a) What is the composition of mortar?

What is the main difference

between mortar and concrete?
Mortar is typically used in the building process and is utilised to bind hardscape
components together such as bricks and stones. It is composed primarily of 3
components which are fine aggregates, water and a binder and in most cases
this is fine sand, water and cement respectively (Dhir and Limbachiya, 1999).
Other possible binder materials that can be used are clay, gypsum or lime and in
some cases a combination of binder materials can be used for this component in
mortar (bldtech, 2011). The individual materials used to make mortar are very
important in relation to the quality of the mortar produced therefore good quality
materials should always be used.
Binding Agent
Cement Portland cement is most commonly used as the binding agent in
mortar and is given its name due to the fact that it hardens when mixed with
water and resembles the colour of a Portland stone (Winter, 2012). Portland
cement comprises of Lime, Silica, Iron, Alumina and small quantities of
Magnesium which may exist due to impurities stemming from the limestone
(Corporation, 2014).
Hydrated Lime This is another common material that is added to cement when
creating mortar. It allows the mortar to be creamier which results in a more
workable and durable mortar product. Another reason it is added is to minimize
the amount of cracking in the mortar as it dries out. It may come as the oxide of
calcium as well as the hydroxide of calcium (bldtech, 2011).
Fine Aggregates
Sand is used as the fine aggregate element in mortar with different types of
sands being selected for different applications depending on the environment
that the mortar will be subject to (bldtech, 2011).
Water
The water used should be clean with minimum impurities within as this could
affect the quality of the mortar produced.
The main difference between mortar and concrete has to do with the
composition of concrete. Both concrete and mortar are composed of the same
materials (fine aggregate, water and cement or binding agent). However,
concrete has an additional component of course aggregate which is usually
gravel (Beaulieu, 2016). The addition of gravel or course aggregate allows
concrete to have a much greater level of durability than mortar and therefore
can be used for structural projects, beams, supports and foundations usually with
the addition of reinforced steel rebar (Eagle, 2012). Essentially, mortar is thicker
and without the course aggregate which makes it suitable to be used for bonding
as it has a higher water-to-cement ratio. Concrete has a lower water-to-cement
ratio and has the additional course aggregate in the form of gravel to add
durability to the final product (Chan, 2016).

b) List the factors that affect the strength of the mortar sample. (This is
important during the sample preparation process.) How do the listed
factors influence the strength of the sample?
Some of the factors that can affect the strength of mortar in the sample are
listed below;
Cement Amount
The amount of cement used in the mixture has an effect on the strength of the
mortar. Generally as you increase the amount of cement in the mixture the
strength also will increase. However, if too much cement is added to the mixture
it will make the mortar sample very brittle. The reason for this is that cement
particles are not able to transfer normal contact force (OrangeRind, 2011).
Water Amount
There is a workable range in terms of mass percentage where strength can be
maximised when making mortar. Having a lower water content will produce a
thicker mortar with lower strength however this could be desired for certain
applications. Also, having a high water content can lead to a runny mortar which
also reduces the strength even though there are certain circumstance where this
is required. The amount of water that is optimal when making mortar based as a
percentage of water mass to total mass (w/w) is 20%-40% (Lanas and AlvarezGalindo, 2003).
Sand Amount
The amount of sand in the mortar mixture will also influence the strength of the
samples. Having too much sand will cause the mortar samples to be very brittle
and weak.
Sand Shape
The shape of the aggregates used within the mortar samples will affect the
strength because having sharp points/bends will increase the contact are as well
as aid to increase the inter-lock capabilities of the sand (OrangeRind, 2011).
Air Entrainment/Additives to Fill Voids
Reducing the number of air pockets within the mortar samples will increase the
strength of the sample. Adding additives to the mixture to fill voids also help to
increase strength of the mortar. The additives are extremely fine and therefore fit
into the small voids filling them up (Lustig and Kaper, 1980)

c) By comparing the properties of mortar listed in Table 1 with the rock

properties you learnt in lecture notes 2, comment on whether mortar is
an appropriate material for physical modelling of the rocks.
Some of the properties associated with the UWA mortar samples used in the
experiment are shown in the table below (Table xxxx).

Property
Uniaxial Compressive Strength,

Value
79.5

(MPa)

Tensile Strength,

4.8

(MPa)

Youngs Modulus, E (GPa)

Fracture Toughness,

K Ic

27.7
0.78

(MPa

Poissons Ratio, v
Porosity,

0.19
14.7

(%)

Permeability, k (mD)

0.018

To compare the properties of the mortar samples to the rock properties learnt in
lecture notes 2 we must first determine typical values for the properties listed in
the table above for all common rocks discussed.
Uniaxial Compressive Strength,

(MPa)

The uniaxial compressive strength is a measure of a materials strength and is the

maximum axial stress a material can withstand before failure under unconfined
conditions (Cargill and Shakoor, 1990). The UCS recorded for the mortar samples
is 79.5 MPa which puts it within the range for materials such as Basalt, Gneiss,
Granite, Limestone, Sandstone and Shale. The following table shows the range of
UCS for each material with their respective mean values according to lecture
notes 2.
Material
Basalt
Gneiss
Granite
Limestone
Sandstone
Shale

UCS Range (MPa)

42
355
73
340
30
340
48
210
40
179
36
172

UCS Mean (MPa)

150
159
166
102
96
95

Table

xxxxx

From this we can conclude that the UCS of mortar used in the samples lies within
the range of these particular materials. However, only Limestone, Sandstone and
Shale have mean values relatively close to the 79.5 MPa observed in the mortar
samples. We know Sandstone is the most common reservoir rock so it makes
sense to achieve values for the UCS similar to that of Sandstone and Limestone
(Pasternak, 2016).

Tensile Strength,

(MPa)

The tensile strength, t , is the ability of a material to withstand loads tending

to elongate. It is a measure to determine how much force it can endure under
tensile load before failure (Hiramatsu and Oka, 1966). From the UWA mortar
samples the tensile strength was determined to be 4.8 MPa which puts it within
the range for Basalt, Gneiss, Granite, Limestone, Sandstone and Shale. The
following table shows the range of UTS for each material with their respective
mean values according to lecture notes 2.
Material
Basalt
Gneiss
Granite
Limestone
Sandstone
Shale
Table xxxxxx

UTS Range (MPa)

2
28
3
21
3
39
2
40
3
7
2
5

UTS Mean (MPa)

13
14
12
12
5
3

The 4.8 MPa UTS observed from the samples of mortar are very close to the
mean values for both Sandstone and Shale. Sandstone has a UTS of 5 MPa which
is very similar to that of the mortar samples.
Youngs Modulus, E (GPa)
Youngs modulus is a relationship between stress (force per unit area) and strain
(proportional deformation) and determined from the linear slope of the stress vs
strain curve (Sachpazis, 1990). The Youngs Modulus observed in the mortar
samples is 27.7 GPa which puts it within the range known for Basalt, Gneiss,
Granite, Limestone, Sandstone and Shale. The following table shows the range of
Youngs Modulus for each material with their respective mean values according
to lecture notes 2.
Material
Basalt
Gneiss

Youngs Modulus
Range (GPa)
16
101
16
103

Youngs Modulus
Mean (GPa)
53
58

Granite
Limestone
Sandstone
Shale
Table xxxx

10
1
10
10

74
92
46
44

45
48
22
28

From this it is clear that Sandstone and Shale display mean Youngs Modulus
values very similar to that of the mortar samples. Again, this makes sense seeing
that Sandstone is the most common reservoir rock.

Fracture Toughness,

K Ic

(MPa

) ADD TO THIS SECTION?

The fracture toughness of a rock is the ability for a rock with pre-existing flaw to
resist fracture (Anstis et al., 1981). From the data obtained the mortar samples
have a fracture toughness of

K Ic =0.78 (MPa

). Which is similar to most

other reservoir rocks.

Poissons Ratio, v
The Poissons ratio observed in the mortar sample is (v=0.19) which puts it
within the range of Basalt, Dolerite, Gneiss, Granite, Limestone, Quartzite,
Sandstone and Shale. The following table shows the range of Poissons Ratio for
each material with their respective mean values according to lecture notes 2.
Material

Poissons Rati Range

(v)
0.13
0.38
0.15
0.29
0.10
0.40
0.10
0.39
0.08
0.39
0.11
0.25
0.10
0.40
0.10
0.19

Basalt
Dolerite
Gneiss
Granite
Limestone
Quartzite
Sandstone
Shale
Table xxxx

Poissons Ratio Mean

(v)
0.22
0.20
0.22
0.23
0.25
0.16
0.24
0.14

The Poissons Ratio associated with the UWA mortar samples are most similar to
the materials Basalt, Dolerite, Gneiss and Quartzite by average/mean.
Porosity,

(%)

The porosity of a material is the ratio of void volume to gross volume as a

percentage (Pasternak, 2016). According to the data for the UWA test samples

the porosity of the mortar is 14.7% which puts it within the known ranges for
Sandstone, Shale and Limestone. The following table shows the range of porosity
associated with each material according to lecture notes 2.
Material
Sandstone
Shale
Limestone
Table xxx

Porosity Range (%)

5
25
10
30
5
20

This means that the mortar samples exhibit similar porosity properties to that of
Sandstone, Shale and Limestone. Again, this makes sense seeing at the Lab tests
are trying to mimic common reservoir rocks.
Permeability, k (mD)
Permeability is the ability of a porous rock to flow fluid and depends on the
continuity and connectivity of the pore space within the rocks (Pasternak, 2016).
According to the data obtained from the UWA mortar test samples the
permeability observed was 0.018 mD. This means that the ability for the rock to
flow fluid is extremely poor as learnt in lecture notes 2.
Permeability Value (mD)
<1
1-10
10-100
>100
Table xxx

Rating
Very Poor
Poor
Good
Excellent

Figure xxxx
The figure above suggests the permeability measured from the samples of
0.018mD puts it into the Impervious range similar to that of fresh Limestone and
Dolomite which are in the range of 0.01mD-0.1mD. Fresh Granite falls below this
as it operates within the range of 0.0001mD-0.001mD in the impervious zone.
Fresh Sandstone is semi-pervious and usually has a permeability approximately
between 1mD and 10mD.

Comments
Mortar definitely seems like a suitable material that can be used for physical
modelling of the rocks as most material properties are similar to those of
Sandstone, Limestone and Shale. The most common reservoir rock which is
Sandstone (approximately 90%) has very similar properties to that of the mortar
with the exception of the permeability. However, the permeability of the mortar
is similar to that of Limestone and Dolomite which is useful because Limestone is
also a sedimentary rock commonly used as a reservoir rock (Pasternak, 2016). It
can be concluded that since the laboratory scale hydraulic fracturing
experiments are designed to test and study the fracture mechanics behind
fracking stimulation techniques for tight oil and gas reservoirs to increase
production it would be essential that the samples tested exhibited properties as
similar to those of the reservoir rock itself. Therefore it the mortar samples used
are an appropriate material for physical modelling of the rocks.

d) Could another material be selected for physical modelling of the

rocks? Provide an explanation.
When trying to physically model the rocks the general aim is to find materials
with similar properties thus giving a relatively accurate representation of the rock
being modelled. Limestone or Shale could be used as has similar values for the
unconfined compressive strength, ultimate tensile strength and Youngs modulus
as compared to Sandstone. However Shale has a better porosity than sandstone
but a very poor permeability compared to sandstone. Limestone and Sandstone
have very similar porosity values but sandstone has the advantage when it
comes to permeability. From this we can conclude that Limestone and Shale
display similar properties and therefore should be suitable for physically
modelling the rocks. However costs associated with each will be a factor to keep
in mind as many sample will probably be needed to carry out the tests. In this
regard mortar is the most suitable option as it can be created in the lab with
relatively cheap materials and placed in a mould for the required shape.
Limestone and Shale would have to be bought or outsourced and would have to
be cut into the desired shapes for the laboratory testing further adding to the
costs.
Another possible option would be Red brick or brick. This was the rock used in
Lab 1 for the petroleum engineering labs and it was determined to have a
Youngs Modulus of approximately E=44Gpa and a UCS of approximately

c =

48 MPa. This material is relatively easy to come by and cheap to obtain. However
costing would still be a factor in this material selection as well as the other
properties such as porosity, fracture toughness, permeability, ultimate tensile
strength and Poissons ratio.

References

ANSTIS, G. R., CHANTIKUL, P., LAWN, B. R. & MARSHALL, D. B. 1981. A critical

evaluation of indentation techniques for measuring fracture toughness: I,
direct crack measurements. Journal of the American Ceramic Society, 64,
533-538.
BEAULIEU, D. 2016. What's the Difference Between "Cement," "Concrete" and
"Mortar?" [Online]. About Home: David Beaulieu. Available:
http://landscaping.about.com/cs/hardscapefences1/f/cement_mixing.htm
2016].
BLDTECH. 2011. Composition and uses of lime and mortar [Online]. Building
science and properties of materials: bldtech. 2016].
CARGILL, J. S. & SHAKOOR, A. Evaluation of empirical methods for measuring the
uniaxial compressive strength of rock. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts, 1990. Elsevier,
495-503.
CHAN, C. 2016. What's The Difference Between Cement, Concrete And Mortar?
[Online]. GIZMODO: GIZMODO. Available:

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2016/06/whats-the-difference-betweencement-concrete-and-mortar/ 2016].
CORPORATION, T. 2014. Manufacture of Ordinary Portland Cement [Online].
Available:
http://www.tasekcement.com/index/cement_facts/manufacture_of_ordinary
_portland_cement.html.
DHIR, R. K. & LIMBACHIYA, M. C. 1999. Utilizing Ready Mix Concrete and Mortar:
Proceedings of the International Conference Held at the University of
Dundee, Scotland, UK on 8-10 September 1999, Thomas Telford.
EAGLE, B. 2012. Construction for Beginners: What is the Difference Between
Mortar and Concrete? [Online]. Construction and permit services: Bald
Eagle. Available: http://baldeagleconstruction.com/what-is-the-differencebetween-mortar-and-concrete/ 2016].
HIRAMATSU, Y. & OKA, Y. Determination of the tensile strength of rock by a
compression test of an irregular test piece. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts, 1966. Elsevier,
89-90.
LANAS, J. & ALVAREZ-GALINDO, J. I. 2003. Masonry repair lime-based mortars:
factors affecting the mechanical behavior. Cement and concrete research,
33, 1867-1876.
LUSTIG, K. P. & KAPER, L. 1980. Building material additive. Google Patents.
ORANGERIND. 2011. What actually happens if I vary proportions of cement and
sand in mortar? [Online]. How it works?: Stackexchange. Available:
http://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/6651/what-actually-happens-if-ivary-proportions-of-cement-and-sand-in-mortar 2016].
PASTERNAK, E. 2016. Lecture Notes 2. Petrophysics. UWA.
SACHPAZIS, C. I. 1990. Correlating Schmidt hardness with compressive strength
and Youngs modulus of carbonate rocks. Bulletin of the International
Association of Engineering Geology-Bulletin de l'Association Internationale
de Gologie de l'Ingnieur, 42, 75-83.
WINTER, N. B. 2012. Understanding cement: An introduction to cement
production, cement hydration and deleterious processes in concrete,
Microanalysis Consultants.