Table 1. The measured value of the powders mass.
Investigated powder Mass [g]
Limestone 1,6991
Cement V 2,8189

Table 2 presents the specific density of the powders. Those results were obtained from the supervisor after the experiment, because the supervisor in the beginning of the lab did not calibrate the equipment.

Table 2. Obtained specific density for the powders.
Investigated powder Specific density [g/cm3]
Limestone 2,587
Cement V 2,762

Task 3: Water demand experiment
The rewritten equation for mpowder (see page 3) gives the amount of needed mass of powder together with the chosen ratio 0,5. The base diameter of the used cone was 10 cm and the obtained specific density can be found in table 2. This results in:

mlimestone = 344/(0,5 …show more content…
A new amount for the first trial mass was obtained by the supervisor.

In table 3 and table 4 the obtained results from the water demand experiment are presented.

In figure 3 and 4 the obtained results from the mini-spread flow test calculated by equations 8 and 9 are presented.

Figure 3 and 4. The relation between the proportion and relative slump flow, and also the water demand and the deformation coefficient for limestone (left) and cement V (right).
Task 4: Thickness of the water layer
With the values from the previous tasks, the thickness of the water layer could be calculated. By using the rewritten equation 9, the thickness was calculated by taking into account the converted cm to nm as shown in table 5.

The calculations results in the calculated thickness of 19,16 nm for limestone and 72,38 for cement V.
Task 5: Analyzing of the computed …show more content…
Possibly, these differences can be emerged from the errors in the PSD measurements or the specific density measurements.

Conform the handout of the course a relation is found between the bigger water layer by the irregular particle shapes. Both analyzed materials consist of irregular particle shapes. The irregular particle shapes of cement V explains the bigger water layer because it is less sensitive to the water content .
Conclusion and discussion
In this chapter the results of the five tasks are explained. In addition, there were a few things that went not as planned during the tasks. Therefore, the remarks to the results are also discussed in this chapter. Each task is handled separately. Task 1:
When comparing the results of the two measurements of the limestone powder, it is assumed that these tests went well. During these measurements, there was enough time to conduct the measurements, so the limestone powder could have been separated well. The graphs of the results show more or less the same