CENE 486 S21: Final Presentation

2021 Concrete Canoe

Russell Collins

Marie Cook

Kyle Julle

Scott Murphy

Ryan Wassenberg

Friday, April 16, 2021

MEET THE TEAM

Marie Cook

Project Manager

Ryan Wassenberg

QA/QC

Russell Collins

Mix Design Captain

Kyle Julle

Hull Design Captain

Scott Murphy

Structural Design Captain

Project Introduction

Introduction

 Design a concrete canoe

 Follow ASCE National Concrete Canoe

Competition (NCCC 2021) rules [1].

 Competed at the virtual Pacific Southwest

Conference hosted by University of California, Los

Angeles (March 25

– 27

)

Ponderosa Team Goals

 Simplified mix design for shotcrete application

 Mentee Program improvement

 Incorporate sustainable design and new

construction methods

Fig. 1: ASCE Request for Proposals Cover Page [1]

Enhanced Focus Areas

Fig. 3: Mentee Instruction

Image Credit: Ryan Wassenberg

 Simplified Mix Design

 Utilize locally sourced materials

 Reduce components going into mix

 Mentee Program

 Involve mentees to sustain future canoe teams and

their success

 Purchase equipment for future teams

Fig. 2: Mix Proportions

Image Credit: Russell Collins

Mix Design, Technical Approach

 Mix Design Research

 2021 RFP constraints

 Mix Design Testing

 Test → Reﬁne/Research → Test → Repeat

Fig. 4: First Mix Design

Image Credit: Kyle Julle

Fig. 5: Mentees Making Concrete Cylinders

Image Credit: Marie Cook

Mix Design Testing

 Slump test (ASTM C143)

 Compression Test (ASTM C39)

 Splitting Tensile Test (ASTM C496)

 Shotcrete Test (Adapted)

Fig. 6: Slump Test

Image Credit: Ryan Wassenberg

Fig. 7: Splitting Tensile Test

Image Credit: Ryan Wassenberg

Mix Design Testing

Fig. 8: Shotcrete Application & Reinforcement

Image Credit: Marie Cook

Criteria

(1) Can it flow through the shotcrete gun in a

large enough quantity to form a layer of

concrete quickly enough for construction?

(2) Is it cohesive enough to stick to the form

without excessive particle rebound?

(3) Does it slump on the form after placement?

Table 1: Shotcrete Criteria

Table 2: Ponderosa Mixes 4, 5, and 8

Mix Design Testing

Fig. 9: Result of Compression Test

Image Credit: Kyle Julle

Fig. 10: Result of Compression Test

Image Credit: Kyle Julle

Fig. 11: Result of Compression Test

Image Credit: Kyle Julle

Mix ID

Number

Variable of

interest

Comp. Strength

28 day (psi)

Plastic Unit

Weight (pcf)

Slump

(in)

Shotcrete

Performance

Mix #4

Silica Fume

@25%

2100 105 3 Bad

Mix #5

Class F fly ash

@25%

1950 103 5 Poor

Mix #8

80/20 ash

blend @25%

2700 110 6 Good

Mix Design Testing

Table 3: Viscosity Modification

Fig. 12: Curing Chamber

Image Credit: Marie Cook

Fig. 13: Concrete Mixture

Image Credit: Ryan Wassenberg

Mix ID

Number

Variable of

interest

Comp. Strength

28 day (psi)

Plastic Unit

Weight (pcf)

Slump

(in)

Shotcrete

Performance

Mix #9

Inclusion of

VMA

2700 110 9 Excellent

Mix Design Testing

Fig. 14: Result of Splitting Tensile Test

Image Credit: Ryan Wassenberg

Table 5: Air-Entrainer Tests

Table 4: Increased Cement Content

Mix ID

Number

Variable of

interest

Comp. Strength

28 day (psi)

Plastic Unit

Weight (pcf)

Slump

(in)

Shotcrete

Performance

Mix #9

Inclusion of

VMA

2700 110 9 Excellent

Mix #10

+200lbs cement

(per yd

)

3150 110 9 Excellent

Mix ID

Number

Variable of

interest

Comp. Strength

28 day (psi)

Plastic Unit

Weight (pcf)

Slump

(in)

Shotcrete

Performance

Mix #11

Air-entrainer

included

3150 102 9 Excellent

Mix #12 No air-entrainer 4250 107 9 Excellent

Table 7: Final Mix Admixtures

Table 6: Final Mix Solid Materials

Final Mix Design

Solid Materials Amount (pcf)

Type I/II/IV

Cement

600

Class F/C 80/20

Blend

200

PVA RECS15 8mm

(fibers)

Utelite Crushed

Fines

372

Utelite 10Mesh 372

No. 6- Expanded

Perlite

128

Admixtures Amount (fl. oz / cwt)

MasterGlenium 7500 10

MasterSet DELVO 5

MasterLife SRA-35 5

MasterMatrix VMA 362 6

Fig. 15: Fiber Reinforcement

Image Credit: Marie Cook

Fig. 16: Final Concrete Cylinder

Image Credit: Marie Cook

Ponderosa Mix Design vs Others

Variable

Ponderosa

(2021) Mix

Agassiz

(2020) Mix

VolCanoe

(2019) Mix

Unit Weight

(Plastic)

93 lb/ft

56 lb/ft

60 lb/ft

Unit Weight

(Dry)

75.6 lb/ft

56.1 lb/ft

53.0 lb/ft

Compressive

(7 day)

1570 psi 1200 psi N/A

Compressive

(28 day)

2250 psi 2110 psi 2080 psi

Tensile 333 psi 180 psi 300 psi

Slump 9 in 0.5 in N/A

Air Content 8.3 % -4.6 % 9.5 %

Table 8: Final Mix Testing Results

Fig. 17: Broken Concrete Cylinder

Image Credit: Marie Cook

Hull Design

Overall Design Goals

 Maneuverability

 Provide adequate buoyancy

 Stability

Fig. 18: Canoe Terminology [6]

Hull Design

Design Process

Research

SolidWorks

MAXSurf

Fig. 19: Isometric View of Ponderosa in SolidWorks

Bow

Stern

Fig. 20: Ponderosa Represented in MAXSurf

Hull Design

Ponderosa Proposed Dimensions

Length 216 inches

Width 30 inches

Depth 18 inches

Thickness 0.5 inches

Weight 267 pounds

Table 9: Ponderosa Proposed Dimensions

Fig. 21: Plan view of canoe

Fig. 24: Glass Fiber Mesh

Photo Credit: Scott Murphy

Fig. 23: Basalt Mesh

Photo Credit: Scott Murphy

Reinforcement

Fig. 22: Broken Concrete Beams with Reinforcement

Photo Credit: Scott Murphy

Parameters Considered

 Sustainability

 Cost

 Constructability

 Effectiveness

Reinforcements Tested

 Basalt Reinforcement Mesh Geo-Grid

 BASF DiamondShield Glass Fiber Mesh

Reinforcement Testing

Fig. 25: Placing Reinforcement in between Shotcrete layers

Photo Credit: Scott Murphy

Fig. 26: Three Point Loading Test on Mini Beams

Following ASTM C78

Photo Credit: Scott Murphy

Structural Calculations

-150

-100

-50

100

150

0.0 2.0 4. 0 6.0 8. 0 10.0 12 . 0 14.0 16. 0 18.0

SHEAR (LB)

DISTANCE (FT)

100

200

300

400

500

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0

MOMENT (LB-FT)

DISTANCE (FT)

2 Person Load Case

Shear Force Diagram

Bending Moment Diagram

-300

-200

-100

100

200

300

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12 . 0 0 14.00 16.00 18. 0 0

SHEAR (LB)

DISTANCE (FT)

-1000

-800

-600

-400

-200

200

0.00 2.00 4. 00 6. 00 8.00 10.00 12. 0 0 14.00 16.00 18.00

BENDING MOMENT (LB-FT)

DISTANCE (FT)

Shear Force Diagram

Bending Moment Diagram

4 Person Load Case

Structural Calculations

Cross-Sectional Analysis

Calculated Structural Values

Centroid from Keel

7.10

𝑖𝑛

Moment of Inertia

819.77

𝑖𝑛



Cracking Moment

2568.79

𝑙𝑏 − 𝑓𝑡

Compressive Stress (2-Person)

72.5

𝑝𝑠𝑖

Compressive Stress (4-Person)

135

𝑝𝑠𝑖

Tensile Stress (2-Person)

𝑝𝑠𝑖

Tensile Stress (4-Person)

𝑝𝑠𝑖

Freeboard (2-Person)

0.42

𝑓𝑡

Freeboard (4-Person)

0.35

𝑓𝑡

Fig. 27: Cross-Sectional Analysis

Table 10: Final Structural Values

Structural Calculations

ULTIMATE BENDING MOMENT CALCULATION

 Considers the strength of the reinforcement

with the concrete

 AKA Flexural Capacity

 Completed following ACI 318-19

Ultimate Bending Moment

150718.8

𝑙𝑏 − 𝑓𝑡

Fig. 28: Ultimate Bending Moment Calculations

Additional Construction Methods Testing

Goal: Practice using different construction

methods to provide future teams with

results and useful information.

 Shotcrete application

 Releasing Agent

 Flex Seal Application

 Color Testing

Fig. 28: Color Testing using Latex Paint

Photo Credit: Russell Collins

Vaseline

½ Mineral Oil/

½ Vegetable Oil

10 parts dish soap: 1

part water

Liquid Release

(Commercial)

Fig. 27: Releasing Agent Tests on Foam Mini Beam Molds

Photo Credit: Marie Cook

Fig. 30: Pacific Southwest Conference [8]

Conference

 Technical Proposal

 Enhanced Focus Areas Report

 Technical Presentation

 R. John Craig Legacy Video

 Peer review of 3 Proposals

Fig. 29: Ponderosa Technical Proposal Cover

Placed 4

out of 18 Schools

Impacts

SOCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC

Wasted material is not

transported to a landfill

Promoted the use of

environmentally friendly

components in concrete

design

Increase production of

materials such as cement

Support AZ economy by

buying locally sourced

materials

Increase demand for

concrete products

Continues tradition of

Concrete Canoe at NAU

Promotes

communication between

students and industry

professionals

Increased possibility of

COVID exposure

References

[1] Committee on Concrete Canoe Competitions, 2021 Request for Proposals. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2021.

[2] – “ASCE Library: Civil Engineering and its Practical Applications,” ASCE Library | Civil Engineering and its Practical Applications.

[Online]. Available: https://ascelibrary.org/. [Accessed: 07-Feb-2021].

[3] – “United States,” BASF. [Online]. Available: https://www.basf.com/us/en.html. [Accessed: 07-Feb-2021].

[4] – “Salt River Materials Group,” Phoenix cement. [Online]. Available: https://www.srmaterials.com/. [Accessed: 07-Feb-2021].

[5] – PCA America’s Cement ManufacturersTM, Arizona Cement Industry, Portland Cement Association, 2016, www.cement.org

[6] Home. (n.d.), from http://canoeing.com/

[7] Northern Arizona University. (2020). Agassiz. NCCC Design Paper. Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University.

[8] ASCE at UCLA, Pacific Southwest Conference Mailer 1. American Society of Civil Engineers, 2021.

Questions?