 3-17-43 3:45 5998 100 29 18 Fifth day 3-18-43 10:00 a.m. 5993 100 29 18 Sixth day 3-19-43 10:00 5986 100 27 16 Seventh day 3-20-43 1:30 p.m. 5982 100 35 24 Weight of mortar and pan 6079 5. Weight of pan 10418. Weight of mortar 50 2 g. Original water in specimen §g3§ x 9;§0854% - 2O - 464.1 g. Membrane Application Exposed area, 1g sq. in. Amt. of mat'l. applied 9.5 ml. Sp. Gr. of mat'l. Checking by weight \0 ID U1 0) “I m 2/ MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test D Specimen D-5 Date March 13, 1943 Curing Material none Tested by L. T. O. Position in Cabinet 5 TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight Temp. Wet & Correct of of Dry Bulb Humidity Specimen Cabinet Humidity Reading 3-13-43 2:45 p.m. 6132 g. 1000 F. 36% 25% Before sealer 3-13-43 5:50 , 6100 100 35 24 After sealer 3-13-43 6:00 6108 100 35 24 First day 3-14-43 4:15 5956 99 34 23 Second day 3-15-43 4:00 5937 100 33 22 Third day 3-16-43 4:00 5927 100 33 22 Fourth day 3-17-43 3:45 5919 100 29 18 Fifth day 3-18-43 10:00 a.m. 5913 100 29 18 Sixth day 3-19-43 10:00 5907 100 27 16 Seventh day 3-20-43 1:30 p.m. 5902 100 35 24 Weight of mortar and pan 6132 g. Weight of pan lO6I g. Weight of mortar 5071 g. Original water in specimen 5071 x 9. 608540 - 20 = 467. 2 g. Exposed area, 79 sq. in. 24 MENBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test E Specimen E-6 Date March 25, 1943 Curing Material none Tested by L. T. O. Position in Cabinet 6 TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight Temp. Wet & Correct of of Dry Bulb Humidity Specimen Cabinet Humidity Reading 3-25-43 11:10 a.m. 5933 g. 1000 F. 36% 25% Before sealer 3-25-43 2:05 p.m. 5901 100 36 25 After sealer 3-25-43 2:10 5908 100 36 25 First day 3-26-43 4:00 5760 100 31 20 Second day 3-27-43 12:00 m. 5746 99 34 23 Third day 3-28—43 3:30 p.m. 5734 100 33 22 Fourth day 3-29-43 12:00 m. 5727 100 34 23 Fifth day 3-30-43 1:45 p.m. 5720 100 33 22 Sixth day 3-31-43 1:15 5716 100 35 24 Seventh day 4-1-43 1:00 5712 100 35 24 Weight of mortar and pan 5933 8. Weight of pan 10 9 5. Weight of mortar 4884 g. Original water in specimen 4884 x 9.60854% - 20 = 449.3 5. Exposed area, 1g sq. in. 3/ MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test F Specimen F-l Date April 1. 19431 Curing Method Moist Room Tested by L. T. 0. TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight of Moist Room Specimen Temp. Humidity 4-1-43 2:05 p.m. 6007 g. 660 F. 100% First day 4-2-43 4:30 6032 " n Second day 4-3-43 12:00 m. 6038 " " Third day 4-4-43 4:30 p.m. 5041 u " Fourth day 4-5-43 4:00 5045 u u Fifth day 4-6-43 3:30 6047 u u Sixth day 4-7-43 3:15 6048 n " Seventh day 4-8—43 7:00 5047 n H Weight of mortar and pan 6007 5. Weight of pan 1068 g. 4:: KO \0 Weight of mortar g. Original water in specimen 4939 x 9.60854% - 20 = 494.5 g. .32 Specimen F-2 Curing Method Moist Room MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test F Date April 1,1943 Tested by L. T.0. Remarks First day Second day Third day Fourth day Fifth day Sixth day Seventh day Weight of mortar and pan Weight of pan Weight of mortar U m C" m \NUJUJUKJJUJWW J—‘J—‘J—‘f‘k-P‘J—‘k 03-4 0“? #UIDDH bk-k-l—‘J-‘JP-P-L‘ TEST RECORD Time Weight of Moist Room Specimen Temp. Humidity 2:20 p.m. 5932 g. 660 F. 100% 4:30 5965 " " 12:00 m. 5978 " " 4:30 5984 N I. 4:00 5987 H 3' 3:30 5990 " " 3:15 5990 " " 7:00 5990 " " 1040 g. 4892 g. Original water in specimen 450.6 x 9.60854% - 20 . 450.6 g. 33 MENBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test F Specimen F—B Date April 11‘1943 Curing Method Moist Room Tested by L. T. 0. TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight of Moist Room Specimen Temp. Humidity 4-1-43 3:50 p.m. 6060 g. 66° F. 100% First day 4-2-43 4:30 6094 u u Second day 4-3~43 12:00 m. 6105 " " Third day 4-4-43 4:30 p.m. 5107 n " Fourth day 4-5-43 4:00 6113 u n Fifth day 4-6-43 3:30 6114 " " Sixth day 4-7-43 3:15 5115 n n Seventh day 4-8-43 7:00 5117 u H Weight of mortar and pan 6060 g. Weight of pan 1068 g. Weight of mortar 322g g. Original water in specimen 4992 x 9.60854% - 20 = 459.6 g. 34 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test F Specimen F-4 Date_April l, 1943 Curing Method Moist Room Tested by L. T. O. TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight of Moist Room . Specimen Temp. Humidity 4-1-43 3:57 p.m. 5970 g. 66° F. 100% First day 4-2-43 4:30 6003 u n Second day 4-3-43 12:00 m. 6017 " " Third day 4-4-43 4:30 p.m. 6022 " " Fourth day 4-5-43 4:00 6027 u u Fifth day 4-6-43 3 :30 6029 u u SiXth day 4-7—43 3:15 6030 II .3 Seventh day 4-8-43 7:00 5033 u H Weight of mortar and pan 5970 g. Weight of pan 1040 g. Weight of mortar 4930 g. Original water in specimen 4930 x 9.60854% - 20 = 453.7 g. 35 NENBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test F Specimen F-5 Date April 1, 1943 Curing Method Wet Burlap_ Tested by L. T. 0. TEST RECORD Remarks Date Time Weight of Laboratory Air Specimen Temp. Humidity 4-1-43 4:35 p.m. 6146 g. Start of Curing 4-1-43 7:20 6135 First day 4-2-43 4:30 6158 Second day 4-3-43 12:00 m. 6160 72° F. 22% Third day 4-4-43 4:30 p.m. 6166 72 41 Fourth day 4-5-43 4:00 6174 75 . 24 Fifth day 4-6-43 3:30 6174 75 32 Sixth day 4-7-43 3:15 6170 75 34 Seventh day 4-8-43 7:00 6170 75 38 Weight of mortar and pan 6146 g. Weight of pan 1063 g. Weight of mortar 5083 g. Original water in specimen 5083 x 9.60854% - 20 = 468.4 g. o ‘L 36 Specimen F-6 Curing Method Ponding_ U {D c+ (D Remarks 4-1-43 Start of Curing 4-1-43 First day 4-2-43 Second day 4-3-43 Third day 4-4-43 Fourth day 4-5-43 Fifth day. 4-6-43 Sixth day 4-7-43 Seventh day 4-8-43 Weight of mortar and pan Weight of pan Weight of mortar Original water in specimen MEMBRANE CYRING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Test F Date April 1. 1943 Tested by L. T. 0. TEST RECORD Time Weight of Laboratory Air Specimen Temp. Humidity 4:45 p.m. 6005 5. 7:20 5995 4:30 6033 12:00 m. 6041 720 F. 22% 4:30 p.m. 6045 72 41 4:00 6047 75 24 3:30 6051 75 32 3:15 6052 75 34 7:00 6053 75 38 6005 g. 1050 g. 4955 s. 4955 x 9.6085flfl - 20 = 456.1 g. 37 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series I Explanation of Computations under Tabulated Data Original Water (A) - This is the water in the Specimen at the time of finishing of the mortar. It was computed as follows: weight of mortar times percent water minus 20 grams. This correction is applied, because during the mixing operation, approximately 1/2 hour, the mortar loses moisture. (Please refer to datum under Evaporation Loss While Mixing under Minor Test). Correction for Curing Material (B) - Because the membrane curing compounds are highly volatile, much of the weight disappears in a few hours. This correction is necessary or this loss of weight would be considered water loss, which is not correct. (Please refer to Percent Solids of Membrane Curing Materials under Minor Tests). Correction for Sealer (C) - The Latex material used to prevent moisture from escaping around the edges of the pan is also a material which will evaporate considerably. Therefore, a correction should be used to discount this loss of weight, so that it will not be considered water loss. (Please refer to Percent Solids of Sealing Naterial under Ninor Tests). Water Loss While Blank (D) - This is the water loss from the time of finishing until the time when the mortar was in a condition so that the membrane could be applied. (Approximately 3 hours). 38 Water at Application of Fembrang (E) - This is the water in the specimen at the time the membrane was applied; or in other words, the Original Water minus the Water Loss While Flank. Water Loss (F) - This is the corrected water loss as determined by the loss in weight of the specimen from the time thzt the membrane was applied. Percent Water Loss = 100 F - This is the percent water loss as A determined by the water loss from the application of the curing material times 100, divided by the original water in the specimen. This was computed for the two-day and seven-day periods. Percent Water Loss 100 F - This is the percent water loss as E determined by the water loss from the application of the curing material times 100, divided by the water in the specimen at the time of application of the membrane. This percent water loss is probably the better one to use in comparing the results of the various curing materials. Percent Efficiency = 100 - 100 F/E - This computation is also F73 (blank) useful in comparing the various membrane curing compounds. A slight explanation is necessary. If the membrane were absolutely water-tight, the percent efficiency would be 100, while if the membrane were of no use whatever in conserving the water for the hydration of the cement, the efficiency would be 0. The higher the percent efficiency, the more the water is retained in the mortar and, consequently, the more water is available in the hydration of the cement. 39 NEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST TABULATED DATA - Test A Specimen Curing Original water (A) Water gain (F) day days days days days days ammkumw days Percent water gain : 100 F A 2 days 7 days Percent efficiency = 100 FAA F/A (blank) 2 days 7 days 40 Moist Room 66° F.. 100 % Rel. Hum. 460.1 g. 5. g. 11 18 23 30 36 1.08 7% 7.8 % 103.3 % 118.9 % 447.1 g. 9 g. 13 17 25’ 28 39 2.01 % 8.7 % 106.1 % 121.1 % KEYBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST TABULATED DATA - Test B Specimen B-l B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 Curing Material Horn Klearcure Klearcure Horn Blank Original water (A) 466.2 g. 459.1 g. 456.2 g. 475.2 g. 469.7 3. Correction for curing materia1(B) 6 4 4 6 0 Correction for sealer (C) 1 1 l l 1 Water loss while blank (D) 37 3o 37 39 56 Water at appl. of membrane (E) 429.2 429.1 419.2 436.2 433.7 Water loss ' (F) 1 day 132 27 34 137 36 2 days 150 47 53 155 154 3 days 160 58 63 164 165 4 days 165 63 68 170 170 5 days 177 75 79 182 181 6 days 184 82 86 189 188 7 days 188 87 91 195 194 Percent water loss a 100 F A 2 days 32.2 10.25 11.61 32.6 32.8 7 days 40.3 18.98 - 19.92 41.1 41.3 Percent water loss 2 100 F E 2 days 35.0 10.96 12.65 35.6 35.6 7 days 43.8 20.25 21.70 44.7 44.8 Percent efficiency = 100 - 100 F/E FIE (blank) 2 days 1.50 69.2 64.4 0.0 0 7 days 2.20 54.8 51.6 0.20 0. 4/ IEEMRRANE CUR INC- STU DY WATER RETENTION TEST TABULATED DATA - Test C Specimen C-1 C-2 C-5 C-6 Curing material Satisfaction 45 Blank Blank Original water (A) 459.0 g. 465.3 g. 478.3 g. 469.2 5. Correction for curing material (B) 4 4 0 0 Correction for sealer (C) 4 2 2 3 Water loss while blank (D) 52 49 51 51 Water at appl. of membrane (E) 407.0 416.3 427.3 418.2 Water loss (F) 1 day 107 100 143 138 2 days 127 120 162 156 3 days 138 131 173 167 4 days 147 139 .183 175 5 days 155 147 190 183 6 days 161 153 196 189 7 days 166 159 204 195 Percent water loss . 100 F A 2 days 27.7 25.8 33.9 33.3 7 days 36.2 34.2 42.7 41.6 Percent water 1083 I 100 F W ~J 2 days ~ 31.2 28.8 37.9 37.3 7 days 40.8 38.2 47.7 46.6 Percent efficiency = 100 - 100 F/E FZE (blank) 2 days 17.0 23.4 7 days 13.5 19.0 0(3 OCD C30 O ()0 42 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST TABULATED DATA - Test D Specimen D-l D-2 D—3 D-4 D-5 D-6 Curing material Aquastatic Aquastatic Blank Blank 1-C-Red Slab Cure Red Original water (A) 466.6g. 464.1g. 463.7g. 463.1g. 467.2g. 462.2g. Correction for curing material (B) 4 4 4 4 O O Corr. for sealer(C) 2 2 3 3 3 2 Water loss while blank (D) 37 34 35 30 34 34 Water at appl. of membrane (E)429.6 430.1 428.7 433.1 433.2 428.2 Water loss 1 day 35 . 23 47 37 144 142 2 days 38 35 67 59 163 160 3 days 50 45 77 70 173 171 4 days 57 53 86 77 181 179 5 days _ 63 58 91 83 187 184 6 days 69 65 97 89 193 190 7 days 74 69 103 93 198 195 Percent water loss = 100 F A. 2 days 1 8 .5 14.4 12.8 34. 34 6 7 days 15 9 9 . 22.2 20.3 42.4 42.2 Percent water loss . 100 F E 2 days 8.55 8.1 15.6 13.6 37.6 37.4 7 days 17.2 16.0 24.0 21.5 45.7 45.6 Percent efficiency = 100 - 100 F/E F/E (blank) 2 days 77.2 78.4 58.4 63.8 00 00 OO O O OO ' 7 days 62.4 65.0 47.4 - 53.0 43 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST TABULATED DATA - Test E Specimen E-l E-2 E-2 E-4 E-5 E-6 Curing material 'Truscon 223 Truscon 203 Blank Blank Original water (A) 458.1g. 463.2g. 459.4g. 457.3g. 463.5g. 449.3g. Correction for curing material (B) 2 2 . 4 4 O 0 Correction for sealer (C) 2 3 2 3 2 2 Water loss while blank (D) 40 35 45 44 41 41 Water at appl. of membrane (E) 418.1 428.2 414.4 413.3 422.5 408.3 Water loss (F) 1 day 83 65 50 37 133 134 2 days 98 81 66 53 148 148 3 days 111 94 79 65 161 160 4 days 118 101 86 73 169 167 5 days 123 107 92 79 175 174 6 days 129 112 97 84 180 178 7 days 134 117 102 89 184 182 Percent water loss a 100 F A 2 days 21.4 17.5 14.4 11.6 32.0 33.0 7 days 29.2 25.2 22.2 19.5 39.7 40.5 Percent water loss . 100 F E 2 days 23.4 18.9 15.9 12.8 35.0 36.3 7 days 32.0 27.4 24.6 21.6 43.5 44.6 Percent efficiency = 100 - 100 F/E F/E (blank) 2 days 34.5 47.0 55.5 64.2 0.0 0.0 7 days 27.4 37.8 44.2 51.0 0.0 0.0 44 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST TABULATED DATA - Test F Specimen F-l F-2 F-3 F-4 Curing Moist Room Moist Room 66° F.. 100% R.H. 66° F. 100% R.H. F-5 Wet Burlap F-6 Ponding Original water (A) 454.5 g. 450.6 g. 459.6 g. 453.7 5. 468.4 g. 456.1 g Water gain (F) 1 day 25 33 34 33 2 days 31 46 45 47 3 days 34 52 47 52 4 days 39 55 53 57 5 days 40 58 54 59 6 days 41 58 55 6O 7 days 40 58 59 63 Percent water gain 100 F A 2 days 6.8 % 10.2 % 9.8 % 10.4 % 7 days 8.8 13.3 12.8 13.9 Percent efficiency 100 - 100 F/A F7A (blank) 2 days 116.6 124.9 123.9 125.4 7 days 121.5 132.4 131.2 133.9 45 12 14 20 38 28 24 24 3.0 % 5.1 107.3 112.4 28 36 4O 42 46 47 48 7.9 % 10.5 119.3 125.6 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Data applicable to every specimen under this series Mortar Data Brand of cement - Huron Standard Sand (a) Source - Oxford, Michigan (b) Grading - Absolute Passing N0. 4 100 % 16 60 % 50 15 % 100 2 % (0) Moisture (saturated surface-dried condition - 1.128 %) Proportioning 0: Mix Cement 680 g. Water 272 g. (.40 of cement by weight) Sand 2030 g. (sufficient for 25% flow) Total 2982 g. Percent water - 9.1214 % This batch is sufficient for four specimens. Sealing of Edges Approximately 1 1/4 hours after finishing the specimens, they were taken from the cabinet, weighed, brushed, and re-weighed. Latex material was then placed in a small groove, formed for the purpose when finishing, sealing the specimen and the mould. This prevented water loss through shrinkage cracks. Application of Membrane Curing Compound Approximately 35 minutes after the edges had been sealed, the membrane was applied by spraying with an atom- izer at the rate of 200 sq. ft. to the gallon. Storage of Specimens 100 g 10 F. 31-35% 2 feet per second Temperature range Humidity range Air flow 46 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Test H Specimen H-1 H-2 H-3 H-4 Curing material Truscon 203 Truscon 203 Truscon 203 Blank Weight pan & mortar 588.5 g. 591.8 g. 602.2 g. 585.7 a. Weight pan 43.6 47.2 42.9 45.3 Weight mortar 544.9 544.6 559.3 540.4 Weight before brushing 583.8 587.5 597.9 581.0 Weight after brushing 583.3 587.2 597.6 580.5 Weight after sealer 585.3 588.8 599.3 582.7 Wt. before membrane 583.9 587.4 597.8 581.2 Membrane should be applied 3.12 3.12 3.12 Membrane was applied 3.09 3.19 3.12 4-14-43 1:00 p.m. 584.2 587.9 598.1 558.1 4-15-43 1:45 p.m. 583.7 587.5 597.6 555.5 TABULATED DATA - TEST H Original water (A) 49.7 49.7 51.0 49.3 Water loss while b1ank(D) 5.3 5.0 5.1 5.3 Water at time of application (E) 44.4 44.7 45.9 44.0 Water loss (F) 1 day . .5 .5 .6 22.5 2 days 1.0 .9 1.1 25.1 Percent water loss = 100 x F/E 1 day 1.125% 1.119% 1.309% 51.1% 2 days 2.25 % 2.01 % 2.40 % 57.0% Percent efficiency = (100 - 100 F/E ) ( F/E (blank)) 1 day 97.8 % 97.82 % 97.44 % 0.0% 2 days 96.05 % 96.47 % 95.79 % 0.0% Time of finishing 4-13-43 11:45 a.m. Brushed and sealer applied 4-13-43 1:00 p.m. Membrane applied 4-13-43 1:35 p.m. 47 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Test I Specimen I-l I-2 Curing material Aquastatic Aquastatic l-C-Red 1-C-Red Weight pan & mortar 596.8 g. 585.5 g. Weight pan 45.4 45.4 Weight mortar 551.4 540.1 Weight before brushing 593.1 581.5 Weight after brushing 592.9 581.3 Weight after sealer 594.1 582.9 Weight before membrane 592.6 581.3 Memb. should be applied 3.44 3.44 Membrane was applied 3.57 3.36 4-18-43 12:45 p.m. 591.9 580.1 4-19-43 10:40 a.m. 591.1 579.4 TABULATED DATA - TEST I Original water (A) 50.4 49.3 Water loss while b1ank(D) 4.7 4.9 Water at time of application (E) 45.7 44.4 Water loss (F) 1 day 2.1 2.4 2 days 2.9 3.1 Percent water loss - 100 x F/E 1 day 4.60% 5.41% 2 days 6.35% 7.0 % Percent efficiency - (100 - 100 F/E ) ( F/E (blank) ) 1 day 91.47% . 90.0 % 2 days 89.14% 88.02% Time of finishing 4-17-43 Brushed and sealer applied 4-17-43 Membrane applied 4-17-43 48 I-3 Blank 596.5 s. 52.4 544.1 49.5 5.7 43.8 23.6 25.6 54.0%. 58.5% 00 00 8:50 a.m. 10:05 a.m. 10:40 a.m. Efifi 1-4 Aquastatic 1-C-Red 569.5 g. 44.0 525.5 565.3 565.1 567.0 565.3 3.44 3.38 564.7 563.9 92.68% 90.03% MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Test J Specimen J-l J—2 J-3 J-4 Curing material Klearcure 60 Klearcure 6O Klearcure 60 Blank Wt. pan and mortar 574.1 g. 575.0 g. 592.0 g. 590.4 g Wt. pan 45.5 44.9 44.9 44.0 Wt. mortar 528.6 530.1 547.1 546.4 Wt. before brushing 568.0 569.3 585.5 583.6 Wt. after brushing 567.7 569.0 585.3 583.3 Wt. after sealer 569.5 571.0 586.7 584.7 Wt. before membrane 568.2 569.8 585.4 583.5 Memb. should be applied 3.46 3.46 3.46 Membrane was applied 3.45 3.43 3.44 4-18-43 1:00 p.m. 568.7 570.3 585.0 560.8 4-19-43 1:45 p.m. 568.1 569.8 584.9 558.6 TABULATED DATA - TEST J Original water (A) 48.2 48.4 49.9 49.8 Water loss while blank (D) 6.7 6.1 7.2 7.5 Water at time of application (E) 41.5 42.3 42.7 42.3 Water loss (F) 1 day .9 .8 1.0 22.2 2 days 1.4 1.3 1.9 24.4 Percent water loss = 100 x F/E 1 day 2.16% 1.89% 2.3 % 52.5% 2 days 3.38% 3.08% 4.4 % 57.7% Percent efficiency e (100 — 100 F18 ) ( F/E (blank)) 1 day 95.89% 96.40% 95.51% 0.0» 2 days 94.14% 94.66% 92.28% 0.0% Time of finishing 4-17-43 9:35 a.m. Brushed and sealer applied 4-17—43 10:50 a.m. Membrane applied 4-17-43 11:25 a.m. 49 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series 11 Test K Specimen K-l K-2 K-3 K-4 Curing material Aquastatic Aquastatic Aquastatic Blank Slab Cure Red Slab Cure Red Slab Cure Red Weight pan & mortar 562.1 g. 574.8 g. 553.8 g. 574.0 g. Weight pan 44.2 43.5 42.9 50.3 Weight mortar 517.9 531.3 510.9 523.7 Wt. before brushing 558.2 570.4 549.1 569.0 Wt. after brushing 557.9 570.2 548.9 568.8 Wt. after sealer 560.2 572.1 551.2 571.5 Wt. before membrane 558.8 570.5 549.6 568.8 Memb. should be applied 3.12 3.12 3.12 Membrane was applied 3.24 3.12 3.12 4-18-43 12:45 p.m. 559.2 570.8 549.4 546.3 4-19-43 12:55 p.m. 558.4 569.8 548.0 543.8 TABULATED DATA - TEST K Original water (A) 47.3 48.4 46.6 47.7 Water loss while blank (D) 4.2 5.2 5.1 6.0 Water at time of application (E) 43.1 43.2 41.5 41.7 Water loss (F) 1 day .4 1.2 1.0 22.0 2 days 1.2 2.2 2.4 24.5 Percent water loss = 100 x F/E 1 day .929% 2.78% 2.41% 52.8% 2 days 2.78 % 5.10% 5.80% 58.7% Percent efficiency = (100 - 100 F/E ) ( F7E (blank)) 1 day 98.24 % 94.74% 95.44% 0.0% 2 days 95.60 % 91.31% 90.12% 0.0” Time of finishing 4-17-43 1:05 p.m. Brushed and sealer applied 4-17-43 2:20 p.m. Membrane applied 4-17-43 2:55 p.m. 50 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Test L Specimen L-l L-2 L-3 L-4 Curing material Truscon 223 Truscon 223 Truscon 223 Blank Wt. pan a mortar 561.7 g. 579.0 g. 578.2 g. 580.3 g. Wt. pan 43.4 47.0 45.3 50.9 Wt. mortar 518.3 532.0 532.9 529.4 Wt. before brushing 556.4 574.3 572.8 575.0 Wt. after brushing 556.2 574.1 572.5 574.8 Wt. after sealer 558.1 576.3 574.7 577.7 Wt. before membrane 556.6 . 574.8 572.9 576.0 Memb. should be applied 2.98 2.98 2.98 Membrane was applied 3.07 3.00 3.01 4-18-43 12:45 p.m. 556.8 574.9 573.0 554.0 4-19-43 3:40 p.m. 555.5 573.4 570.7 551.4 TABULATED DATA - TEST L Original water (A) 47.3 48.5 48.6 48.3 Water loss while blank (D) 6.0 5.3 6.6 5.8 Water at time of application (E) 41.3 43.2 42.0 42.5 Water loss (F) 1 day .1 .2 .1 21.2 2 days 1.4 1.7 2.4 23.8 Percent water loss = 100 x F/E 1 day .242% .463% .238% 50.0% 2 days 3.39 % 3.94 % 5.72 % 56.0% Percent efficiency e (100 - 100 F/E ) ( F7E (blank)) 1 day 99.52 % 99.07 % 99.52 % 0.0% 2 days 93.94 % 92.95 % 89.98 % 0 0% Time of finishing 4-17-43 1:50 p.m. Brushed and sealer applied 4-17-43 3:05 p.m. Membrane applied 4-17-43 3:40 p.m. 5/ MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series 11 Test M Specimen M-1 M-2 M-3 Curing method Moist R. Moist R. Moist R. Wt. pan and mortar 617.2 g. 615.8 g. 599.9 g. Wt. pan 52.3 46.6 46.0 Wt. mortar 564.9 569.2 553.9 4-21-43 12:35 p.m. 618.3 615.8 600.3 4-22-43 10:00 a.m. 619.4 617.4 601.1 Original water (A) Water gain (F) 1 day 2 days Percent water gain 1 day 2 days Tabulated Data - Test M 51.5 51.9 50.5 1.1 0.0 0.4 2.2 1.6 1.2 - 100 F A 2.16% 0.0 % 0.79% 4.27% 3.08% 2.38% 52 M-4 Moist R. 603.7 g. 45.0 558.7 603.8 604.8 50.9 0.20% 2.16% Specimen Curing material Wt. pan " " & mortar Wt. mortar 4-28-43 4-29-43 9:30 P.M. MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Test N N-l N-2 Klearcure 60 47.0 s. 591.2 592.9 591.1 592.5 590.2 591.8 Tabulated Data - Test N Original water (A) 49.7 g. 50.1 g. Water loss while blank (D) 0 0 Water at time of . application (. 49.6 50.1 Water loss (F) 1 day 2.1 2.0 2 days 3.0 2.7 Percent water loss . 100 x F/E 1 day 4.23 % 4.00 % 2 days 6.05 5.40 'Percent efficiency a (100 - 100 E/E ; F/E (blank; 1 day 91.80 % 92.25 % 2 days 89048 91061 Aquastatic 1-6-Red 42.8 g. N-3 Trasgon 4303 80 584.3 541.0 583.9 583.3 49.4 g. 0 . 49.4 1.8 #U N 0 (1:01 # mm 8% 92.92 % 91.55 The membrane curing compound was applied immediately after finishing. 53 N-4 Satis. 45 50.2 s. 591.8 541.6 587.2 584.1 49.4 g. 49.4 5.1 9.2 12.35 3% 18.61 \ 0 “IO 0 (TH-J KEKBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Test 0 Specimen 0-1 0-2 0-3 0-4 Curing material Satis. 45 Satis. 45 Satis. 45 Blank Weight pan 44.1 g. 44.8 g. 46.8 g. 44.4 g. Wt. pan and mortar 583.5 573.7 574.1 582.? Weight mortar 539.4 528.9 527.3 538.3 Wt. before brushing 578.0 568.2 568.8 577.4 Wt. after brushing 577.8 567.9 568.5 577.2 Wt. after sealer 579.9 559.7 570.7 579.4 Wt. before membrane 578.2 568.1 569.1 577.8 Wt. membrane to apply 3.37 3.37 3.37 O Wt. memb. has applied 3.37 3.37 3.37 0 4-28-43 '3:00 p.m. 574.9 564.3 566.1 555.0 4-29-43 3:00 p.m. 571.9 561.0 562.8 552.5 Tabulated Data - Test 0 Original water (A) 49.1 g. 48.2 g. 48.0 g. 49.0 g. Water loss while blank (D) 6.3 6.3 6.0 6.0 Water at time of application (E) 42.8 41.9 42.0 43.0 Water loss (F) . 1 day 4.2 4.8 3.9 22.2 2 days 7.2 8.1 7.2 24.7 Percent water loss 2 100 x F/E 1 day 9.81 % 11.45 % 9.29 % 51.6 % 2 days 16.80 19.32 17.12 57.5 Percent efficiency = (100 - 100 F/E ) ( FZE (blank)) 1 day 81.0 77.8 82.0 0.0 2 days 70.8 66.4 70.2 0.0 Time of finishing 4-27-43 1:50 p.m. Brushed and sealer applied 4-27-43 3:05 p.m. Membrane applied 4-27-43 3:40 p.m. 54 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Test P Specimen P-1 P-2 P-3 P-4 Curing material Truscon 203 Truscon 203 Truscon 203 Truscon 203 Coverage (sq. ft. to the gallon) 100 200 600 400 Wt. pan 49.9 g. 45.2 g. 44.6 g. 43.6 g. Wt. pan & mortar 590.0‘ 572.7 597.0 586.6 Wt. mortar 540.1 527.5 552.4 543.0 Wt. before brushing 586.0 568.8 594.6 582.8 Wt. after brushing 585.8 568.6 594.0 582.4 Wt. before membrane 584.2 566.7 591.7 579.8 Wt. membrane should . be applied 6.24 3.12 1.04 1.56 Wt. membrane was applied 6.24 3.12 1.04 1.56 3:45 p.m. 4-30-43 586.0 567.1 585.2 576.1 3:30 p.m. 5- 1-43 585.7 566.5 582.1 573.4 TABULATED DATA - Test P Original water (A) 49.2 g. 48.1 g. 50.4 g. 49.5 g. Water loss while blank (D) 5.6 5.8 5.7 6.4 Water at time of appl. of membr. (E) 43.6 42.3 44.7 43.1 Water loss (F) 1 day 1.0 1.0 7.0 4.4 2 days 1.3 1.6 10.1 7.1 Percent water loss = 100 x E E 1 day 2.29 % 2.36 A 15.7 o 10.2 % 2 days 2.98 % 3.78 a 22.6 g 16.5 % Percent efficiency = (100 - 100 F/E ) ( F/E (blank)) 1 day 95.55 % 95.38 % 69.3 % 80.1 % 2 days 94.77 W 93.56 % 60.4 s 71.1 g Time of finishing 4-29-43 12:40 p.m. Brushed and sealer applied 4-29-43 1:35 p.m. Membrane applied 4-29-43 2:10 p.m. 55 HEM RAPE CURING STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Test Q Specimen Q-l --2 Q- Q-4 Curing material Aquastatic Aquastatic Aquastatic Aquastatic l—C-Red l-C-Rei l-C-Red l-C-Red Wt. pan 45.2 g. 50.8 g. 43.4 g. 45.3 g. Wt. pan and mortar 575.5 600.2 598.9 578.9 Wt. mortar 530.3 549.4. 555.5 533.6 Wt. before brushing 570.4 595.8 593.9 573.6 Wt. after brushing 570.1 595.6 593.5 573.4 Wt. after sealer 572.7 596.5 Wt. before membrane 570.6 595.4 593.1 572.8 Kembrane should be applied 3.44 3.44 3.44 3.44 Membrane was applied 3.44 3.44 3.44 3.44 4:15 p.m. 4-30-43 570.4 594.7 592.1 570.5 3:30 p.m. 5- 1-43 569.7 595.9 591.1 569.0 TABULATED DATA - Test Q Original water (A) 48.4 g. 50.2 g. 50.6 g. 48.6 g. Water loss ‘ while blank (D) 6.1 5.7 5.4 5.9 Water at time of application (E) 42.3 44.5 45.- 42.7 Water loss (F) 1 day 1.0 1.7 2.6 3.9 2 days 1.7 2.5 3.6 5.4 Percent water loss = 100 x F 1 day 2.36 3 3.82 S 5.75% 9.14 3 2 days 4.02 % 5.61 % 7.98% 12.64 % Percent efficiency : (100 - 100 F/E ) ( F/E (blanky) 1 day 95.38 % 92.56 2 88.78% 82.13 % 2 days 92.95 W 90.15 g 86.0 % 77.80 ; £933: sealer was applied to edges of specimens Q-l and Q22, but not to Q-3 and Q-4. The results are quite apparent. 56 Specimen Curing material Weight pan Wt. pan and mortar Weight mortar Membrane should be applied Membrane applied 4:20 p.m. 4-30-43 3:30 p.m. 5-1-43 Original water Water loss while blank Water at time application Water loss 1 day 2 days Percent water 100 x F/E 1 day 2 days Percent efficiency (100 - 100 FZE of loss ( F/E (blank)) 1 day 2 days (A) A 0 \1 21m MEMBRANE CURIN} STUDY WATER RETENTION TEST Series II Test R R-l R-2 Aquastatic Klearcure 60 1-C-Red 4406 8;. 44.2 8. 594.8 584.3 550.2 540.1 3.44 3.46 59208 58’401 591.2 582.6 Tabulated Data - Test R 50.3 g. 49.3 g. 0 0 50.3 49.3 3.6 2.2 5.2 3.7 7.16 z 4.46 % 10.32 7.51 86.0 % 91.28 6 81.90 86.82 R-3' Truscon 203 45.3 a. 591.6 546.3 “3.12 3.12 590.1 588.9 88.62 W 85.59 The membrane was applied immediately after finishing. 57 25.10 67.15 x 56.0 APPENDIX B - ABRASION AND FLEXURE DATA MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: B-5 Compound: None Curing: Tire in.minutes Dial readings Mean 0 ~14 -14 -12 -16 -13.75 1 39 39 38 40 39.0 3 113 110 111 116 112.5 5 153 159 154 157 155.75 10 No readings Weight before: 2491 Time in.minutes Dial readings Nean O -1 -10 4 -8 -3.75 l 50 47 48 48 48.25 3 132 135 138 131 134.0 4 160 162 157 161 160.0 10 No readings weight before: 2340 Weight after: 2284 Flexural Test Dial readings 24 Load at rupture 925 pounds Modqu 3 of rupture Date tested: Tested by: Weight after: March 6, 1943 FY. A. B 0 One week in cabinet and one week in lab air. Total wear 0 52.75 126.25 169.50 2434 Loss: 57 grams Total wear 0 52.0 137.75 163.75 Loss: 56 grams 529 pounds per square inch MEMBRANE CURIHG STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: C-l Compound: Satisfaction 45 . Curing: One week in the cabinet and one week in lab air. This speimen was cracked on removal from the mold, and therefore no tests could be run. METT BANE CL‘RII=.—'G STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: C~2 Date tested: March 16, 1943 Compound: Satisfaction 45 Tested by: ‘W. A. B. Curing: One week in the cabinet and one week in lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Kean Total wear 0 ~15 ~14 ~14 ~9 ~13 0 1 19 16 21 18 18.5 31.5 3 76 72 75 72 73.75 86.75 5 133 130 130 129 130.5 143.50 10 No readings Weight before: 2530 Weight after: 2484 Loss: 46 grams Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~10 '~1O ~14 ~10 ~11 O 1 30 27 30 21 27 38 3 105 101 103 108 104.25 115.25 5 152 148 146 149 148.75 159.75 10 No readings weight before: 2285 Weight after: 2231 Loss: 54 grams Flexural Test Dial reading This specimen was also cracked on re- moval from mold; therefore, no flexure test possible. MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: E~1 Date tested: April 8, 1943 Compound: Trucure 223 Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: One week in cabinet and one week in lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~15 ~10 ~12 ~6 ~10.75 0 1 16 14 13 14 14.25 25 3 55 55 57 53 55.0 65.75 5 95 95 97 99 96.5 107.25 10 No readings weight before: 2413 ‘Weight after: 2365 Loss: 48 grams at six minutes Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~9 ~11 ~12 ~10 ~10.5 0 1 17 16 18 16 16.75 27.25 3 56 55 50 50 52.75 63.25 5 91 88 90 88 89.25 99.75 10 No readings weight before: 2347 Weight after: 2308 Loss: 37 grams Flexural Test Dial reading 26.5 Load at rupture 1025 pounds Nodulus of rupture 585 pounds per square inch A! MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: B-S' Date tested: March 6, 1943 Compound: Klearcure 60 Tested by: W} A. B. Curing: One week in cabinet and one week in lab air. Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 -8 -8 ~18 ~10 ~11 0 l 6 6 4 4 5.0 16.0 3 16 16 15 14 15.25 26.25 5 25 25 28 25 25.75 36.75 10 50 47 50 48 48.75 59.75 Time Weight before: 2281 Weight after: 2250 Loss: 31 grams in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~12 2 -8 0 ~4.5 0 1 11 16 16 17 15.0 19.5 3 34 34 34 34 34.0 38.5 5 48 50 52 49 . 49.75 54.25 10 92 92 92 95 92.75 97.25 weight before: 2506 weight after: 2463 Loss: 43 grams Flexural Test Dial reading 32 Load at rupture 1225 pounds Modulus of rupture 700 pounds per square inch LEMBRAI‘IE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: B-4 Date tested: March 6, 1943 Compound: Horn Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: One week in cabinet and one week in lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Nean Total wear 0 ~6 ~3 ~10 ~6 ~6.25 0 1 47 42 47 47 45.75 52.0 3 107 104 111 114 109.0 115.25 5 150 150 156 153’ 152.25 158.50 10 No readings Time Weight before: 2394 ‘Weight after: 2342 Loss: 52 grams in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~10 -8 ~15 ~12 ~11.25 O 1 34 34 33 34 33.75 45.0 3 85 87 85 83 85.0 96.25 5 125 135 125 130 128.75 140.00 10 No readings Weight before: 2495 weight after: 2448 Loss: 47 grams Flexural Test Dial reading 25 Load at rupture 970 pounds Modulus of rupture 554 pounds per square inch MEVBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: E-2 Date tested: April 8, 1943 Compound: Trucure 223 Tested by: W; A. B. Curing: One week in cabinet and one week in lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~28 ~32 ~24 ~30 ~28.5 O 1 3 3 1 3 2.5 31.0 3 29 28 28 28 28.25 56.75 5 60 55 57 55 56.75 85.25 10 108 105 107 105 106.25 134.75 Weight before: 2555 ‘Weight after: 2510 Loss: 45 grwns Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~15 ~13 -9 ~6 ~10.75 0 1 22 20 24 19 21.25 32.0 3 63 57 63 60 60.75 71.5 5 92 90 93 91 91.5 102.25 10 144 144 143 144 143.75 154.40 Weight before: 2295 Weight after: 2244 Loss: 51 grams Flexural Test Dial reading 29 Load at rupture 1125 pounds Modulus of rupture 642 pounds per square inch [9 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimenk E~3 Date tested: April 8, 1943 Compound: Trucure 203 Tested by: ”W. A. B. Curing: One week in the cabinet and one week in lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear O -7 ~6 ~12 ~5 ~7.5 0 1 15 17 15 18 16.25 23.75 3 42 . 40 40 42 41.0 48.5 5 69 66 69 66 67.5 75.0 10 132 130 132 136 132.5 140.0 ‘Weight before: 2481 Weight after: 2435 Loss: 46 grams Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Dial wear 0 ~3 ~11 ~7 ~4 ~6.25 O 1 20 18 18 18 18.5 24.75 3 44 43 46 47 45.0 51.25 5 74 78 70 80 75.5 81.75 10 143 146 140 145 143.5 149.75 Weight before: 2321 ‘Weight after: 2270 Loss: 51 grmns Flexural Test Dial reading 28 Load at rupture 1075 pounds Nodulus of rupture 614 pounds per square inch 20 Specimen: E-4 Compound: Trucure 203 Curing: Time in minutes 0 ~16 l 5 3 27 5 47 10 92 Weight Time in.minutes 0 -24 1 -1 5 25 5 45 10 99 weight Dial readin Load at rupture Modulus of MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Date tested: Dial readings Mean ~17 ~18 ~16 ~16.75 4 10 7 6.5 29 26 25 26.75 51 45 50 48.25 90 93 90 91.25 before: 2502 Weight after: Dial readings Wean -30 ~25 ~30 ~27.25 ~3 ~1 ~5 ~2.5 19 24 24 22.5 48 46 46 46.5 100 103 102 101.0 before: 2308 Weight after: Flexural Test g 27.5 1063 pounds rupture 2/ Tested by: April 8, 1945 W} A. B. One week in the cabinet and one week in lab air. Total‘wear O 23.25 43.50 65.0 108.0 2470 Loss: 32 grams Total wear 0 24.75 49.75 73.75 128.25 2267 Loss: 41 grams 607 pounds per square inch MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: E-5 Date tested: April 8, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: One week in the cabinet and one week in lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~5 ~5 ~4 ~6 ~5 O 1 59 50 55 50 53.5 58.5 3 159 161 160 161 160.25 165.25 5 ' No readings 10 weight before: 2398 Weight after: 2340 Loss: 58 grams Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~13 ~16 ~13 ~18 ~15 0 1 52 58 53 58 55.25 70.25 3 152 150 155 150 151.75 166.75 5 No readings 10 weight before: 2232 weight after: 2175 Loss: 57 grams Flexural Test Dial reading 20 Load at rupture 775 pounds Nodulus of rupture 442 pounds per square inch 722 Specimen: Compound: Curing: E-6 None Time in minutes 10 ~17 28 90 144 No Weight Time in minutes 0'1 10 ~21 52 143 No weight Nodulus of rupture MET-{BRAKE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Dial readings ~22 ~16 ~18 28 29 28 9O 92 93 140 148 151 readings before: 2311 Dial readings ~14 ~22 ~13 57 54 56 147 143 146 readings before: 2454 Flexural Dial reading 21 Load at rupture 813 Date tested: April 8, 1943 Tested by: W. A. B. One week in the cabinet and one week in lab air. Mean Total wear ~18.25 O 28.25 46.5 91.25 109.5 145.75 164.0 Weight after: 2255 Loss: 56 grmxs Kean Total wear 54.75 72.25 144.75 162.25 weight after: 2403 Test pounds 23 Loss: 51 grams 464 pounds per square inch MEMBRAT-IE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: F-l Date tested: April 15, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: ‘W. A. B. Curing: One week in the moist room and one week in lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~19 ~23 ~29 ~20 ~22.75 0 1 ~4 ~4 ~8 ~4 ~5 17.75 3 1 3 8 3 3.75 26.5 5 21 17 21 '22 20.25 43.0 10 58 60 62 64 61.0 83.75 weight before: 2533 'Weight after: 2498 Loss: 35 grams Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 -6 -6 ~6 ~3 ~5.25 O 1 11 7 7 5 7.5 12.75 3 20 20 21 19 20.0 25.25 5 3O 27 30 31 29.5 34.75 10 73 72 7O 73 72.0 77.25 'Weight before: 2340 'Weight after: 2307 Loss: 33 grmns Flexural Test Dial reading 25 Load at rupture 975 pounds Modulus of rupture 556 pounds per square inch 24 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: F-2 Date tested: April 15, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: One week in the moist room and one week in lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Pean Total wear 0 10 ~6 7 ~10 .25 0 1 16 16 20 16 17.0 16.75 3 34 29 29 27 29.25 29.0 5 36 37 35 36 36.0 35.75 10 52 57 56 56 55.25 55.00 Weight before: 2533 'Weight after: 2506 Loss: 27 grams Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~10 ~8 ~12 ~10 ~10 O l 14 12 11 12 12.25 22.25 3 28 25 26 26 26.25 36.25 5 42 36 40 39 39.25 49.25 10 73 75 73 72 73.25 83.25 'Weight before: 2289 Dial reading Load at rupture Flexural Hodulus of rupture 24 Weight after: 2252 Test 925 pounds Loss: 37 grams 528 pounds per square inch 25 Specimen: F~3 Compound: None NENBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Date tested: April 15, 1943 Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: One week in moist room and one week in lab air. Time in.minutes o -5 L;- 20 5 55 5 45 10 90 Dial readings -7 18 37 50 90 -5 22 35 52 87 1 21 35 50 89 weight before: 2412 Time in minutes 0 -9 1 12 3 28 5 44 10 87 Dial readings ~4 12 30 5O 84 -9 12 31 44 80 -6 13 28 46 87 Weight before: 2525 Dial reading Load at rupture Yodulus of rupture Flexural 25 20.25 35.5 49.25 89.0 Weight after: Mean ~7 12.25 29.25 46.0 84.5 Weight after: Test 975 pounds 26 Total‘wear O 21.75 37.0 50.75 90.5 2374 Loss: 38 grams Total wear 0 19.25 36.25 53.0 91.5 2488 Loss: 37 grams 556 pounds per square inch Specimen: Compound: Curing: F-4 None MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Date tested: April 15, 1943 Tested by: 'W..A. B. One week in the moist room and one week in lab air. Time in minutes Time 10 -6 12 27 47 89 weight in minute 3 10 -20 14 27 50 weight Dial readings -6 -9 10 12 26 28 43 45 88 90 before: -7 15 27 ‘ 45 91 2441 Dial readings Dial reading -18 -23 -14 6 1 3 15 16 14 25 25 25 53 50 50 before: 2418 Flexural 21 813 Load at rupture Kodulus of rupture 13? e an -7 11.75 27.0 45.0 89.5 weight after: Mean -18.75 2.75 14.75 25.5 50.75 Weight after: Test pounds Total'wear 0 18.75 34.0 52.0 96.5 2400 Loss: 41 grams Total‘wear O 21.5 33.5 44.25 69.50 2387 Loss: 31 grams 464 pounds per square inch 27 ’ENBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: F—5 Date tested: April 15, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: One week under wet burlap and one week in lab air. Time Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 -8 -l3 -8 -13 -10.5 0 1 ' 8 8 11 7 8.5 19.0 3 18 18 20 17 18.25 28.75 5 26 29 28 27 27.5 38.0 10 66 66 62 68 65.5 76.0 Weight before: 2675 Weight after: 2649 Loss: 26 grams in minutes Dial readings Tean Total wear 0 -14 -14 -16 -18 -15.5 0 l 3 3 3 2 2.75 18.25 3 l6 17 16 16 16.25 31.75 5 27 30 27 29 28.25 43.75 10 69 68 7O 70 69.25 84.75 'Weight before: 2341 weight after: 2311 Loss: 30 grams Flexural Test Dial reading 28.5 Load at rupture 1100 pounds Modulus of rupture 627 pounds per square inch 28 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series I Specimen: F-6 Compound: None Curing: Time in minutes Dial readings 0 -22 -3 -22 -2 1 4 4 O 10 3 19 20 18 22 5 23 26 3O 28 10 49 48 46 48 Weight before: 2104 Time in minutes Dial readings O -3 -12 -12 -7 1 20 18 18 18 3 27 29 32 30 5 4O 4O 45 4O 10 59 60 6O 55 'Weight before: 2751 Flexural Dial reading 21 Load at rupture 813 Fodulus of rupture Date tested: Tested by: Fean -12.5 4.5 19.75 26.75 47.75 weight after: weight after: Test pounds 29 April 15, 1943 W. A. B. Ponded for one week and one week in lab air. Total wear 0 17.0 32.25 39.25 60.25 2085 Loss: 19 grams Total‘wear O 27.0 38.0 49.75 65.0 2732 Loss: 19 grams 464 pounds per square inch LENBRAHE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: H-l Date tested: April 15, 1943 Compound: Trucure 203 Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Tire in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 -13 -12 -17 -16 -l4.5 O 1 9 6 4 7 6.5 21.0 3 27 26 26 26 26.25 40.75 5 49 49 47 49 48.5 63.0 8 76 75 75 70 74.0 88.5 Height before: 583.7 'Weight after: 550.3 Loss: 33.4 grams Specimen: H-2 Date tested: April 15, 1943 Compound: Trucure 203 Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two dais in the cabinet. Tire in minutes Dial readings Kean Total wear 0 7 0 1 1 2.25 0 1 12 :5 12 15 15.0 10.75 3 29 28 27 27 27.75 25.50 5 38 57 38 38 57.75 55.50 8 6O 52 51 50 50.75 58.50 weight before: 587.5 weight after: 565.1 Loss: 22.4 grans JO MEMBRANE CURIITG STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: H-3 Date tested: April 15, 1943 Compound: Trucure 203 Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~33 ~34 ~38 ~31 ~34 0 1 ~13 ~18 ~13 ~18 ~15.5 18.5 3 6 6 6 7 6.25 40.25 5 25 26 27 27 26.25 60.25 8 60 61 61 60 60.5 94.5 Weight before: 597.6 Weight after: 562.3 Loss: 35.3 grams Specimen: H—4 Date tested: April 15, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Tire in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear O -9 ~18 ~9 ~14 ~12.5 O 1 25 23 23 23 3.5 36 3 153 159 161 160 158.25 170.75 5 No readings Weight before: 555.5 weight after: 495.7 Loss: 59.8 grams 3/ MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: I-l Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: Aquastatic 1-C-Red Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~6 -7 ~8 ~5 ~6.5 0 l 4 8 3 3 4.5 11.0 3 21 23 20 22 21.5 28.0 5 40 41 38 g 45 41.0 47.5 8 69 71 69 65 68.5 75.0 weight before: 591.1 Weight after: 561.2 Loss: 29.9 Specimen: I-l Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: Aquastatic 1-C-Red Tested by: ‘W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~6 ~12 ~12 ~12 ~10.5 0 1 -2 -4 -5 ~3 ~3.5 7 3 13 10 10 13 11.5 22.0 5 36 35 34 38 35.75 46.25 10 65 7O 67 70 68.0 78.5 Weight before: 579.4 Weight after: 547.7 Loss: 31.7 32 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: I-3 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~4 ~4 ~12 ~4 ~6 O l 110 114 115 110 112.25 118.25 1; 150 157 155 157 157.5 155.5 5 No readings 8 Weight before: 565.4 weight after: 506.9 Loss: 58.5 Specimen: I-4 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: Aquastatic l-C—Red Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Fean Total wear 0 ~7 ~11 ~7 ~11 ~9 0 1 15 13 13 15 14 23 3 37 38 4O 38 38.25 47.25 5 54 56 56 60 56.5 65.5 8 85 88 85 89 86.75 95.75 weight before: 563.9 ‘Weight after: 531.4 Loss: 32.5 33 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: J-l Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: Klearcure 60 Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear O -1 O ~2 ~3 ~1.5 O 1 15 16 15 13 14.75 16.25 3 35 35 35 32 34.25 35.75 5 47 49 48 44 47.0 48.5 8 72 71 71 71 71.25 72.75 weight before: 568.1 Weight after: 543.6 Loss: 24.5 grams Specimen: J-2 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: Klearcure 60 Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in.minutes Dial readings Nean Total wear 0 O O ~3 1 ~.5 O l 14 18 16 16 16.0 16.5 3 32 3 33 33 32.75 33.25 5 48 53 46 47 48.5 49.0 8 76 75 78 75 76 76.5 Weight before: 569.7 height after: 542.0 Loss: 27.7 grams 34 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: J-3 Date tested: Aprii 19, 1945 Compound: Klearcure 60 Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Nean Total wear 0 7 3 5 7 5.5 . 0 1 15 14 15 15 14.75 9.25 3 35 33 33 33 33.5 28.0 5 52 52 50 52 51.5 46.0 8 75 73 75 78 75.25 69.75 Weight before: 584.9 ‘Weight after: 560.2 Loss: 24.7 grams Specimen: J~4 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: ‘W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 -4 ~8 ~5 ~9 ~6.5 O l 67 60 63 64 63.5 70.0 2 135 140 135 130 135.0 141.5 5 No readings Weight before: 558.6 weight after: 510.0 Loss: 48.6 grams 35 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: K81 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: Aquastatic Slab Cure Red Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~7 ~8 -9 -6 ~7.5 O 1 9 10 6 9 8.5 16.0 3 22 23 20 20 21.25 28.75 5 35 33 33 g 33 33.5 41.0 8 55 54 56 53 54.5 62.0 weight before: 558.4 'Weight after: 534.2 Loss: 24.2 grams Specimen: K-2 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: Aquastatic Slab Cure Red Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Jean Total wear 0 -5 ~18 -9 -15 * -12.25 0 l 0 ~2 2 4 1.0 13.25 3 20 17 18 18 18.25 30.5 5 32 39 35 37 35.75 48.0 8 77 76 81 80 78.5 90.75 weight before: 569.8 Weight after: 535 Loss: 34.8 grams 36 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: K-3 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: Aquastatic Slab Cure Red Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear O -4 l4 -3 13 5.0 0 1 25 25 26 25 25.25 20.25 3 36 36 32 30 33.50 28.50 5 54 51 48 , 48 50.25, 45.25 8 72 76 70 73 72.75 67.75 Weight before: 548 weight after: 520 Loss: 28 grams Specimen: K-4 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Nean Total wear 0 O -6 -l -6 ~3.25 0 l 70 75 7O 74 74.75 78.0 2 150 159 156 159 156.0 159.25 5 No readings weight before: 543.8 Weight after: 487.0 Loss: 56.8 grams 37 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Specimen: L-l Compound: Truscon 223 Curing: Two days in the Time in minutes Dial 0 ~10 ~16 1 15 16 3 55 48 5 110 106 8 157 154 Weight before: Specimen: L-2 Compound: Truscon 223 Curing: Two days in the Time in minutes Dial 0 ~6 ~16 1 10 12 3 4O 41 5 67 76 8 118 118 Weight before: Abrasion Test Series II Date tested: April 19, 1943 Tested by: W. A. B. cabinet. readings Mean Total wear ~13 ~18 ~14.25 O 11 11 13.25 27.5 52 54 52.25 66.5 104 104 106.0 120.25 156 159 156.5 170.75 556.8 Weight after: 502 Loss: 54.8 grams Date tested: Ap‘il 19, 1943 Tested by: W. A. B. cabinet readings Mean Total wear -9 ~9 ~10.0 0 12 10 11.0 21.0 38 37 39.0 49.0 71 67 70.25 80.25 120 122 119.5 129.5 573.4 Weight after: 527 Loss: 46.4 grams 38 MEEBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: L~3 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: Truscon 223 Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Kean Total wear 0 ~30 ~28 ~27 ~27 ~28 O 1 1 ~3 ~2 1 ~i75 27.25 3 18 20 20 22 20.0 48.0 5 48 47 48 p 45 47.0 75.0 8 100 97 97 97 97.75 125.75 Weight before: 569.8 Weight after: 529.5 Loss: 40.3 grams Specimen: L~4 Date tested: April 19, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Nean Total wear 0 ~14 ~12 ~16 ~11 ~13.25 0 1 4o 41 44 44 42.25 ’ 55.5 3 160 158 161 155 158.5 171.75 5 No readings weight before: 551.4 'Weight after: 488.8 Loss: 62.6 grams 39 Specimen: Compound: Curing: Time in.minutes Specimen: Compound: Curing: Time in minutes MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II M-l None Two days in the moist room. Dial readings ~26 ~34 ~32 42 30 34 36 143 137 140 141 NO readings weight before: 620 weight M-4 None Two days in the moist room. 'Dial readings ~25 ~18 ~20 -19 43 43 42 43 144 142 150 147 No readings weight before: 605 weight 40 Date tested: Tested by: April 22, 1945 Vi. A. B. Tested on removal. Mean ~31.75 35.5 140.25 after: Date tested: Tested by: Total'wear 67.25 172.0 554 Loss: 66 grams April 22, 1945 w. A. B. Tested on removal. Mean ~20.5 42.75 145.75 after: Total'wear O 63.25 166.25 540 Loss: 65 grams MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: H—2 Date tested: April 27, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two davs in moist room and five days in lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Nean Total wear 0 -2 ~9 -4 ~18 ~8.25 0 l 23 22 22 24 22.75 31.0 3 38 35 38 40 37.75 46.0 5 56 5O 52 50 52.0 60.25 8 8O 83 79 85 81.75 90.0 Weight before: 599.7 Weight after: 568.0 Loss: 31.7 grams Specimen: N-3 Compound: None Curing: Two days in the moist room and five daysin lab air. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 ~5 ~17 ~15 ~12 ~12.25 0 1 14 15 14 17 15.0 27.25 3 37 32 36 31 34.0 46.25 5 50 48 48 52 48.5 60.75 8 87 85 84 87 85.75 98.0 weight before: 583.5 Weifht after: 549.8 Loss: 33.7 grams 4/ MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Specimen: N-l Compound: Klearcure 60 Curing: Two days in the Time in.minutes Dial 0 ~12 ~15 l 19 22 3 72 67 5 100 107 8 144 142 'Weight before: Abrasion Test Date tested: Tested by: Series II cabinet. readings Mean ~10 ~17 ~13.5 21 22 21 70 72 70.25 106 101 103.5 142 142 142.5 590.2 'Weight after: April 29, 1945 W. A. B. Total'wear 0 34.5 83.75 117.0 156.0 532.8 Loss: 57.4 grams Specimen: N-Z Date tested: April 29, 1943 Compound: Aquastatic 1~C~Red Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in.minutes Dial readings IMean Total wear 0 ~11 ~16 ~11 ~16 ~13.5 O 1 19 20 18 18 18.75 32.25 3 75 77 75 78 76.25 89.75 5 110 115 112 118 114.75 128.25 8 151 153 154 152 152.5 166.0 Weight before: 591.8 Weight after: 42 530.7 Loss: 61.1 grams MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: N~3 Date tested: April 29, 1943 Compound: Truscon 203 Tested by: ‘W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total'wear 0 '~15 ~15 ~14 ~12 ~14 0 l 11 11 15 15 15 27 3 62 62 64 62 62.5 76.5 5 110 108 107 108 108.25 122.25 8 147 148 148‘ 148 147.75 161.75 Weight before: 583.3 'Weightafter: 525.9 Loss: 57.4 grams Specimen: N-4 Date tested: April 29, 1943 Compound: Satisfaction Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 -3 ~9 -5 ~12 ~7.25 0 1 12 15 12 16 13.75 21.0 3 58 57 60 55 57.5 64.75 5 97 95 100 95 96.75 104.0 8 144 144 145 144 144.25 151.50 weight before: 584.1 'Weight after: 530.5 Loss: 53.6 grams 43 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: 0-1 Date tested: April 29, 1943 Compound: Satisfaction Tested by: 'W. A. B. Curing: Two daysin the cabinet. Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean. Total‘wear 0 ~7 ~3 ~4 0 ~3.5 O 1 11 10 10 11 10.5 14.0 3 26 22 21 23 23.0 26.5 5 40 37 39 35 37.75 41.25 8 64 62 66‘ 66 64.5 68.0 'Weight before: 571.9 'Weight after: 549.3 L088: 2236 grams Specimen: O~2 Date tested: April 29, 1943 Compound: Satisfaction Tested by: ‘I. A. B. Curing: Twodays in the cabinet. Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total'wear 0 5 ~3 2 ~4 O 0 1 17 13 16 14 15 15 3 35 37 36 35 35.75 35.75 5 68 65 67 67 66.75 66.75 8 96 100 96 101 98.25 98.25 ‘Weight before: 562.8 'Weight after: 525.8 Loss: 37.0 grams 44 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: 0-3 Date tested: April 29, 1943 Compound: Satisfaction Tested by: W. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet: Time in.minutes Dial readings Nean Total wear 0 ~8 ~13 ~6 ~11 ~7.0 0 1 9 13 6 12 10.0 17.0 3 28 27 32 30 29.25 36.25 5 61 55 57 59 58.0 65.0 8 87 86 86 89 87.0 94.0 ‘Weight before: 561.0 ‘Weight after: 528.0 Loss: 33.0 Specimen: 0~4 Date tested: April 29, 1943 Compound: None Tested by: l. A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet. Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 -7 ~7 ~9 ~11 ~8.5 0 1 66 63 63 69 65.25 73.75 2 144 144 145 148 144.75 155.25 5 8 No readings Weight before: 552.5 Weight after: 498.1 Loss: 54.4 grams 45 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Abrasion Test Series II Specimen: R-l Date tested: 'May 6, 1943 Compound: Aquastatic l-C-Red Tested by: w. A. B. ' Curing: Two days in the cabinet and five days in the lab air. Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total wear 0 -3 -8 -5 -8 -6 0 1 19 17 16 23 19.25 25.25 3 46 46 45 45 45.5 51.5 5 76 78 80 76 77.5 83.5 8 118 117 117 118 117.5 123.5 'Weight before: 589.4 'Weight after: 547.2 Loss: 42.2 grams Specimen: R22 Date tested: may 6, 1943 Compound: Klearcure 60 Tested by: 'W..A. B. Curing: Two days in the cabinet and five days in the lab air. Time in.minutes Dial readings Mean Total‘wear O 0 -8 -3 -2 ~3.25 0 1 18 22 20 19 19.75 23.0 3 54 58 55 55 55.5 58.75 5 85 92 90 90 89.25 93.50 8 137 129 135 131 134.0 137.25 'Weight before: 581.0 ‘Weight after: 533.5 Loss: 47.5 grams 46 Specimen: Compound: Curing: Time Specimen: Compound: Curing: R93 MEMBRANE CURING STUDY Truscon 203 in.minutes -19 10 50 82 135 Twp days in the Dial -14 10 51 78 133 ‘Weight before: R-4 Satisfaction Time in.minutes -12 15 70 112 160 Two days in the Dial -10 17 70 111 153 ‘Weight‘before: Abrasion Test Series II Date tested: 'May 6, 1943 Tested by: W. A. B. cabinet and five days in lab air. readings Mean Total'wear -18 -14 -16.25 0 10 11 10.25 26.5 45 48 48.5 64.75 84 84 82.0 98.25 131’ 134 133.25 149.5 587.4 ‘Weight after: 534.3 Loss: 53.1 grams Date tested: May 6, 1943 Tested by: ‘W. A. B. cabinet and five days in the lab air. readings mean Total wear ~15 -6 -10.75 0 15 15 15.5 26.25 72 70 70.5 81.25 118 114 113.75 124.50 152 154 154.75 165.50 558.8 ‘Weight after: 503.2 Loss: 55.6 grams 47 D . 1' : HICHIGQN STQTE UNIV LIBRQRIE; “ M :51 ‘i ‘1 p 31293006279305