KudoZ home » Spanish to English » Construction / Civil Engineering

refrentado

English translation: capping

Advertisement

Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
Spanish term or phrase:refrentado
English translation:capping
Entered by: Nikki Graham
Options:
- Contribute to this entry
- Include in personal glossary

15:25 May 18, 2002
Spanish to English translations [PRO]
Tech/Engineering - Construction / Civil Engineering / civil wks.
Spanish term or phrase: refrentado
Sentence: "En cuanto a la toma de muestras y fabricación de probetas de hormigón fresco queda prohibido el uso de morteros de azufre para refrentado de las probetas."
Parrot
Spain
Local time: 03:37
capping
Explanation:
I know you don't seem to like this, but having done more research, if we're talking sulphur/sulfur mortar, I can't seem to come up with anything else but this, and alternatives (as your text suggests) to the sulphur capping.
By the way, on the probeta subject, I'm convinced that specifically they can be test cubes, test cylinders, test prisms and test cores (testigos - in the Spanish reference I gave at first - and sorry it got repeated so many times, I don't remember clicking more than once!!!). However, collectively, I think "probetas de hormigón" can be "concrete test specimens" (test piece, according to John Scott in his CE dicitionary is for mortar, metal or wood, not concrete)

Adding some more references (in the pdf ones, look for sulfur)

The preparation of the end conditions (cappings) of the concrete cylinder can significantly affect the measured compressive strength. Generally speaking, the standard sulfur mortar capping is suitable for concrete strength up to about 52 MPa (7.5 ksi). For higher strength concrete, different procedures are used to prepare the end conditions of cylinders for compressive testing. One procedure is the parallel grinding of the ends of the cylinder, thereby eliminating the need for end caps. While grinding is regarded as the best procedure, it entails expensive equipment and longer preparation time so that it is not practical for field applications. Another procedure is the use of an unbonded cap consisting of a restraining cap and an elastomeric pad as insert. The unbonded cap system is far more cost-effective and can be easily equipped by any laboratory and used in the field. A previous study [Carasquillo et al. 1988b] showed that for concrete strengths between 28 and 69 MPa (4 and 10 ksi), the use of polyurethane inserts with aluminum restraining caps produced average test results within 5% of those obtained using sulfur mortar caps. For concrete strengths below 76 MPa (11 ksi), the use of neoprene inserts with steel restraining caps yielded average test results within 3% of those obtained using sulfur mortar caps. For higher strength concrete, the use of either unbonded capping system became questionable.
More recently, Pistilli and Willems [1993] compared sulfur caps with unbonded polymer pads in compressive strength testing of concrete within the strength range of 20.7 to 124.2 MPa (3 to 18 ksi) and compared sulfur caps with ground and lapped surfaces within the range of 89.7 to 138 MPa (13 to 20 ksi). Similar tests were conducted by Ipatti [1993] comparing untreated mold surface, sulfur capping, and ground surface for cube specimens, and sawn surface, sulfur capping, and ground surface for cylindrical specimens. Sawing of the cylindrical specimens was accomplished with a water cooled cutting machine with a diamond saw blade of 625 mm diameter, capable of cutting cylinders up to 250 mm in diameter. The capping compound consisted of sulfur, quartz filler, and chalk powder in 1.25 : 0.25 : 0.75 ratio. The compressive strength of the sulfur compound, based on 40 mm cube, was 44 MPa (6.38 ksi). Four grades of concrete were used in the tests including 60, 80, 90, 110 MPa (8.7, 11.6, 13.1, 16 ksi). The test results indicated that for the cylindrical secimens, the highest average strengths were obtained with ground or sulfur capped surfaces. The coefficient of variation averaged 1% for ground surfaces, 1.5% for sulfur capped surfaces and 7.9% for sawn surfaces. For the cube specimens, the highest average strength were obtained with ground surfaces, the second highest with untreated mold surfaces, and the lowest with sulfur capped surfaces. The corresponding coefficients of variation were 0.8%, 1.9%, and 1.3% respectively.
http://www.tfhrc.gov/structur/hpc/hpc2/chap4.htm

Another one (again, look for sulfur)
http://www2.state.ia.us/dot/specifications/Oct_2001/ims/315....

Anyway, hope all this helps.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-19 09:24:44 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://www.portcement.org/pdf_files/hpc-16julaug01.pdf

http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-manuals/em1110...
Selected response from:

Nikki Graham
United Kingdom
Local time: 02:37
Grading comment
Hi! Yes, I found the tests. I'm using capping.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

Advertisement


Summary of answers provided
5 +2capping
Nikki Graham
4 +2crushing
Nikki Graham
5grind, mill
BelkisDV
4 +1spotfacing or surfacing
Maria
4 +1facing
Robert INGLEDEW


Discussion entries: 3





  

Answers


3 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +1
facing


Explanation:
Louis Robb y Javier Collazo dan la misma traducción.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 15:30:58 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

No estoy seguro si las referencias van con tu contexto, pero las incluyo, por las dudas.

Your search: \"probe facing\" Categories | Web Sites | Web Pages | News | Research Documents

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web Page Matches 1-20 of 49 | Next 20 >


NASA relativity probe facing costly delay (PDF)
... running development project in NASA\'s history. Tony Reichhardt NASA relativity probe
facing costly delay Boston A radical animal rights group calling itself ...
http://tycho.dm.unipi.it/~nobili/opendiscussion/GPB_delay_na...


Portable Corrosion Rate Measurement
... Sand Monitoring This is a dual probe application, with one probe facing the process
flow, and one away from the flow. Produced sand impinges upon the exposed ...
http://diamond.mtec.or.th/labs/famd/famdprog/microcorr.html





Robert INGLEDEW
Argentina
Local time: 22:37
Works in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish, Native in SpanishSpanish
PRO pts in category: 4

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Henry Hinds: Facing is OK... these "probetas" are "test cylinders" which are then broken in a press in a compression text and they need a smooth facing on top.
21 mins
  -> Gracias, Henry.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

20 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +1
spotfacing or surfacing


Explanation:
probetas in this context = test specimen

Subject - Standardisation - Metrology (=NO)
- Metallurgy - Iron & Steel - Non-ferrous Metals(=SI)



(1)
TERM probeta

Reference CSIC
Definition l. the test piece is a part of the specimen, of specified dimensions, rough or machined, brought to the required state to undergo a specified test. The test piece can be constituted by the specimen itself 2. test specimen : a test sample as finally prepared for testing



[PDF] Accelerometer Mounting Considerations
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Your browser may not have a PDF reader available. Google recommends visiting our text version of this document.
... machining processes such as spotfacing, grinding, milling, turning, etc ... the problem
with dental cement lies with its tenacity ... in the actual test. In this manner ...

www.dytran.com/v1/pagecontent/a8.pdf
Astralloy Creusabro 8000
... Cement Plants: Liners for drier-tubes; ... followed by a pull-off test according to NFA
89020 part ... drilling,; milling, countersinking, spotfacing,; tapping. In spite of ...
www.astralloy.com/print/creusabro.asp


Maria
Local time: 20:37
Native speaker of: Native in SpanishSpanish
PRO pts in category: 12

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Maria Luisa Duarte
5 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

21 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5
grind, mill


Explanation:
En el mismo diccionario Collazo explica que "facing" es para un contexto de mecánica, mientras que grinding y milling son para tu contexto. Probetas en este caso es un "powder tester", no test tubes.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 15:48:29 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Están probando el granulado o polvo del hormigón.

BelkisDV
United States
Local time: 21:37
Works in field
Native speaker of: Native in SpanishSpanish
PRO pts in category: 29
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

42 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +2
crushing


Explanation:
Hi, having read what Belkis and Henry have written...
I think Henry's right. This is to do with a cylinder test or cube test. In the former a test cylinder (probeta) is made and then crushed, and in the latter a test cube (probeta) is made and then crushed to test the concrete's strength (after so many days). The Penguin CE dictionary says cylinder is for the States, cube for GB.
Given that what Belkis said is correct (refrentar can also mean grind / mill), I think the refrentado is referring to the crushing, but I need more time to double check this, so please don't close the question yet!

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 16:34:25 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Well, refrentado is definitely NOT crushing (so it may well be facing, still checking - why does this subject fascinate me so much?), but probeta is either test cylinder or cube

Esta norma de aplica a aquellas probetas cuyas superficies de contacto con las prensas de ensayo No cumplan con los requisitos de planeidad y/o paralelismo entre caras especificados. Esta norma se aplica a probetas cúbicas, cilíndricas o prismáticas, tanto moldeadas en hormigón fresco como a testigos extraídos del hormigón endurecido.

Refrentado:

Procedimiento de aplicación y moldeo de la capa de refrentado sobre una superficie de carga en una probeta de hormigón, destinado a corregir defectos de planeidad y/o paralelismo entre caras con el fin de obtener la mejor coincidencia posible con las piezas de apoyo y carga de la prensa de ensayo y una distribución uniforme de tensiones durante la aplicación de la carga.

Capa de refrentado:

Capa de material aplicado y moldeado que recubre una superficie de carga en una probeta de hormigón.
http://icc.ucv.cl/hormigon/refrentado.htm


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 16:39:20 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Well, refrentado is definitely NOT crushing (so it may well be facing, still checking - why does this subject fascinate me so much?), but probeta is either test cylinder or cube

Esta norma de aplica a aquellas probetas cuyas superficies de contacto con las prensas de ensayo No cumplan con los requisitos de planeidad y/o paralelismo entre caras especificados. Esta norma se aplica a probetas cúbicas, cilíndricas o prismáticas, tanto moldeadas en hormigón fresco como a testigos extraídos del hormigón endurecido.

Refrentado:

Procedimiento de aplicación y moldeo de la capa de refrentado sobre una superficie de carga en una probeta de hormigón, destinado a corregir defectos de planeidad y/o paralelismo entre caras con el fin de obtener la mejor coincidencia posible con las piezas de apoyo y carga de la prensa de ensayo y una distribución uniforme de tensiones durante la aplicación de la carga.

Capa de refrentado:

Capa de material aplicado y moldeado que recubre una superficie de carga en una probeta de hormigón.
http://icc.ucv.cl/hormigon/refrentado.htm


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 16:52:34 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Well, refrentado is definitely NOT crushing (so it may well be facing, still checking - why does this subject fascinate me so much?), but probeta is either test cylinder or cube

Esta norma de aplica a aquellas probetas cuyas superficies de contacto con las prensas de ensayo No cumplan con los requisitos de planeidad y/o paralelismo entre caras especificados. Esta norma se aplica a probetas cúbicas, cilíndricas o prismáticas, tanto moldeadas en hormigón fresco como a testigos extraídos del hormigón endurecido.

Refrentado:

Procedimiento de aplicación y moldeo de la capa de refrentado sobre una superficie de carga en una probeta de hormigón, destinado a corregir defectos de planeidad y/o paralelismo entre caras con el fin de obtener la mejor coincidencia posible con las piezas de apoyo y carga de la prensa de ensayo y una distribución uniforme de tensiones durante la aplicación de la carga.

Capa de refrentado:

Capa de material aplicado y moldeado que recubre una superficie de carga en una probeta de hormigón.
http://icc.ucv.cl/hormigon/refrentado.htm


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 17:06:12 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

CAPPING

This is what I think it is.
Penguin CE dictionary
cap = a mortar made with sulphur or high-alumina cement and sand applied to the rough end of a concrete test core to smooth it before the core is tested in the compression testing machine

Abstract: ASTM D 4832: Standard Test Method for Preparation and Testing of Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) Test Cylinders currently permits three types of capping for CLSM cylinders: sulfur mortar (ASTM C 617), gypsum plaster (ASTM C 617), and unbonded neoprene restrained by rigid retainers (ASTM C 1231). These cappings were developed for portland cement concrete (PCC) cylinders and all produce good estimates of PCC potential strength. However, these cappings are inappropriate for excavatable CLSM cylinders. Sulfur mortar and gypsum plaster methods often result in cylinder damage during capping due to the low strength of excavatable CLSM cylinders.
http://www.astm.org/JOURNALS/TESTEVAL/PAGES/454.htm

Physical testing complements the data provided from chemical and microscopic testing, providing important information regarding the physical properties of the member under examination. Most commonly requested, of course, is strength, to enable the Engineer to assess the loading capabilities of a structural element. This is usually supplemented with data on the reinforcement configuration, type and size, from a covermeter survey and localised breakouts.

Tests Available
Compressive Strength to BS 1881 Part120
Visual Description and Photograph
Static Modulus
Expansion Test for ASR
Ultrasonic Tests for Strength and Damage Assessment

Notes on Physical Testing


Crushing a Concrete Core Sample
Compressive Strength Determination
The compressive strength of a concrete has traditionally been used as a specification tool by engineers to specify the quality of concrete delivered to a job. It has been used for many years because it is a relatively simple property to measure, unlike chemical analysis which requires a well equipped chemistry laboratory to determine whether an adequate cement content has been used. On site, a simple slump test will normally be carried out to show whether the concrete complies with the specified workability.

The concrete will normally be specified as a \"designed mix\", meaning that the engineer will have asked for a concrete of a certain strength, either to ensure that he has adequate strength for structural purposes, or, more usually, to ensure the overriding requirement that the concrete has adequate durability. The first thing to realise when measuring concrete strength is that concrete is not a uniform material and, when placed, it is even less so. Even with good quality control, a spread of results of 16 N/mm2 is likely with a Grade 40 concrete. This means that to be sure of getting most (95%) of his results above 40 N/mm2, the concrete supplier will aim for a target mean strength of some 48 N/mm2.

These days, BS 5328 allows the specifier to call for an \"equivalent grade\" concrete, meaning that he can specify a strength grade that will give him a reasonable guarantee that he has achieved his desired minimum cement content and/or maximum water/cement ratio. The strength so specified will usually be higher than that which would be called for strength purposes alone. Alternatively, the specifier may call for a \"designated mix\", so that the concrete supplied will be suitable for the intended purpose, without the specifier needing to think about cement content, water/cement ratio etc. For example, the specifier wanting a concrete suitable for a domestic driveway would call for a PAV1 mix. This automatically requires a minimum strength of 35 N/mm2, a minimum cement content of 300 kg/m3 and a maximum water/cement ratio of 0.6, with air entrainment.

It must be appreciated that the results gained from concrete core samples will not be directly comparable with those from the original cube tests. Cube samples are fully compacted and have been stored under ideal curing conditions for 28 days, prior to test. Core samples, on the other hand, have been taken from insitu concrete, cured in the structure, often inadequately, with perhaps less than perfect compaction. There are also settlement effects, with results on cores from the bottom of a wall or column differing by 15-30% from those of cores taken near the top. Not surprisingly, there are large differences in the strength measured on cores and on cubes made from the original concrete, as supplied. Concrete Society Technical report No. 11 gives excellent guidance to anyone wishing to find their way through the maze of measuring strength in concrete. It provides guidance on planning an investigation, interpreting the results and comparing the test values with those from the original concrete as delivered. It is currently under review and will be re-issued to cover concrete made with GGBFS and PFA. An article in Concrete magazine covers the subject in summary

Measuring Concrete Strength
Core samples are the most common form of sample for this purpose, removed from the structure by diamond drilling. Typically cores will be 100mm in diameter, and should ideally be at least three times the maximum aggregate size in diameter.

The cores are usually visually described and photographed, concentrating especially on compaction, distribution of aggregate, presence of steel etc. and then trimmed to a length to diameter ratio approaching 1:1. Various methods are available to ensure accuracy of the ends of the core; grinding to a perpendicular flat surface, capping with high alumina cement mortar and capping with hot sulphur are all methods which are used.

The capped core is then crushed (after appropriate curing for HAC capped specimens) in a calibrated compression testing machine. The resulting failure load is converted firstly to a cylinder strength and secondly to an equivalent insitu cube strength. This will generally be some 75% or so of the original cube result, depending on where the core was taken, before allowing for any additional correction due to compaction effects.
http://www.mg-assoc.co.uk/serv03.htm

RILEM Technical Recommendations for the Testing and Use of ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
... 1 Sampling fresh concrete in ... making concrete test specimens, 1979 ... 3.2 Capping concrete
specimens, 1979 CPC 3.3 Sulphur mortar for capping concrete ...
www.rilem.org/rtr.pdf - Similar pages


Nikki Graham
United Kingdom
Local time: 02:37
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 1726

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  BelkisDV: ¡Bravo!
8 hrs
  -> Thank you!

agree  Henry Hinds: This is a lot of stuff.. but all I can say is that I have worked with compression testing of cylinders.
14 hrs
  -> Thanks Henry!
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

17 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5 peer agreement (net): +2
capping


Explanation:
I know you don't seem to like this, but having done more research, if we're talking sulphur/sulfur mortar, I can't seem to come up with anything else but this, and alternatives (as your text suggests) to the sulphur capping.
By the way, on the probeta subject, I'm convinced that specifically they can be test cubes, test cylinders, test prisms and test cores (testigos - in the Spanish reference I gave at first - and sorry it got repeated so many times, I don't remember clicking more than once!!!). However, collectively, I think "probetas de hormigón" can be "concrete test specimens" (test piece, according to John Scott in his CE dicitionary is for mortar, metal or wood, not concrete)

Adding some more references (in the pdf ones, look for sulfur)

The preparation of the end conditions (cappings) of the concrete cylinder can significantly affect the measured compressive strength. Generally speaking, the standard sulfur mortar capping is suitable for concrete strength up to about 52 MPa (7.5 ksi). For higher strength concrete, different procedures are used to prepare the end conditions of cylinders for compressive testing. One procedure is the parallel grinding of the ends of the cylinder, thereby eliminating the need for end caps. While grinding is regarded as the best procedure, it entails expensive equipment and longer preparation time so that it is not practical for field applications. Another procedure is the use of an unbonded cap consisting of a restraining cap and an elastomeric pad as insert. The unbonded cap system is far more cost-effective and can be easily equipped by any laboratory and used in the field. A previous study [Carasquillo et al. 1988b] showed that for concrete strengths between 28 and 69 MPa (4 and 10 ksi), the use of polyurethane inserts with aluminum restraining caps produced average test results within 5% of those obtained using sulfur mortar caps. For concrete strengths below 76 MPa (11 ksi), the use of neoprene inserts with steel restraining caps yielded average test results within 3% of those obtained using sulfur mortar caps. For higher strength concrete, the use of either unbonded capping system became questionable.
More recently, Pistilli and Willems [1993] compared sulfur caps with unbonded polymer pads in compressive strength testing of concrete within the strength range of 20.7 to 124.2 MPa (3 to 18 ksi) and compared sulfur caps with ground and lapped surfaces within the range of 89.7 to 138 MPa (13 to 20 ksi). Similar tests were conducted by Ipatti [1993] comparing untreated mold surface, sulfur capping, and ground surface for cube specimens, and sawn surface, sulfur capping, and ground surface for cylindrical specimens. Sawing of the cylindrical specimens was accomplished with a water cooled cutting machine with a diamond saw blade of 625 mm diameter, capable of cutting cylinders up to 250 mm in diameter. The capping compound consisted of sulfur, quartz filler, and chalk powder in 1.25 : 0.25 : 0.75 ratio. The compressive strength of the sulfur compound, based on 40 mm cube, was 44 MPa (6.38 ksi). Four grades of concrete were used in the tests including 60, 80, 90, 110 MPa (8.7, 11.6, 13.1, 16 ksi). The test results indicated that for the cylindrical secimens, the highest average strengths were obtained with ground or sulfur capped surfaces. The coefficient of variation averaged 1% for ground surfaces, 1.5% for sulfur capped surfaces and 7.9% for sawn surfaces. For the cube specimens, the highest average strength were obtained with ground surfaces, the second highest with untreated mold surfaces, and the lowest with sulfur capped surfaces. The corresponding coefficients of variation were 0.8%, 1.9%, and 1.3% respectively.
http://www.tfhrc.gov/structur/hpc/hpc2/chap4.htm

Another one (again, look for sulfur)
http://www2.state.ia.us/dot/specifications/Oct_2001/ims/315....

Anyway, hope all this helps.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-19 09:24:44 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://www.portcement.org/pdf_files/hpc-16julaug01.pdf

http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-manuals/em1110...


    Reference: http://www.virginiadot.org/vtrc/main/online_reports/pdf/00-r...
    Reference: http://www.icci.org/01final/01kumar.pdf
Nikki Graham
United Kingdom
Local time: 02:37
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 1726
Grading comment
Hi! Yes, I found the tests. I'm using capping.

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  BelkisDV: When I read your reference it was obvious to me that they mean "capping" precisely because of the usage of sulphur, which the original text specifies NOT to use that method.
5 hrs
  -> That's what I think too. I'd need to see more text in Spanish to really compare.

agree  xxxtazdog: thanks, this helped a lot
2149 days
  -> :-)
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.



See also:



Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search