Citation
Earth constructions

Material Information

Title:
Earth constructions poured earth
Creator:
Williamson, Jedidiah Andrew
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 electronic file : ;

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Earth construction ( lcsh )
Building, Adobe ( lcsh )
Building, Adobe ( fast )
Earth construction ( fast )
Genre:
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Review:
Soil has been used as a construction material for millennia. The suitability of this material to multiple climates is evident by the wide range of ancient and contemporary structures made from earth. One of the main disadvantages of earth construction is labor cost. To reduce these costs mechanical means can be employed. Poured earth has high potential for mechanization using concrete construction equipment. This thesis sets forth three mix designs and tests their suitability for construction by measuring their shrinkage, weather resistance, compressive strength and modulus of rupture.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Jedidiiah Andrew Williamson.

Record Information

Source Institution:
|University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
|Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
859793862 ( OCLC )
ocn859793862

Auraria Membership

Aggregations:
Auraria Library
University of Colorado Denver

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
EARTH CONSTRUCTION: POURED EARTH
by
Jedidiah Andrew Williamson
B.S., University of Colorado Denver, 2006
A thesis submitted to the
University of Colorado Denver
in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
Civil Engineering
2012


This thesis for the Master of Science
degree by
Jedidiah Andrew Williamson
has been approved
by
Fredrick Rutz
Nien-Yin Chang
Kevin Rens
April 13, 2012
Date


Williamson, Jedidiah Andrew (M.S., Civil Engineering)
Earth Construction: Poured Earth
Thesis directed by Assistant Professor Fredrick Rutz
ABSTRACT
Soil has been used as a construction material for millennia. The suitability of
this material to multiple climates is evident by the wide range of ancient and
contemporary structures made from earth. One of the main disadvantages of earth
construction is labor cost. To reduce these costs mechanical means can be employed.
Poured earth has high potential for mechanization using concrete construction
equipment. This thesis sets forth three mix designs and tests their suitability for
construction by measuring their shrinkage, weather resistance, compressive strength
and modulus of rupture.
This abstract accurately represents the content of the candidates thesis. I
recommend its publication.
Approved:
Frederick Rutz


DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my dear wife Chelsea, who has lovingly and whole-
heartedly supported me through this process.


ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I am so thankful for the dedication of my advisor Dr. Frederick Rutz. His
guidance and calm assurance through this process is greatly appreciated.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
1. History of Earth Construction............................................1
2. Advantages of Earth Construction.........................................8
2.1 Ecologic Advantages.....................................................8
2.2 Economic Advantages....................................................9
2.3 Ergonomic Advantages...................................................9
3. Earth Construction Research.............................................11
3.1 Clay...................................................................11
3.2 Gradation..............................................................14
3.3 Water Content..........................................................18
3.4 Compaction.............................................................18
3.5 Additives..............................................................20
3.6 Engineering Properties.................................................22
4. Introduction to Poured Earth............................................25
5. Objective of this Study.................................................28
6. Design of soil mix......................................................29
7. Experiment description..................................................42
7.1 Making mixes...........................................................43
7.1.1 Mix A...............................................................43
7.1.2 Mix B...............................................................45
vi


7.1.3 Mix C..............................................................46
7.2 Pouring the Test Specimens...........................................48
7.3 Tests................................................................56
7.3.1 Shrinkage Test.....................................................56
7.3.2 Erosion Test.......................................................57
7.3.3 Wet/Dry Appraisal Test.............................................61
7.3.4 Compression Test...................................................62
7.3.5 Modulus of Rupture Test............................................63
7.3.6 Gradation Analysis.................................................64
8. Test Results..........................................................66
8.1.1 Shrinkage Test.....................................................66
8.1.2 Erosion Test.......................................................67
8.1.3 Wet/Dry Appraisal..................................................71
8.1.4 Compression Test...................................................78
8.1.5 Modulus of Rupture Test............................................82
8.1.6 Gradation Analysis.................................................84
9. Conclusion............................................................87
Appendix ................................................................90
REFERENCES..............................................................112
vii


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1 Cob House (Minke, 2009)..................................................3
2 Wall at Chan Chan (McHenry, 1996)........................................4
3 (Church of the Holy Cross, 2011).........................................5
4 Clay Particle Diagram (Das, 2002)........................................ 12
5 Idealized Particle Distribution Curves...................................15
6 Theoretical Mix Design Envelope...........................................30
7 Mix Ingredient Particle Size Distribution Curves.........................31
8 Cassagrandes Plastisity Chart (Holtz and William, 1981).................32
9 Leyden Breeze Mixes.......................................................35
10 Ingleside Breeze Mixes..................................................36
11 Recycled Concrete Mixes.................................................37
12 Frei Breeze Mixes.......................................................38
13 Mixes Used For Testing..................................................39
14 Mix A After Soaking.....................................................44
15 Mix B After Soaking.....................................................46
16 Mix C After Soaking.....................................................47
17 Shrinkage Box prior to adding poured earth..............................49
18 Shrinkage box with poured earth added...................................50
19 Block Forms and Cylinders Filled with Soil Mixes........................51
viii


20 Blocks Removed From Their Forms........................................52
21 Shrinkage Boxes after drying...........................................53
22 Cylinder Capping Form..................................................54
23 Cylinder with Damaged Cap..............................................55
24 Cylinders from Each Mix................................................56
25 Erosion Test Set Up....................................................58
26 Pit Depth Measurement..................................................59
27 Wetted Depth After Erosion Test........................................60
28 Compression Test Set-up................................................63
29 Specimen Ready for Modulus of Rupture Test.............................64
30 Poured Earth Shrinkage in Relation to the Clay Content.................67
31 Erodibility Versus Permability.........................................68
32 Mix A Erosion Test Specimen After Drying...............................69
33 Mix B Erosion Test Specimen After Drying...............................70
34 Mix C Erosion Test Specimen After Drying...............................71
35 Mix A Specimen Prior to Wet/Dry Appraisal..............................73
36 Mix A Specimen After the Wet/Dry Appraisal.............................74
37 Mix B Specimen Prior to Wet/Dry Appraisal..............................75
38 Mix B Specimen After the Wet/Dry Appraisal.............................76
39 Mix C Specimen Prior to Wet/Dry Appraisal..............................77
40 Mix C Specimen After the Wet/Dry Appraisal.............................78
IX


41 Mix A Force Versus Displacement of Compression Tests..................79
42 Mix B Force Versus Displacement of Compression Tests..................80
43 Mix C Force Versus Displacement of Compression Tests..................80
44 Poured Earth Compression Strength in Relation to Clay Content.........81
45 Mix A Force Versus Displacement of Modulus of Rupture Tests...........82
46 Mix B Force Versus Displacement of Modulus of Rupture Tests...........83
47 Mix C Force Versus Displacement of Modulus of Rupture Tests...........83
48 Poured Earth Rupture Strength in Relation to Clay Content............84
49 Mix A Gradation Analysis..............................................85
50 Mix B Gradation Analysis..............................................86
51 Mix C Gradation Analysis..............................................86
x


LIST OF TABLES
Table
1 Slump measurements of test mixes..........................................41
2 Weight of mixes used to make..............................................43
3 Erodibility index.........................................................59
4 Shrinkage results.........................................................66
5 Erosion test results......................................................68
6 Wet/Dry Appraisal Summary.................................................72
7 Poured Earth Compression Strength Statistics..............................81
8 Poured Earth Rupture Strength Statistics..................................84
xi


LIST OF EQUATIONS
Equation
1 The Fuller Formula...............................................17
2 The Modified Fuller Formula......................................17
3 Gradation Analysis Mixing Equation..............................34


1. History of Earth Construction
Moreover, are there not in Africa and Spain walls made of earth that
are calledframed walls, because they are made by packing in a frame
enclosed between two boards, one on each side, and so are stuffed in
rather than built, and do they not last for ages, undamaged by rain,
wind, andfire, and stronger than any quarry stone? Spain still sees
the watch towers of Hannibal and turrets of earth placed on the
mountain ridges. Pliny the Elder, Natural History circa A.D. 77
Soil has been a choice building material since time immemorial. There are
many ways that simple, humble earth has been pressed into service as shelter for
humans. It can be formed into blocks, sun dried and stacked with mud mortar. This is
called adobe. It can be balled into lumps and thrown wet without mortar into a wall.
This is known as cob. It can be packed into a woven framework of wood to add
weatherproofing and durability. This is called wattle and daub. Earth can be packed
while moist within a sturdy formwork to make a wall. This is called rammed earth.
It can be poured into forms in a plastic state and let dry. This is called poured earth.
Blocks of earth can be also formed by moist earth being pressed in a machine and
then dried in the sun. These are called compressed earth blocks. The above is only a
cursory glance at the techniques used by man through the millennia for constructing
1


earth shelters. By some estimates there are twenty different known methods of earth
construction (Rael, 2009).
The earliest forms of surviving earth construction known can be found in the
Middle East. Rammed earth foundations dating from 5000 B.C. can be found in
Assyria and earth block buildings in Turkestan date to 8000 to 6000 B.C. (Minke,
2006). In fact the word adobe is derived from Arabic (Easton, 2007). The city of
Shibam in Yemen, known as The Manhattan of the Desert, has 9 story high
apartments built entirely from mud bricks (Rael, 2009).
Earth construction has been known for some time outside of the Middle East,
as well. The Ten Books or Architecture by Roman architect Vitruvius mentions
lightweight waterproof mudbricks made with pumice that could float on water (Rael,
2009). The Great Wall of China, a rammed earth wall faced in stone (Minke, 2006),
is one of the few man made features on earth that can be seen from space and it is
made with dirt! The Silk Road, through the Himalayan Mountain range, snakes past
rammed earth structures dating from the 1600s (Easton, 2007). These structures must
have been exposed to high winds and earthquakes and are still standing. A cob
house, built in 1410 in Devon, England is still inhabited (Minke, 2006). This house
had stood for more than 150 years before Shakespeare wrote his first sonnet. See
Figure 1.
2


Figure 1 Cob House (Minke, 2009)
The use of earth as a building material was not just a Eurasian phenomenon.
The city of Chan Chan was a bustling metropolis in the 12th century (McHenry,
1996). The city, built almost entirely of soil, is situated near the city of Trujillo, Peru
on the arid coast between the Pacific Ocean and the Andes. Figure 2 shows the
immaculate detail in the earth plaster work, which speaks of a sophisticated culture
and advanced thinking; earth is not merely reserved for simple mud huts.
3


North of the equator, the oldest continuously occupied structure in North
America is made of earth (Easton, 2007). It is the Taos Pueblo in northern New
Mexico and made with adobe and earth plaster. Adobe was introduced into the area
by the Spanish. Prior to the Conquistadors, the Pueblo people constructed Casa
Grade in Arizona by tamping the mud directly into formwork in a manner similar to
pise [rammed earth] and to modem concrete. (Easton, 2007) Unfortunately, through
neglect and time, Casa Grande is little more than a min today.
Even Christopher Columbus had ties to earth construction. Archeology on the
island of San Cristobal suggests Columbus built his fortifications out of tapia, or
tabby (Easton, 2007). Tabby is a form of rammed earth that employs soil mixed with
crushed seashells.
4


The history of earth construction in the Americas does not stop with the
Spanish or Pueblo peoples. In 1850, the Church of the Holy Cross was built in
Statesburg, South Carolina. The church measures 105 feet by 27 feet and has gabled
ends that are 43 high at their peak (Easton, 2007). This rammed earth structure has
survived hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes. (Church of the Holy Cross, 2011). In
addition to these environmental forces, this earth structure has withstood more than
150 years of the high humidity of the southern coast of the US.
Figure 3 (Church of the Holy Cross, 2011)
South America also has examples of historic rammed earth structures that
have endured earthquakes. In Mendoza, Argentina there are rammed earth structures
5


that have stood through earthquakes that have brought modem adobe and brick
buildings down (Minke, 2001). Furthermore, the Salvadorian Government census
taken after the January and February 2001 earthquakes states that adobe houses were
not worse affected than other houses (Minke, 2001, p 5).
Right to the present time, earth construction is being used and even codified.
Code written for the state of New Mexico (New Mexico Building Code, 2009) has
standards for adobe and even terronis, which are blocks of sod that are reinforced by
the roots present in the blocks. Engineers in California, one of the most earthquake
prone zone of the U.S., are adapting the working stress method of design for
Masonryry walls for use with rammed earth walls (King, 1996). New Zealand has
three standards that deal with earth construction: NZS 4297 Engineering Design of
Earth Buildings, NZS 4298 Materials and Workmanship for Earth Buildings, and
NZS 4299 Earth Buildings Not Requiring Specific Design. All three of these
standards are referenced in the Standard Guide for Design of Earth Wall Building
Systems (ASTM E2392). There are construction firms in Arizona, New Mexico,
California, British Columbia, England, New Zealand, and Australia and elsewhere
that specialize in earth construction.
The future of earth construction has been written in the stars. The California
Institute of Earth Art and Architecture (Cal-Earth), founded in 1991 by architect
Nader Khalili, has worked with NASA to design possible shelter construction
methods on the Moon and Mars (Rael, 2009). The proposed plan is to fill plastic bags
6


with soil from the celestial body being colonized and mortar the bags together with
Velcro.
Currently one third to one half of the worlds population lives in earth
structures (Rael, 2009). The universal availability and dirt cheap price of earth as a
construction material ensures that the current rate of earth structure habitation is not
reducing any time soon.
7


2. Advantages of Earth Construction
The advantages of earth construction can be divided into three intertwining
categories: ecologic, economic and ergonomic.
2.1 Ecologic Advantages
Earth can be found on every building site known to man, and is almost always
usable for some type of earth construction. If on site soil is used, the proximity of the
raw construction material to the final destination reduces the carbon footprint of
material transportation to nil. Not only is the environmental transportation cost
reduced, but the material itself is inert. The environmental impact of digging soil
from a job site and reconfiguring it is limited to the environmental life cycle cost of
the digging equipment.
Once a soil structure has reached the end of its useful life, the raw soil is
completely recyclable. Essentially if a raw soil structure is no longer needed, the
metals, wood, glass, roofing, fixtures, and finishes can be removed from it and the
building will either melt back into the earth or it can be broken down into earth and
reshaped into a new building. Theoretically, this cycle of building and demolishing
and reconfiguring could be continued indefinitely.
8


2.2 Economic Advantages
Just as with the ecological advantages mentioned above, the proximity of soil
suitable to earth construction to every construction site can reduce the economic cost
of material transportation. For example, instead of shipping trees from the forested
North West of the United States of America thousands of miles to New Mexico to
build a stick framed house, a local quarry could send a dump truck full of soil to be
formed into adobes or rammed earth. In some cases the soil used for construction can
be found on site, and incurs no more material cost than the soil excavation. Much of
this excavation needs to be done to build the foundation anyway, thus reducing the
material cost further.
However, the low cost of the material itself can be offset with the high labor
cost associated with traditional earth construction. This labor cost is not an issue if
the builder is also the owner, or, as in some poorer countries, labor can be cheaper
than material. An alternative to reduce the labor cost of earth construction is to
mechanize the process.
2.3 Ergonomic Advantages
Structures built with soil are comfortable. When soil walls are exposed, or
treated with a mud plaster they balance humidity, store heat, and absorb pollutants
(Minke, 2006). Balanced humidity can reduce stresses on the respiratory system
caused by dry air that is associated with forced air heating. The heat storing capacity
9


of earthen walls helps to keep the living and working spaces in a building
comfortable. The capability of soil to absorb pollutants and balance humidity is
linked to the soils natural tendency to breathe.
10


3. Earth Construction Research
Structural engineering is the art of molding materials we do not
wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to
withstandforces we cannot really assess, in such a way that the
community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our
ignorance. William Lemessurier (and others)
3.1 Clay
Clay is the smallest, and often most demonized, particle in soil. Unlike other
inorganic soil particles, clay particles are not the result of mechanical erosion of rock.
They are hydrated alumino-silicates that are leached out of rock and soil (King,
2006). Silicate clays are made of sheets of silica tetrahedrons bonded to sheets of
aluminum, magnesium, or iron octahedrons.
A silica tetrahedron is made by one silicon atom being surrounded by four
oxygen atoms in a three sided pyramid shape. The silica sheets are formed by the
three oxygen atoms at the base of each tetrahedral being shared with the neighboring
tetrahedrons. The octahedrons are six hydroxyls, which is an oxygen atom covalently
bonded to a hydrogen atom, surrounding one aluminum atom. If the octahedron
sheets are formed by aluminum then it is called a gibbsite sheet; if by magnesium
then it is a brucite sheet (Das, 2002). The sheets of either silica tetrahedrons or
11


aluminum octahedrons are held together by the top oxygen of a silica tetrahedron
replacing one of the octahedrons hydroxyls. Clay is generally made up of repeating
layers of gibbsite/silica sheets.
Kaolinite, Montmorillonite, and Illite (three of the most common clays found
in soil) are variations of silica and octahedral sheet combinations. Each layer of
Kaolinite is a single gibbsite sheet bonded to a single silica sheet as depicted in
Figure 4(a). These layers are bonded to each other through hydrogen bonding. Each
Montmorillonite layer is a single gibbsite sheet sandwiched between two silica sheets,
as depicted in Figure 4(c). Illite has the same structure as Montmorillonite, except
the gibbsite/silica sandwiches are bonded together by Potassium ions, as depicted in
Figure 4(b).
Si i'.'.i Kvl
Silica sheet
Gibbsite sheet
Silica sheet
Gibbsite sheet
SHOtisIBiSSt
nH20 and exchangeable cations
Basal
spacing
variablefrom
9.6 A to complete
separation
# SiMca
Gibbsite sheet
(b)
Silica sheet
(c)
Figure 4 Clay Particle Diagram (Das, 2002)
12


Clay mineral type directly affects volume stability, cohesiveness and
reactivity to stabilizers, such as lime or cement. This means mineral type recognition
is more powerful than plasticity for soil behavior predictions (Ingles, 1973). Studies
have shown that cohesiveness and compressive strength are related to the type and
quantity or interchangeable cations in a clay (Minke, 2006). Montmorillonite has
more interchangeable cations and therefore higher cohesiveness and, when dry,
compressive strength than Kaolinite and Illite. The structure of Montmorillonite
attracts more water between each layer so the swell/shrinkage potential is much
higher than Kaolinite or Illite.
The specific surface of a clay is a way to determine its relative binding force.
The higher the specific surface of a clay, the higher the binding force (Minke, 2006).
Specific surface is a measure of the surface area of all particles per unit mass.
Kaolinite has a specific surface of about 15 m /g, Illite has a specific surface of about
80 m /g, and Montmorillonite has a specific surface of about 800 m /g (Das, 2002).
The volume stability, or swell potential, of clay is of utmost importance in
geotechnical engineering. It is often the swelling of clay that can tear apart a
structure that is not properly founded. However, swelling is not a problem in a
properly constructed earth building. Studies have shown that adobes exposed to 95%
humidity for 6 months did not swell or lose strength (Minke, 2006). In other words,
if an earth structure is kept from becoming sodden, the soil will not swell even in high
humidity areas. In earth construction, it is the shrinkage potential of clay from its
13


wetted state that causes more problems. If not attended to, shrinkage can be very
detrimental to earth construction.
3.2 Gradation
It has been stated regarding a rammed earth wall, A well-graded soil...will
result in the most durable wall (Easton, 2007, p. 100). The proper grading of a soil
that uses only mineral aggregates can reduce shrinkage to zero (Minke, 2006). The
different ranges of particle sizes within a soil have specific names. The exact range
of size for each particle group varies with the standard used. The largest particles are
called gravel and and are anything bigger than about 3/16 of an inch. Sand is the
next particle group. Sand ranges in size from about 3/16 in diameter to 1/32. Silt is
the next group and clay is the smallest particle. The Unified Soil Classification
System lumps clays and silts into a group called fines.
The gradation of a soil can be dertermined by shaking a soil sample through a
stack of standard sized sieves. The soil starts at the top on the sieve with the largest
openings and is sifted down through the sieves. This process is known as a gradation
analysis. The results of this analysis are displayed using a particle-size distribution
curve. This curve is constructed by plotting the size of the sieve openings on a
logarithmic horizontal axis and the percent of soil mass that passed through that sieve
opening (percent passing) on a vertical axis.
14


The results of a gradation analysis can be used to determine if a soil is either
poorly graded, well graded, or gap graded (See Figure5). In a poorly graded soil most
of the grains in the soil are nearly the same size. In a well graded soil the mass of the
soil is evenly distributed between particle sizes. In a gap graded soil there are two or
more concentrations of particle sizes evident.
The narrowest sieve in a typical analysis is a sieve with 200 openings per inch
also known as a #200 sieve. Soil that passes through this sieve would be classified as
silt and clay. The grain distribution of this part of the soil can be further analyzed
using a hygrometer test.
Figure 5 Idealized Particle Distribution Curves
To explain why the distribution of particle size within a soil is so important to
durability and shrinkage, imagine a bag of large marbles. The marbles can only be
so close to each other and therefore there are large voids between the marbles. This is
15


an idealization of a poorly graded soil, because all the particles are the exact same
size.
Next, imagine mixing a bunch of small marbles into the bag. These marbles
would fill some of the voids and there would be less space between the particles.
This illustrates a gap graded soil, because there are two main particle sizes in the
mass of particles.
Finally, imagine shaking BBs into the mix. The little metal spheres would
fill nearly every void. The mass of particles would have almost no voids. This would
be a simple illustration of a well graded soil because the particles in the mass vary in
size such that every space in the mass is filled.
When a soil is well graded the lack of voids reduces the ability of particles to
slip past each other. This lack of voids, therefore, equates to minimized shrinkage
and increased durability.
The Fuller Formula, which was developed for concrete aggregate, is a
mathematical model for a perfectly graded particle-size distribution made up of
spherical grains (Maniatidis and Walker, 2003). Unaltered, the Fuller Formula
predicts clay sized particles as only 2 to 3% of the total weight. This is too small a
percentage for earth construction. The Fuller Formula can be adapted for use in earth
construction by adding 10 to the equation to ensure more clay sized particles in the
mix, as seen below (Minke, 2006).
16


aw = 100 +10
Equation 1 The Fuller Formula
a io = the percent of soil mass smaller than a given diameter
d = diameter of grain
D = Largest grain diameter in soil.
The Fuller Formula is most accurate if all the particles are approximately
spherical. Soil does not have spherical grains, therefore Equation 2 has been
proposed (Maniatidis and Walker, 2003). The exponent accounts for the particle
shape. Maniatidis and Walker claim most soil particles have an of 0.20 to 0.25.
Equation 2 The Modified Fuller Formula
n =the grading coeffiecent
However, When a soil reaches 50% or more in clay content the engineering
properties of the soil are nearly the same as that of pure clay. This is because the silt,
sand, and gravel are suspended in clay and will not react with each other directly
(Das, 2002). Therefore if a soil of high clay content is to be used for earth
construction the properties of the clay may completely override the gradation effects.
17


3.3 Water Content
There are four types of water in a soil mass (Minke, 2006). Water of
crystallization is the water that is chemically bound to the soil particles. This water
will only be released if the soil is heated between 400 and 900 degrees Celsius.
Absorbed water is bound electrically to the clay particles. Pore water is in the soil
through capillary action. Both absorbed and pore water will be released from the soil
if it is heated to 105 degrees Celsius. The fourth type of water is free water.
Free water is the water that is responsible for the swell of clay when present
and the shrinkage of clay when it evaporates. Swelling happens when the free water
enters the spaces between the layers of clay particles and pushes them apart. This
action also causes the clay particles to become parallel. When the water evaporates,
the parallel structure of the clay particles increases the tensile and compressive
strength of the clay, because parallel particles form a stronger bond than nonparallel
particles (Minke, 2006).
3.4 Compaction
The compacting of earth increases its density. An increased density will mean
that the compacted soil mass will have higher compressive and shear strengths than
an uncompressed soil of the same type. When compacting a soil mass the moisture
content of the soil will affect the final density. If the soil is too dry or too wet the soil
will not reach its maximum density from a given compacting effort. The moisture
18


content associated with maximum density when running a standard proctor
compaction test is known as the Optimum Moisture Content. The Optimum Moisture
Content should not be viewed as the only moisture content to be used for compacting
soil. The moisture content associated with the highest final density will change with
the type of compaction used (Ingles, 1973).
There is always some type of compacting effort employed in building an earth
structure coupled with a particular moisture content. Neither the compaction nor the
moisture content has been strictly controlled in traditional earth building. Instead of
compaction in pounds per square foot or moisture content in percentages, the builder
relies on how the soil is behaving. For instance, when mixing mud plaster, if the
plaster sticks to the trowel when inverted, but is easily flung off, the plaster is
considered to have the proper moisture content (Guelberth and Chiras, 2003).
Compaction effort has been similarly unscientific in earth structures. In cob built
structures the compaction comes from throwing the plastic clay lumps on to the wall.
In some traditional adobe construction methods, throwing the mud into the form is the
compaction. In pressed block construction the compaction is provided by a static
force applied to moist earth.
Which of these methods of earth preparation results in the greatest final
density? How much effect does the moisture content of the mixed soil affect the final
structure? According to Minke, the moisture content at the mixing of the soil for
construction should be slightly higher than the Optimum Moisture Content (Minke,
19


2006). Another study by Minke shows that properly mixed hand thrown adobe
blocks had an average of 19% greater compression strength than machine pressed
blocks made from moist raw earth (Minke, 2006). This suggests the dynamic action
of throwing mud into forms increases the compressive strength and/or the higher
moisture content increases the compressive strength. The increased strength of the
adobe can be accounted for because the dynamic compaction of throwing the mud
into the form encourages the aligning of the clay particles. The high moisture content
of the adobes also facilitates this aligning. These aligned clay particles in turn
increase the compressive strength of the dry soil mass as discussed previously.
3.5 Additives
Many different substances can be added to a soil mix to alter the final
behavior of the mix. Lime, asphalt emulsion, and cement are common additives used
in contemporary earth construction. In traditional earth construction, peculiar things
such as horse urine and cheese have been added to alter soil behavior. Bizarre as it
sounds however, the tensile bending strength of a Kaolinite sample can be increased
10 to 20 times by being soaked in putrid urine prior to placing. The strength increase
can be attributed to the urea and ammonium acetate found in the urine. (Minke,
2006).
Care must be taken when using additives to improve one aspect of a soil
because it may have a secondary effect on another trait. For example, cement used to
20


increase the compressive strength of a soil will decrease the vapor permeability of the
wall. Low vapor permeability can increase the chance of condensation within a soil
wall, which in turn can cause mold (if organic aggregate is present in the soil) or
premature frost-action degradation of the wall. One favorable correlation between
additives that can be drawn is soil stabilizers that improve soil strength will also
improve the volume stability of the soil (Ingles, 1973).
Not all soil mixes react to a given additive in the same way. To increase
compressive strength, lime is a good choice for a soil mix that is rich in clay content
while cement is more effective in a lean clay mix (Minke, 2006). Further, the type of
clay in a soil will affect how it reacts to a given additive. Cement reacts more
favorably with Kaolinite than lime, but lime is more appropriate for Montmorillonite
than cement (Minke, 2006).
The amount of a given stabilizer required to achieve an expected result may
vary with the soil type. Cement can be affected by soil sulphates. The sulphates will
decrease the effectiveness of the cement to a point that much more cement will be
needed to reach a given strength (Ingles, 1973). A test developed in the 1950s,
called the calcium absorption test, can be used to determine the soils reaction to
cement (Robbins, 1960). Compressive strength has actually been shown to decrease
with lime and cement additives in quantities less than 5% of the mix (Minke, 2006).
21


3.6 Engineering Properties
The engineering properties of a soil are affected by clay type and percentage,
water content, gradation, compaction type, and additives, if present. The
compressive strength of a loam type depends mainly on its soil grain size distribution,
water content, the static or dynamic compaction imparted to it, and the type of clay
mineral present (Minke, 2006). (In Europe, the term loam often refers to soil that
is devoid of organic material.) Ingles adds to this list several other options, in that
increasing soil strength can be achieved through compaction, improved gradation,
additives, & heat treatment (Ingles, 1972). However, as mentioned before, when a
soil reaches 50% or more in clay content the engineering properties of the soil are
nearly the same as that of pure clay (Das, 2002). Therefore, if a soil with very high
clay content is to be used, the clay type will be the main driving force of the
engineering properties of the soil.
In the area of Tuscon, Arizona, the standard soil mix for rammed earth
construction is Aggregate Base Course (ABC) mixed with cement and sometimes
iron oxide, which is commonly known as rust. This mix usually attains a
compressive strength of 300 to 800 pounds per square inch. The modulus of
elasticity, E, of earthen construction varies widely. It has been reported that
stabilized rammed earth has an E of roughly 750 kips per square inch and adobe has
an E of 80 to 120 kips per square inch (King, 1996).
22


As mentioned before, shrinkage can be an issue in earth construction. Wet
soil mixes without shrinkage control can have shrinkage strains of 3 to 12%. Dry soil
mixes can have 0.4 to 2% (Minke, 2006). However, shrinkage can be controlled by
optimization of water content or gradation. Additives can be used to reduce
shrinkage as well. According to Michael Frerking, too much water, not enough large
aggregate, or too much clay can cause excessive shrinkage and cracking (Frerking,
personal communication, August 21, 2011).
The durability of an earthen wall varies greatly with the mix and construction
method. Regardless of construction method, the greatest threat to an earthen wall is
water. Water can cause damage to the wall in many ways including direct erosion by
wind driven rain, basal erosion from capillary action, or freeze thaw damage. Basal
erosion is the loss of soil at the base of a wall. As a general note on durability,
rammed earth has a longer lifespan than adobe because rammed earth is monolithic,
and therefore does not have mortar lines to cause discontinuities in strength or
durability (Minke, 2006).
The rate of erosion from rain for an unprotected vertical face of earthen wall
in the American Southwest is on the order of one inch every twenty years (McHenry,
1983). This rate can be reduced or even eliminated if the soil wall is protected by a
large enough roof overhang or sacrificial earthen plaster. The earthen plaster would
have to be reapplied periodically. More permanent cementitious plaster can be
detrimental to an earth wall because this impervious layer increases the height water
23


can rise in the wall through capillary action. This in turn increases softening and frost
action at the base of the wall. Impervious outer coverings like cement can increase
capillary action in an adobe wall from the usual three feet to fifteen feet (Battle,
1983).
Fort Selden in New Mexico was an adobe military fort built in 1865. When it
was abandoned in 1891 the roofs, doors, and windows were removed. The
unprotected walls did not erode from the top down into a pile of earth. The walls
only lost about 6 inches of height before they succumbed to basal erosion and fell
over (Caperton, 1983). As with direct rain erosion, basal erosion can be reduced or
eliminated in earthen construction by proper detailing. To reduce basal erosion a
vapor barrier may be placed between the founding soil and the earth wall. This is
most easily done by constructing a concrete, stone, or masonry stem wall that rises
out of the ground enough to keep the bottom of the earthen wall from becoming
sodden.
Similar to concrete, frost resistance can be increased by increasing the
entrained air in a soil. From observance of structures in the American Southwest,
adobe has a good resistance to frost damage.
24


4. Introduction to Poured Earth
Soil construction as outlined above has much merit as a building material.
However, there are major hurdles that keep earth from being more widely used in
industrialized nations. One of the major hurdles that soil construction faces, as
discussed in the Economic Advantages section of this thesis, is the labor cost
associated with it. Another is the non-uniformity of soil. This non-uniformity can
lead to expensive case by case testing and evaluation of soils before they can be used.
A third hurdle to the wide use of soil in construction is the perception of soil as an
inferior building material. Many people envision squalid dirty buildings when they
consider houses built from earth, but it is possible to build clean modern
accommodations from earth.
All traditional earth construction methods are very labor intensive. Of all the
methods mentioned, poured earth has the highest potential to be mechanized thereby
reducing labor. The proper soil can be mixed and placed with current concrete
construction equipment and the cost of earth construction can thus be minimized.
The uniformity of earth as a construction material can be increased if the soils are
manufactured. Recycled concrete, crusher fines, and the remainder from gravel
25


sieving, are all potential materials to combine into more uniform readily available
material for construction. Finally, the perception of soil as a poor building material
will change with each new earth structure built.
New Zealand Standard NZS 4298 deals directly with poured earth as a
building material as well as rammed earth, adobe, and pressed blocks. It covers the
testing and quality control of earth construction with soil/cement ratios of less than
15% (Maniatidis and Walker, 2003).
A patented technology called cast earth was invented in 1992 by Harris
Lowenhaupt (Cast Earth, 2011). Cast earth is soil stabilized with calcined gypsum,
also known as Plaster of Paris. The crux of the technology is the retarder that
Lowenhaupt invented. If calcined gypsum is mixed in soil without this retarder the
open working time of the mix is five to ten minutes. The retarder can be controlled to
allow for a fifteen minute to eight hour open working time. The strength of the
material is 500 to 1000 pounds per square inch with a soil mix of fifteen percent
gypsum to 85 percent soil by weight (Frerking, 2000).
Regarding sustainability, cast earth is still not as green as earth construction
can get. Calcined gypsum is not a raw material. It is mined gypsum that is heated,
similar to cement. This heating takes energy and causes pollution. Also, the retarder
used in cast earth is a trade secret and the current initial investment to gain access to
that secret is $15,000 (Cast Earth, 2011). This initial investment makes it more
difficult to offset any financial gain received from the mechanical process and makes
26


this material an unlikely choice for small owner-builders. However, the success of
this material shows that poured earth is a viable earth construction method.
27


5. Objective of this Study
The purpose of this study is to design a poured earth mix using commercially
available raw or by-product materials that are currently commercially available that
can be mixed and placed by conventional concrete construction equipment. The basic
materials I propose for this earth mix are crusher fines for aggregate and color, and
clay from quarries, mines, or deep foundation construction. In the right proportions
these elements should make a well-graded, pourable, and durable mix that meets the
requirements for adobe construction of 300 psi compression strength and 50 psi
modulus of rupture (New Mexico Building Code, 2009, IBC, 2006). Shrinkage and
erosion resistance of this mix should meet or exceed the limits set forth in NZS 4298
(New Zealand Standards Committee, 1998).
28


6. Design of soil mix
The mix design for this thesis will be based on particle size distribution. As
mentioned before a particle-size distribution curve that approximates the shape of the
Modified Fuller Formula represented in Equation 2, will optimize particle size
distribution. There are two disadvantages of basing a soil mix on the Modified Fuller
Formula.
First, since gradation analysis is not a very accurate test (the same soil can
have a range of particle distribution curves), the values for suggested by
Maniatidis and Walker are believed to create a distribution envelope too narrow for
practical use. The minimum and maximum values used for are 0.15 and 0.3
respectively (See Figure 6).
Second, as a soil approaches 50 percent of its soil particle mass passing the
#200 sieve the soil will act more like a fine grained soil. This means the gradation of
the particles retained on the #200 and larger sieves will have less and less of an
impact on the behavior of the soil. Therefore as a soil mix approaches the top of the
design envelope shown in Figure 6, the less the gradation of the soil matters and the
more the soil fines will control the mix.
29


BOUNDARIES USED TO ASSESS SOIL MIXTURES
Figure 6 Theoretical Mix Design Envelope
Figure 7 shows the particle-size distribution curve for the various mix
ingredients investigated for this experiment. The names of the clay, breeze/crusher
fines indicate their origin. (Crusher fines and breeze are equivalent terms. They are
the remaining material that is too small to use as gravel after crushing rock.)
30


Aggregates used for mixes
Figure 7 Mix Ingredient Particle Size Distribution Curves
The Frei Breeze comes from a pit owned by Albert Frei and Sons, Inc in
Henderson, Colorado. The Leyden Breeze and Leyden Clay come from the Leyden
Pit in Golden, Colorado owned by Pioneer Sand Company, Inc. The Ingleside
Crusher Fines come from the Ingleside Quarry in Fort Collins, Colorado owned by
Pioneer Sand Company, Inc. Both the Masonry and Concrete Sand are from a Pioneer
Sand Company Pit in Fort Lupton. The Recycled Concrete is available through
Pioneer Sand Company as well and is classified as Class 6. None of these materials
display any clay like qualities, in other words, they are non plastic.
31


The Leyden Clay is the binding agent in this mix. The properties of the clay
are of special concern, as discussed in the Discussion on clay. The Atterberg limits,
which measure the qualities of fine-grained soils, can be used in conjunction with
Cassagrandes plasticity chart to determine the probable predominant clay minerals in
a soil. The Atterberg Limits for Leyden Clay provided by Pioneer Sand Company are
a Liquid Limit of 38 and a Plasticity Index of 21. These numbers chart the clay near
the U-line on Cassagrandes chart which means the clay is probably active and mostly
Montmorillonite. Therefore a soil mix made with this clay instead of more stable
clay will have more potential for drying shrinkage, but a higher compressive strength.
Liquid limit
Figure 8 Cassagrandes Plastisity Chart (Holtz and William, 1981)
32


The varying gradation of the Frei Breeze, Leyden Breeze, and Ingleside
Crusher Fines are of note. Both the Frei and Leyden Breeze are well graded. The
Ingleside Crusher Fines are gap graded.
This doesnt mean that the Ingleside Crusher Fines would be a bad choice for
using in a mix because the gaps in the grain-size distribution could be filled with
another material like the Concrete or Masonry Sand, which are both poorly graded.
The Recycled Concrete has a good gradation.
33


To design a theoretical best mix, the various ingredients are combined
mathematically by Equation 3.
i) i) mix \ ipp ingredient n ^ pi J
sieve i \ seive i ingredient n )
Equation 3 Gradation Analysis Mixing Equation
PP"evei = The percent passing the zth sieve of the mix
PPsZfent = The percent passing the zth sieve of the zzth ingredient
Cingredient = The percentage the zzth ingredient makes up of the mix
Figures 9 through 12 show the various resulting particle size distribution
curves grouped by major inactive aggregate ingredient. Neither the Masonry nor
Concrete Sand are considered as a major ingredient. They are used to try to smooth
the gradation of a given mix. The design envelope shown in Figure 6 is repeated in
each of the mix design figures. This allows a visual comparison of the mix design to
the design envelope.
34


The Leyden mixes, as seen in Figure 9 stay close to the design envelope but
exhibit a sharp shift between the sand and silt sized particles. This indicates that the
mixes are not well graded. This mix was not pursued further because other mixes
appeared to better fit into the design distribution envelope.
Leyden Breeze
Soil Mixes
.75 parts Leyden + .25 parts Clay
.5 part Leyden Breeze + .25 Concrete
Sand +.25 part Clay
.5 Leyden +.25 part Frei Breeze + .25
part Clay
.5 part Leyden Breeze + .25 Mason Sand
+.25 part Clay
.5 part Leyden Breeze + .25 Ingleside
+.25 part Clay
t .5 part Leyden Breeze + .25 Recycled
Concrete +.25 part Clay
diameter, mm
Figure 9 Leyden Breeze Mixes
35


The gap grading of the Ingleside Breeze is still evident in the mix designs, as
seen in Figure 10. This set of mixes is not pursued further due to this issue.
Ingleside Breeze
Soil Mixes
diameter, mm
Figure 10 Ingleside Breeze Mixes
36


The recycled concrete mixes do follow the lower bound of the design
envelope, as evident in Figure 11. However, there is an unknown amount of un-
hydrated cement in the recycled concrete. This cement could provide more strength
or reduce it (see the Discussion of Additives above). Because of this uncontrollable
variable, these mixes were not pursued further.
Recycled Concrete Base Course
Soil Mixes
diameter, mm
.75 parts Recycled Concrete Base
Course+ .25 parts Clay
* .5 part Recycled Concrete Base
Course + .25 Concrete Sand +.25
part Clay
.5 Recycled Concrete +.25 part Frei
Breeze + .25 part Clay
.5 part Recycled Concrete + .25
Mason Sand +.25 part Clay
* .5 part Recycled Concrete + .25
Leyden +.25 part Clay
.5 part Recycled Concrete + .25
Ingleside +.25 part Clay
Figure 11 Recycled Concrete Mixes
37


The Frei Breeze mixes, as seen in Figure 12, appear very similar to the
Leyden Breeze mixes. However, the Frei Breeze mixes have a smoother curve than
the Leyden mixes. The Frei mixes were chosen to be studied more closely.
Frei Breeze
Soil Mixes
diameter, mm
Figure 12 Frei Breeze Mixes
38


The three mixes shown in Figure 13 were used to make test specimens. The
aggregate ratios are reported with respect to the total aggregate weight.
100
90
80
* 70
.E 60
'w
to
g. 50
I 40
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
diameter, mm
Figure 13 Mixes Used For Testing
The initial mixes have several ingredients per mix. The test mixes are Frei
Breeze and Leyden Clay. The complexity of the mixes was reduced because the low
precision of gradation analysis did not warrant adding small amounts of other
ingredients such as sand to improve the distribution curve slightly seemed futile.
The final ingredient in pourable earth is water. Since the mixes are desired to
be placed similar to concrete, the controlling criteria for water content was slump of
the mix. The target slump was 5 to 6 because that would provide an easily worked
Test Mixes
--Mix A: +0.9Frei+0.1Clay -*-Mix B: +0.65Frei+0.35Clay
--Mix C: +0.3Frei+0.7Clay


V
4* 0 . 7
' w/



-O'*

1 1 I
39


mix. Small batches of each mix were made and the water content was increased until
the target slump was measured. Table 1 shows the results. Neither the in situ
moisture content of the clay or crusher fines was accounted for.
40


Table 1 Slump measurements of test mixes
Weight of Water divided by,
Mix Weight of Clay Weight of Aggregate Slump
A 100% 10% Moist, no slump measured
150% 15% 4.25"
B 50% 18% 1.75"
57% 20% 5.75"
C 35% 24% Stiff, no slump measured
40% 28% 7.25"
From Table 1 it is evident that the slump of each mix is sensitive to water
content. For Mix A the slump of 4.25 is deemed appropriate. The slump of 5.75
for Mix B is right on target. Since the slump for Mix C was zero at a water content of
24% of aggregate weight and a slump of 7Vi was measured at a water content of
28%, the design mix was to be mixed at a water content of 26%.
41


7. Experiment description
Three types of specimens were required for each mix to accomplish the
required tests; blocks, cylinders, and shrinkage boxes. Seven blocks for each mix
design were required. The dimensions of the block forms were 5.5 by 5.5 by 14.
Six of these blocks were for 3-point modulus of rupture tests and the last one was for
an erosion test and wet/dry appraisal test. Six cylinders for each mix design were
required. The cylinder forms had a 6 diameter and were 12 tall. All six cylinders
were for compression tests. One shrinkage box was required for each mix. The
shrinkage boxes were 2 by 2 by 24. The shrinkage box was used to determine the
percent of shrinkage each mix has. The total estimated volume required to fill these
forms was 8.8 ft To avoid not having enough of any given mix a mix design of 10.5
ft was made.
Table 2 is the summary of the mix weights used for mixing rounded to the
nearest 0.05 lb.
42


Table 2 Weight of mixes used to make
Mix designs by weight of ingredients
Mix Frei Breeze, lbs Clay,lbs Water, lbs (Water/total dry ingredients)
A 418.7 46.5 69.8 15%
B 291.35 156.9 89.65 20%
C 127.3 297.1 111.4 26%
After the rest of the tests were run a gradation analysis was performed on a
sample of soil one block of each mix. Only a sieve analysis was completed. It is the
larger particles in a mix that affect shrinkage the most and therefore it is these
particles that are of the most interest to soil construction. Therefore, a hygrometer
test was not completed on the specimens.
7.1 Making mixes
On September 4, 2011 the three mixes were made as described below and then
stored in separate tubs. The mixes were left to soak until the next day and then
remixed using a mechanical paddle mixer. The soaking period was to ensure the clay
particles had time to fully absorb the free water in the mix.
7.1.1 Mix A
Mix A was actually mixed second. The full weight of clay (46.5 pounds) and
water (69.8 pounds) were put in the available 9 ft concrete rotating drum mixer. (The
concrete mixer used was made by Stone Construction Equipment and is model
number 95CM.) The water and clay were spun while the breeze was measured and
43


added in 50 pound increments until 418.5 pounds were added. When well mixed the
slump was measured at and the mix was put in a tube to soak.
After soaking for approximately 20 hours, the mix had standing water on top
of half the mix (See Figure 14). The water is on the top half of the tub as seen in the
figure). This water was mixed in using a paddle bit mortar mixer on a drill. The
slump was then measured at 5 A.
Figure 14 Mix A After Soaking
44


7.1.2 Mix B
Mix B was mixed first and in half batches. (The mix was made in half
batches because it was thought the full mix would not fit in the mixer since the mixer
capacity was 9 ft3 and the mix was supposed to be 10.5 ft3.) The 1st half of the batch
was made in the mixer by adding 39.2 lbs of water and 78.45 lbs of clay to the mixer.
(This would have made the mix with a 17.5% water to aggregate ratio. A lower water
ratio was started with to see if the slump of 53/4 could be reduced.) The crusher fines
were added in increments up to 100 pounds, at which point the mix was too stiff to
properly mix. The mix was then taken out of the mixer and water was added to reach
20% water to aggregate ratio. The first half of the mix was then put in a tub to soak.
The second half of the batch was mixed by hand in a wheelbarrow using 20% water
to aggregate ratio. The two half mixes were then put in the tub together and mixed
using a paddle bit mortar mixer. The slump was measured after this at 63/4.
45


After soaking for roughly 20 hours, the mix had standing water on top over
much of the mix (See Figure 15). This water was mixed in using a paddle bit mortar
mixer on a drill. The slump was then measured at 714.
7.1.3 Mix C
Mix C was mixed in the mixer by adding 297.1 pounds of clay and 111.4
pounds of water to the drum and the crusher fines were added in 50 pound
increments. The slump was measured at 73/t immediately after mixing. This mix
was then put in a third tub to let soak.
46


After soaking for roughly 20 hours, the mix had standing water on top of
some of the mix. (See Figure 16.) This photo was taken after the mixing had
commenced. The paddle mixer can be seen standing in the mix.) A small amount of
water had leaked out of the bottom of the tub. The standing water was mixed in using
a paddle bit mortar mixer on a drill. The slump was then measured at 53/4.
Figure 16 Mix C After Soaking
47


7.2 Pouring the Test Specimens
All the test specimens were formed on September 5, 2011. As a general note,
Mix A was the easiest to work with because acted very similarly to concrete. Mix C
was the hardest to work with because it was sticky and stiff. Mix B was not as sticky
as C but was still not as easy to work with as Mix A.
The shrinkage boxes are made from melamine covered particle board. The
joints between the pieces were sealed with silicone caulking to prevent water from
leaking into and swelling the particle board. The form space in the boxes was 2 by
2 by 24. The shrinkage boxes were lined with two layers of newspaper to allow the
poured earth to shrink without being restrained by the box edges (See Figure 17 &
18).
48


49


Figure 18 Shrinkage box with poured earth added
The cylinder forms were 6diameter by 12 tall concrete cylinder molds. The
cylinders were filled in a minimum of three lifts using a scoop. Each lift was
combined with the previous lifts by jabbing a metal rod up and down in the cylinder
similar to filling a slump-test cone, except no standard number of plunges was used.
The blocks were formed in 2x6 forms on plywood base. The form space is
5V2 by 5V2 by 14. The block forms were filled with a scoop and rodded similar to
the cylinders. Figure 19 shows both the block and cylinder forms with poured earth
in them. (There were lids on the cylinders.)
50


Figure 19 Block Forms and Cylinders Filled with Soil Mixes
The shrinkage boxes, blocks, and cylinders were either capped or covered in
plastic to prevent the specimens from drying too quickly. This plastic was removed 7
days later at which point the poured earth in the boxes showed little shrinkage, there
was standing water on the cylinders, and the blocks were very damp. The specimens
in the cylinders had visibly settled so there was about Vi to V2 of clear water from
the top of the mold to the top of the mud. Also because the cylinder forms were not
placed on a level surface the top of the specimen was not parallel with the bottom of
the form. It was decided the skew would be fixed using Plaster of Paris caps once the
cylinders were dried.
51


On October 1, 2011 the blocks were removed from their forms. The blocks
were still slightly damp but dry enough to hold their shape. As visible in Figure 20,
the form for the Mix A blocks (in the foreground) had to be dismantled and the blocks
forced out because this mix had not shrunk nearly as much as B and C (C is the
farthest back and B is in the middle).
Figure 20 Blocks Removed From Their Forms.
The poured earth in the shrinkage boxes was dry. Figure 21 shows the
shrinkage boxes with Mix A in the foreground, Mix B in the middle, and Mix C
farthest back. The shrinkage, visible in Figure 21, was found to increase with the
amount of clay (as was expected), but no excessive cracks are evident. The earth was
52


pushed to one end of the box to make the shrinkage differences more obvious. The
cylinders were still too wet to remove from their molds. On November 12, 2011 the
cylinders were removed from their molds but they were still damp.
Figure 21 Shrinkage Boxes after drying
Capping of the cylinders commenced on February 7, 2012. The forming
system can be seen in Figure 22. The caps were formed either against aluminum
flashing or glass so the surface of the cap was flat.
53


Figure 22 Cylinder Capping Form
Mix A cylinders were capped first and all the cylinders lost some of their mass
when the cap stuck to the form (See Figure 23). When this happened the rest of the
cap was removed and the specimen was recapped. Some of the Mix B cylinders also
had to be recapped due to the same issues.
54


Figure 23 Cylinder with Damaged Cap
Figure 24 shows one cylinder from each mix capped and ready for
compression testing. Note that the three cylinders were all formed in the same size
mold. From this photo it is apparent that the shrinkage increased as the clay content
of the mix increased.
55


Figure 24 Cylinders from Each Mix
The blocks did not require any further preparation to be ready for the tests to
be run on them.
7.3 Tests
7.3.1 Shrinkage Test
The shrinkage test was done by pushing the fully cured mix in each shrinkage
box to one end of the box. The distance from the inside edge of the box to the closest
edge of the cured mix was divided by the total length of the box. This ratio is
56


presented as a percentage in the Experiment Results section of this paper. NZS
4298:1998 limits the shrinkage of poured earth to 0.2%.
7.3.2 Erosion Test
This erosion test was modeled after the erosion test described in Appendix E
of NZS 4298:1998 and therefore is described in SI units with imperial units in
parenthesis. The block to be tested was placed at a slope of 1 unit vertical for each 2
horizontal units. A 100 ml burrette was positioned with its tip 400 mm (153/4) above
the specimen. The drip was roughly centered on a side of the block that had been in
contact with the lumber form during curing. The burrette was then adjusted so that
100 ml of water would drip onto the block within a 20 to 60 minute period. Figure 25
shows the set up of the Mix A test Specimen. The erosion test was completed on one
specimen from each mix.
57


Figure 25 Erosion Test Set Up
Immediately after the 100 ml had fallen on the specimen a cylindrical flat
ended metal probe with a 3.1 mm (1/8) diameter was used to measure the depth of
the deepest pit on the specimen. This was accomplished by placing the probe in the
block and laying a sheet of glass across the pit to determine the pit depth See Figure
26). The depth of pit corresponds to an erodibility index provided in the NZS
4298:1998. See a reproduction of this index in Table 3.
58


Figure 26 Pit Depth Measurement
Table 3 Erodibility index
Pit Depth, D Erodibility
(mm) Index
0 < D < 5 2
5 10 < D < 15 4
D> 15 5 (fail)
59


Immediately after measuring the pit depth the block was broken at the deepest
part of the pit to measure the wetted depth of soil. If the soil was wet deeper than 120
mm (43/4) the mix would fail the erosion test. Figure 27shows the Mix C test
specimen directly after being broken in half. The wetted area is on the top.
Figure 27 Wetted Depth After Erosion Test
After all the measurements were taken the specimens were left to air dry.
Once the specimens were dry, the area that had been wet was inspected for crazing
cracks, star type cracks, local swelling, pitting, surface fraying, or efflorescence (New
Zealand Standards Committee, 1998). If any of these conditions exist on a specimen
it is deemed unfit by NZS 4298.
60


7.3.3 Wet/Dry Appraisal Test
The point of this test is to determine the durability of a mix to repeated
wet/dry cycles. The wet/dry appraisal test was performed on one half of the specimen
used in the erosion test. This test is based on the wet/dry appraisal test outlined in
Appendix C of NZS 4298 (New Zealand Standard Committee, 1998). The testing
apparatus used for the appraisal was a disposable aluminum baking dish with interior
dimensions of roughly 15.5 cm (~6) wide by 28.5 (~1 lVi) cm long by 4.5 cm
(~l3A) deep. Four American 5 cent coins (Nickels) were placed in the bottom of the
dish to support the specimens. Water was added to the dish to 1 cm (-VZ) depth.
Each specimen was placed in this pan for 1 minute (See Figure 28.) The pan was
cleaned and refilled to 1 cm depth between each specimen.
The specimens were allowed to air dry between soakings for 1 day. This
wetting and drying was repeated for 6 cycles.
The specimens were examined to see if they exhibited any crazing or star type
cracking, local swelling or pitting, surface delamination upon soaking or drying,
water penetration deeper than 70% of the specimen height during soaking as visible
on the side of the specimen, loss of material pieces in excess of 5 cm (2) not nearer
than 5 cm (2) from the specimen edge, or Efflorescence. If the specimen showed
any of these symptoms the material would be considered unacceptable by the NZS
4298:1998, but the standard states The use of surface coatings to improve the
61


performance of material that filas the wet/dry appraisal test is outside the scope of this
Standard (New Zealand Standard Committee, 1998).
7.3.4 Compression Test
The compression tests were done using a 20,000 pound capacity testing
machine made by MTS with a model number of 204.63LUBT. The top platen had a
spherical bearing. The rate of compression was set at 2800 pounds per minute until
failure occurred. This is roughly 100 pounds per square inch per minute for a 6
diameter specimen. Figure 28 shows a specimen prepared to be crushed. The
compression test was performed on 6 specimens of each mix.
62


7.3.5 Modulus of Rupture Test
The Modulus of Rupture test was completed using a three point bending test.
Each specimen was centered on (2) 1 diameter pipes 11 apart. A third pipe was
placed on the specimen centered between the support pipes. Load was added at a rate
of 100 pounds per minute until failure occurred. This is equivalent to roughly 10
pounds per square inch per minute rupture stress for a 5V2 by 5 A specimen. Figure
29 shows a specimen prepared to be tested. The modulus of rupture test was
performed on 6 specimens of each mix.
63


7.3.6 Gradation Analysis
After the modulus of rupture and erosion tests were complete, half a block
from each mix was taken for gradation analysis. Each specimen was first broken into
chunks. A rubber mallet was sufficient to break up the Mix A and Mix B Specimens.
Mix C would not break using a mallet so a couple hits with a hammer was used to
fracture the specimen.
The chunks were then wetted and broken into smaller pieces. This was
sufficient for Mix A to achieve sufficiently small particles for the next phase of the
64


analysis. The cohesive nature of Mix B and Mix C required that the specimen
material was molded into smaller pieces. The pieces were put in a 150 degree oven,
until the samples were just moist. The moist pieces were then removed from the oven
and broken into sufficiently small pieces using a rubber mallet. The samples were
then returned to the oven to fully dry.
Once the samples were dry, two specimens, both weighing 500 grams, of each
sample was put into #200 washing sieves. Tap water was used to wash the fines
through the sieve. Once each specimen was fully washed they were placed in
stainless steel bowls. The particles left in the sieve were carefully backwashed into
the bowl as well. The bowls containing the specimens were then placed in the 160
degree oven until fully dry.
When dry, the specimens were weighed and run through a stack of pre-
weighed sieves. The sieves in the stack were matched to the sieves used in the
original gradation analysis provided with the mix ingredients. The sieves used were
#4, #8, #16, #30, #50, #100, and #200. The sieve stack was then shaken for ten
minutes using a mechanical shaker. Then the sieves and soil were weighed
individually and the percent of mass passing each sieve was calculated.
65


8. Test Results
8.1.1 Shrinkage Test
The measurements in Table 3 were taken on February 2, 2012. These
measurements were taken in millimeters to increase precision.
Table 4 Shrinkage results
Shrinkage Measurements
Mix % of Clay Wet Length, mm Dry Length, mm Shrinkage, %
A 10% 600 595 0.8%
B 35% 600 576 4.0%
C 70% 600 556 7.3%
66


Shrinkage of Colorado Poured Earth
Amount of Leyden Clay in Mix
Figure 30 Poured Earth Shrinkage in Relation to the Clay Content
8.1.2 Erosion Test
The erosion tests were completed on February 18, 2012. Table 5 shows the
results from the tests.
During the erosion test, the drops carved out a pool on the Mix A specimen.
This pool then held most of the water in place and let it soak in. During the test of the
Mix C specimen, the water quickly began to run down the block in a little river. This
allowed the water to quickly drain off the block and not soak in. The Mix B
specimen reacted somewhere between A and C.
67


Table 5 Erosion test results
Mix Pit Depth, mm Wetted Depth Erodiblity
A 5 40<120 ok 3
B 10 25<120, ok 4
C 12 15<120,ok 4
Figure 31 shows the relationship between clay content and erodibility and
permeability.
Erodibility versus Permeability
Pit Depth/minimum
wetted depth/minimum
Figure 31 Erodibility Versus Permability
68


Figure 32 shows the Mix A erosion test specimen after it has dried. No cracks
or swelling are apparent on the block.
Figure 32 Mix A Erosion Test Specimen After Drying
69


Figure 33 shows the Mix B erosion test specimen after drying. There are no
visible cracks or swelling on the block in the area that had been wet.
Figure 33 Mix B Erosion Test Specimen After Drying
70


Figure 34 shows the surface of the Mix C specimen. The entire wetted area
8.1.3 Wet/Dry Appraisal
During each successive wetting cycle each specimen lost comparatively less
soil. Mix A lost the least soil and Mix C lost the most. Table 6 summarizes the
conditions observed during the Wet/Dry Appraisal.
71


Table 6 Wet/Dry Appraisal Summary
Conditions during Test
Condition Mix A Mix B Mix C
Crazing or star type cracks None noted None noted Present from first wetting on
Local swelling None noted None noted Clay lumps formed on surface after soakings
Local pitting None noted None noted None noted
Local or general loss of soil layers Thin loss of layer over 60% of block. Thick Full surface of loss of soil during appraisal Thick Full surface of loss of soil during appraisal
Water penetration deeper than 70% of the brick depth No No No
Loss of large soil fragments not near the edge of the block No No No
Efflorescence None noted None noted None noted
72


Figure 35 shows the Mix A Specimen Prior to the wet/dry appraisal. Note the
vertical face facing the camera is the face that was soaked during the test.
73


Figure 36 shows the Mix A specimen after the wet dry appraisal. The block
did lose a surficial layer of soil during the appraisal but retained most of the block.
T
T
- -jr-v i. -
N
Figure 36 Mix A Specimen After the Wet/Dry Appraisal
74


Figure 37 shows the Mix B Specimen Prior to the wet/dry appraisal. Note the
vertical face facing the camera is the face that was soaked during the test.
75


Figure 38 shows the Mix B Specimen after the appraisal. The face being
tested lost a lot of soil.
Figure 38 Mix B Specimen After the Wet/Dry Appraisal
76


Figure 39 shows the Mix C Specimen Prior to the wet/dry appraisal. Note the
vertical face facing the camera is the face that was soaked during the test.
Figure 39 Mix C Specimen Prior to Wet/Dry Appraisal
77


Figure 40 Mix C Specimen After the Wet/Dry Appraisal
8.1.4 Compression Test
Figures 41, 42, and 43 shows the compression test results of the Mix A, Mix
B, and Mix C cylinders respectively. In Figure 43 the data series labeled Cylinder
C6 has a gap because the test was paused in the middle of the test. This specimen
may have had a higher ultimate strength had this pause not been necessary. Table 7
summarizes a few statistical facts for each mix. Figure 44 shows the average
78


compression stress at failure of each mix in relation to the percentage of clay in the
mix.
Mix A Compression Strength
Displacement, inches
Figure 41 Mix A Force Versus Displacement of Compression Tests
79


Mix B Compression Strength
Displacement, in
Figure 42 Mix B Force Versus Displacement of Compression Tests
Mix C Compression Strength
Figure 43 Mix C Force Versus Displacement of Compression Tests
80


Table 7 Poured Earth Compression Strength Statistics
Specimen Stress at Failure
Mix Clay Content Max, psi Min, Psi Average Stress, psi Standard Deviation, psi Coefficient of Variation
A 10% 324.1 275.5 303.3 16.4 5.4%
B 35% 432.8 405.9 417.0 10.3 2.5%
C 70% 559.6 507.5 535.4 18.3 3.4%
Poured Earth Compression Strength
Figure 44 Poured Earth Compression Strength in Relation to Clay Content
81


8.1.5 Modulus of Rupture Test
Figures 45, 46, and 47 show the results of the modulus of rupture tests for Mix
A, B, and C, respectively. Table 8 summarizes a few statistical facts for each mix.
Figure 48 shows the average modulus of rupture for each mix in relation to clay
content of the mix.
Mix A Modulus of Rupture Tests
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
Displacement, in
Figure 45 Mix A Force Versus Displacement of Modulus of Rupture Tests
82


Mix B Modulus of Rupture Tests
Displacement, in
Figure 46 Mix B Force Versus Displacement of Modulus of Rupture Tests
Mix C Modulus of Rupture Tests
Displacement, in
Figure 47 Mix C Force Versus Displacement of Modulus of Rupture Tests
83


Table 8 Poured Earth Rupture Strength Statistics
Specimen Stress at Failure
Mix Clay Content Max, psi Min, Psi Average Stress, psi Standard Deviation, psi Coefficient of Variation
A 10% 126.8 111.6 122.3 5.5 4.5%
B 35% 163.2 144.6 153.7 7.3 4.7%
C 70% 185.4 148.9 168.3 12.2 7.3%
Poured Earth Rupture Strength
Figure 48 Poured Earth Rupture Strength in Relation to Clay Content
8.1.6 Gradation Analysis
Figures 49, 50, and 51 show the results of the gradation analysis for Mix A,
Mix B, and Mix C, respectively. The figures show the theoretical particle distribution
curve found using Equation 3 along with the two gradation analyses run on each mix.
84


The design envelope is also visible in each figure. The figures do not show any
particle size smaller than the #200 sieve because a hygrometer analysis was not run
on the design mixes.
Mix A Gradation Analysis
Figure 49 Mix A Gradation Analysis
85


MIX B GRADATION ANALYSIS
Figure 50 Mix B Gradation Analysis
0.01 0.1 1 10
diameter, mm
Figure 51 Mix C Gradation Analysis
86


9. Conclusion
The results of the shrinkage test show that only Mix A has shrinkage even
close to the shrinkage standards set by NZS 4298:1998. It is also evident that Leyden
Clay is a very active clay.
The erosion test showed that the higher the clay content in the soil mix the
less resistant to erosion the mix is. From observations during the tests this may be due
to the larger particles of the breeze acting as rip-rap in a riverbank. The water drops
could not pick up and move the large particles of rock readily, but the fine particles of
clay, once thoroughly wetted, seemed to be easily displaced. However, the
permeability of the soil decreased with an increase in clay content. This is to be
expected because clay has low permeability. The crazing cracks exhibited on the Mix
C specimen indicate that this mix would be unsuitable for exterior construction.
Similar to the erosion test, the wet/dry appraisal demonstrated that the higher
the clay content the less resistant the mix was to damage caused by water. According
to a strict interpretation of NZS 4298:1998, none of the mixes were appropriate for
use because all mixes showed at least some loss of soil layers (New Zealand
Standards Committee, 1998). However, I believe that this is too stringent because the
87


standard does not allow for surface coatings. With an appropriate surface coating,
such as earth or lime plaster, and good detailing of eaves and wall base, Mix A could
weather well.
The compressive strength and modulus of rupture of all three mixes meet or
exceed the requirements of the New Mexico Building Code (New Mexico Building
Code, 2009). Both of these measures of strength were found to increase as the clay
content of the soil increased. This increase in strength in proportion to increase in
clay content is analogous to more cement in a concrete mix.
The gradation analysis results show that Equation 3 does a good job of
approximating the gradation of a design mix. Both of the gradation analysis
specimens trend with the theoretical gradation and are well within the expected
repeatability of a gradation analysis test.
Of the three mixes, Mix A is the one that most closely meets the requirements
set out in the Objective of this Study. Its workability is not unlike concrete. It meets
the minimum compression and modulus of rupture strengths required by the New
Mexico Building Code. It has the best durability of the three mixes, as measured by
the erosion test and wet/dry appraisal. However, the shrinkage would need to be
reduced to meet the requirements of NZS 4298. The mix may be able to be refined to
reduce the shrinkage into the acceptable range of NZS 4298:1998 by added sand or
other aggregate. Alternatively, with proper detailing and construction sequencing to
88


Full Text

PAGE 1

nr !n!"#$%#"&''( $)$$$$ #$%# *$%)%$ %$+)$%$,% -$%n.. #,, &'/&

PAGE 2

$%$-$%n.. **# 0.1)$2 34, 5# */6"&'/&$

PAGE 3

"7-!n!"#, ,8 $$).$r)$.$$$%0.1)$ 2 n n).$).$$% !)$$% $$$)$*.$#$$ ,%.$ .$*$).$)%$!%$ #$,%$ .$).$.$!).$.$ ...*! )$,*$$%.2$) ,..$.$).$ +)*$!$$%$$9, $$$)$$% .$).$),$1,"$ $.".*#$,$ ))%)*$)! $.$..)$*$$.$$% $.$:$! .$*).$! **#r0.1)$2

PAGE 4

1.$$%" #,3 $)**$$),$*.!

PAGE 5

5;<$1%)%$.$%# !0.1)$2! ,)..).$),$*. ,$**.$!

PAGE 6

# ;0n *$ /!$%$$).$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!/ &!#$,%$$).$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!= &!/.,.#$,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!= &!&..#$,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!> &!6,.#$,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!> 6!$$).$.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!// 6!/!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!// 6!&<$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/? 6!6$$$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/= 6!?*.$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/= 6!@$#!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!&' 6!(,,*$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!&& ?!$).$$)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!&@ @!A.$#%$n$)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!&= (!,%9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!&> B!9*$.*$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?& B!/-1,9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?6 B!/!/-9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?6 B!/!&-9 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?@

PAGE 7

# B!/!6-9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?( B!&),$$n*.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!?= B!6$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@( B!6!/n1,$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@( B!6!&$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@B B!6!6$C**$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!(/ B!6!?*$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!(& B!6!@-))%)*$)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!(6 B!6!(<$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!(? =!$)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(( =!/!/n1,$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(( =!/!&$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(B =!/!6$C**!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!B/ =!/!?*$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!B= =!/!@-))%)*$)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!=& =!/!(<$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!=? >!.)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=B **9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>' 0n!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!//&

PAGE 8

# ;n008!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!6 &$7-."/>>(8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!? 67).%$"&'//8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!@ ?$.,7"&''&8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!/& @2$.$)$)#!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!/@ ($.-9,#*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!6' B-9,$$.n2$)$)# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !6/ =,:$$$7$2 "/>=/8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!6& >; 2-9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!6@ /', 2-9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!6( //...$-9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!6B /&0 2-9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!6= /6-90$,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!6> /?-9%$n1,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!?? /@-9 %$n1,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?( /(-9%$n1,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?B /Bn1, 9*$,*)$!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!?> /=n1,9$*)$!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!@' /> .100$n-9 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@/

PAGE 9

9 &' .1#00!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!@& &/n1, 9%$,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!@6 &&**,0!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!@? &6$,*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!@@ &?%.-9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!@( &@$n$*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@= &($*$-)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!@> &B$$*$%$$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!(' &=*$n$3)*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!(6 &>n*.%-))%)*$)$!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!( ? 6')$n1,$$$ $$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(B 6/$D)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!(= 6&-9$n*.%$,!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (> 66-9 $n*.%$,!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! B' 6?-9$n*.%$,!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! B/ 6@-9n*.$$C**!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!B 6 6(-9n*.%$$$C**!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!B? 6B-9 n*.$$C**!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! B@ 6=-9 n*.%$$$C**!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!B ( 6>-9n*.$$C**!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BB ?'-9n*.%$$$C**!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!B =

PAGE 10

9 ?/-90.D)*.$%* $!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!B> ?&-9 0.D)*.$%* $!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=' ?6-90.D)*.$%* $!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=' ??)$*n$,$$$ $$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=/ ?@-90.D)*.$%-))%) *$)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=& ?(-9 0.D)*.$%-))%) *$)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=6 ?B-90.D)*.$%-))%) *$)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=6 ?=)$)*$)n$,$$$ $$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=? ?>-9<$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!=@ @'-9 <$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!=( @/-9<$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!=(

PAGE 11

9 ;n0 ;n /n)*)$%$$9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!?/ &,$%9)$1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!?6 6$9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@> ?n1,)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(( @$$)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(= ($C**n)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!B& B)$*n$,$n$$$.!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !=/ =)$)*$)n$,$n$$$.!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!=?

PAGE 12

9 ;n0En +)$/0)0)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/B &-%0)0)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!/B 6<$-9,+)$!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!6?

PAGE 13

/ nnrnn nr nn n n nnn n nnn n !$" ..!!BB n..),$.$ $$*")$* $#.$% )!$.%$.1") $.1$)$! .!$.$)*$ $$)$$$! 1.!$.*.1$# %1%$ $*%,)$!.$ $)!$.*.1 $$$)%1$1 !.$! $.*)$%*$.$$ $!.*)$! .1%$.%$$ ,*. $$)!..* $.1!# .),.$$$.+))$), $%.$).$,

PAGE 14

& $$! $$$$$ %%$1$%$ .$).$7"&''>8! $%%)##,$.$).$ 1.%)$ -$!$%)$$,% @''' !!.%) $.1),)1$$ $='''$(''' !!7-1" &''(8!%.$$ #%.7$"&''B8!.$ % n4"1F-$$%$ $G">$, *$$)$$%).17"&' '>8! $.$).$1%$)$ %$-$" !F 1.$.$)G .$.$D$)#)$ ,$,$$*%).1$*).$ $.)%$$7" &''>8!<$%"$ %.$7-1"&''(8" %$%%$)$$$. %*.$ $$Hn1"$),$ -)$,"1*$ $$).$)$,%$/(''7$ "&''B8!$).$))$ #9*$,$+)1 $$,!. )")$/?/'#",$ $7-1"&''(8!) $%$/@'%n1* $%$$!n 0,)/!

PAGE 15

6 nnnnnn )%$),$$A) $)*! .$%)$,$* $/&$.$)7-." />>(8!.$")$$$%" $)$$.$%)A") $.$$$.%..$ !0,)&$ .)$$$$*$1". *1%*$.$.)$) #.$1,I$$# %*))$!

PAGE 16

? nnr nrnrnrnn!n $%$+)$"$$.$))..)* $).$)$ .%$7$"&''B8!$$ )$ -9.$$*$! $).$$ $n*!$$+)$"$) **.$).$ 2$*,F$).$$% 1$ J$K$..$!G7$"& ''B8%$)$"$), ,.$$" $$$)$! #$*))$$$.$) .$!.,$ %n$),,$)))$ %$%.$)$%$*" $7$"&''B8!%% $$$*9$ .)!

PAGE 17

@ $%$.$).$$. $$*$$ n*)**!/=@'"$).% $)$ n$$),"n)$!.).)/' @%$&B%$, $$?6:,$$*17$"&''B8 !$$).$) )##)."$$+)1!7 ).%$"&'//8! $$$#$%."$$ $).$)$$$ /@'%$,)$%$)$. $%$n! n"nnnn nnn n)$.9*%$. $$).$)$$ #)$+)1!-2",$$ $$).$)

PAGE 18

( $$#$$),$+)1$$#), $.1 ),7-1"&''/8!0)$"$n #<#$.) $1%$$)0)&''/$+)1 $$$$F) $%%.$$$)G7-1"&''/" *@8! ,$$$*$$"$.$).$ ,)#.%! $$%$$$%-9.7-9. ),"&''>8 $%# "..1%$$%. $$*$$.1!, %"%$$$+)1 *2%$!n!"*$,$1,$ $%,% -%)$$75 ,"/>>(8!L $$$$$$.$).$r Ln?&>B,,,% $ ),"Ln?&>=-$1* %$ )," Ln?&>>$ ),$+),n*.%. ,!$%$ $%.$n$<)% ,%$ ), n$7n-&6>&8!.$).$% 2"-9." %" $)","L" )$ $$*.2$.$).$! %)$)%$.$).$$$ $$!% $$)$%$$.$.$)73$8 "%)/>>/.$.$ 5"1$n$,* $.$).$ $$--7"&''>8!* **$%*$.,

PAGE 19

B $%$.$,.2 F$G$,$,$$ D.! )$$$%%$:**) $#$ $).$)7"&''>8!)##$ $.**.%$ .$).$$)$$$.)$$ %$$).$)$$$ ).,$!

PAGE 20

= #$%rrnnrnn #$,%$.$).$.# $$$$, .$,r.,."..,.! n#$%rrn $.%)#),$1$ "$ )%$*%$.$).$!% $)"$*9$%$ .$).$$$$%$$ ).$.%$*$% $$*$$$!$$ #$$*$$.$ ).")$$$$%$!# $*.$%,,, %A$.%,),$$$ $#$%...$% $,,,+)*$! .$).$).$%$) %)%"$ .*$..!$% $).$),"$ $"","%,"%9$)"% .#%$$ ),$$.1$$$$ .1$$ *$),!$."$ ..%),, .%,),.).$)%$!

PAGE 21

> nn&n#$%rrn )$$$.,.#$,$ #"$*9$% )$$$.$).$$#.$).$ $.).$...$ %$$*$$!09*"$ %**,$%$%$ $$%$$n$$%.$) %$-9.$ )$.1%)".+).) )*$).1%)%$ %$$!. $)%.$).$. %)$".)$.$ $$9.#$!-).% $9.#$$$)$%) $"$)).,$ $.$%)$! #"$.$%$$$%. %%$$$, .$.$$$$$.$).$ !.$$)% $)$""* .)$"..* $$!$$#$).$ .$%$.$).$$ .2$*.!" &n#$%rrn n$).$))$$.%$! 9*" $$$)*$$.)$" $$"*)$$ 7-1"&''(8! .)$.).$ $*$$ .)$$.$$%. $,!$$,.*.$

PAGE 22

/' %$*$1*$#,1 ,*.), .%$!.*$%$* )$$.)$ 1$$$)$.$$!

PAGE 23

// rnn'rn n nn nn nn nn# $ ;)7$8 rn $$"%$$2"* $.!1$ ,.*$.".*$.$$ )$%..%.1! $)3.$$$. )$%.175," &''(8!n.$.%$%. $$$$% ))",)".$! .$$.$ ,))%) 9,$$**! .$%$ $9,$$$%.$$ ,$$,, $$!.$99" .9,$.#$ $,$")),)) $!%$.$ $%))$$., $$I%,) $$).$$7"&''&8!$ %$.$$

PAGE 24

/& )).$$,$$$* 9,%.$$ *.,%$.$9! ,)*%*$, %,$C.$! 5$"-$$"$7$%$ $..%) 8#$%..$ $.$!.% 5$,,$$$ ,.$*.$ 0,)?78!$.$ $),,,!. -$$,,$$ .$$.$" *.$0,)?7.8!$$ $).$)-$$"9.*$ $,$C..$,$ $)"*.$ 0,)?78! n(n rn)r n*rr&n*rnn

PAGE 25

/6 $*.$%%.$#)$$ ".# .$#$$$2")..$! $*.,$ *%)$*$.$%# *.$7,"/>B68!n$) #$$.#.*#$, $$$$$* +)$$$.,.$.7-1 "&''(8!-$$ $.,.$$%,. #"" .*#$,$$5$$! $).$)%-$$ $$.$$$.$ C1,*$$). ,$5$$! *.%.)%.%.$$ $$#,%.! ,$*.%.)%.%."$, $,%.7-1"&''(8! n*.%.)%.)%$)%. %*$.*)$! 5$*.%.)%.%)$/@&C,"$*.%.)%.%)$ ='&C,"-$$*.%.)%.% )$=''&C,7"&''&8! #)$$"*$$"%. %)$$*$. ,$..,,!$%$$, %.$$.$*$ $).$)$$$**%)!#" ,$* **.$).$$),!n$)# $$9*$>@M )$%($$$,$ 7-1"&''(8!$" %$$).$)1*$%.," $$#, )$!$.$).$"$$ 1,*$$%.%$

PAGE 26

/? $$$$$$.)*!%$$ $$"1,.# $$$$.$).$!" +r$rn $$$,,$"F 3,!!! )$$$)G7$"&''B"*!/ ''8!**,,% $$),,,$.).1 ,$27-1"&''(8! %%$,%*$.2$ #*.%.!9.$, %2%.*$.,)*#$$$ )!,$*$. .,#$,,,$) $6C/(G%.!n$ 9$*$.,)*!n,2%) $6C/(G$$/C6&G!n$ $9$,)*.$$*$.! %n%.$ n$)*.$$,)*.% ,$%.$1 ,*$), $.1%$2#!$$$ $$*$#$$,$ *,%$$),$#! *.1,$ !)$%$* ),*$.32$)$ .)#!.)#.$).$*$$,$ 2%$#*, ,$.2$9$*.$% $$*$),$$# *,7F*.$*,G8#$.9!

PAGE 27

/@ )$%,$.)$ $%$ *,",",*,7n0,) @8!*,$ %$,$$2! ,$%$ #$)$$*$.2! ,*,$$ ..$$%*$.2#$! $#$*.# $&''*,*. 1N&''#!n$$*$) ,$#).% $.!,$)$%$*$ %$.%)$2 ),,$$$! n,n-$r .$n)r n*n%n 9*$$)$%*$.2 $*$$$ )$1,",,%, !. .$.$$%$, #$$!

PAGE 28

/( 2$%*,".) $*$.$9.$ 2! 9$",9,).%$ $,! )%%$#$) *.$$F*$.G! )$$,*,".)$ $*$.2$ %*$.! 0",1, :$$9! $$$*) %##!%*$.) #$#!) *)$$%,. )$*$.$# 2).$$#*.$%! ,$.1%#). $$%*$.$ **$.$!.1%#"$% "+)$$21, .)$! 0)0)".#*%..$ ,,,$" $$.%*%.$,*$.3 2$)$)*% *.,7-$1"&''68! $"$0)0) *.$.2*$.&$6M%$ $$,$!$ *.$,%$.$).$!0)0 ).*$%)$ .$).$,/'$$+)$$) .2*$.$ 9"7-1"&''(8!

PAGE 29

/B /' /''/'+ = % /rnn0n n& rn /'O$*.$%$,# $ & $%, O;,$,$!0)0)$..)$%$*$ .**9$ *.!n$#*.,"$ %+)$& **7-$1"&''68!F G9*$..)$%$*$. *!-$1.$*$. #F G%'!&'$'!&@! /' /''/'+ =% /rnn0n$$n n& rn O$,,.%%.$ #".@'M..$ $$,, **$%$$$$ %*).!.)$$" ",#)*.$ .$$.$.$ 7"&''&8!%%%,..$ $$)%$ .$).$$**$%$..*$ #$,$%%.$!

PAGE 30

/="" rnn%)$*%$7-1 "&''(8!$% .$2$$$$$..) $$*$.!$ %$$$? ''>'',)! $).$.$$.* $.!$$ $),.*.$! $* $%$ %$$$/'@,)!%)$ $*%$%$! 0$$$$$*%$ %.*$ $1,%.$#*$!n ,**$%$ $$*.$$%.*$. *)$*$! .$.)$.*$.$.* !$$#*$" $*$).$)%$.*$.. $$.*# $,$%$.".)**$.% $,$* *$.7-1"&''(8!"( &1rn.*.$,%$.$$! .$ $$$.*.$#,.* #$,$$ ).*%$$*!.*. $,$$) .$$%$%%.$$%$! %$$$$$ $.$9)$%,#.* .$,%%$!$)

PAGE 31

/> .$$.$$9)$), $*.$ .*.$$$1$*$)-$) $$!*$)-$) $$)$#$$). $$$)%.*.$, !$).$$.$$$, $%$.,$ $$*%.*.$)7,"/>B68! $*%.*.$,%%$* ),$ $).$).)*$*$.)$).$$ !$$.*.$$ $).$$$.$.$$ $$),!$% .*.$*)*+)%$$). $$*.$,"$) $#,!0$." 9,)*$"%$ *$$.1$$$#$")$ %),%%"$*$ .$#$**$).$$7<) $"&''68! *.$%%$).$%. $$).$)!.)$ $).$)$.*.$.%$,$* $..)*$$! $$.$).$$"$ ,$)$$%$ .*.$!*.1.$).$$.* .$*#$$. %.**$$$! .%$$%$**$)$ $,$$% $P).%%.$$$).$$ %$9%%.$$% $).$)P..,$-1"$$).$$ $$9,%$% .$).$),$,$$*$ )-$)$$7-1"

PAGE 32

&' &''(8!$$)-1$$** 9$ .1#,%/>M,$.*$ ,$$.* .1%$$7-1"&''(8! ),,$$..$ %$,)$%.$.*# $,$C$, $).$$.$.*#$,$ !.$,$%$ ...)$%.)$..* .$%$,$) $$%.),$,,%$.* $.!,$).$$ %$%.$$$,,! ,.*$.$) .$.*#$,$%$ .)*#)!", #$$%n-%%$)$..$ 9$$$% #%$9!;"*$)". $.$#) .$*$.$).$!$$ $.$).$"*.)$, ).).#$ $#! 2$ )#"$$,$,$%5 $*.. /'$&'$,1*)$)* $*.,!$,$. .$$)$$$)).$$ %)$)!7-1" &''(8! )$$1),$#$*# *.$% .)$#.%%.$$$ $!09*".$)$

PAGE 33

&/ .$.*#$,$%. $#**$%$ !;#**$..$.. %.$$ ".$)..)7%,.,,, $*$$8 *$)%$3.$,$%$! %#.$$ $#$$.$2$$ *#$,$ *#$#)$$%$7,"/ >B68! $9.$$,#$#$ !. .*#$,$",..% 9$$...$$ .$%%.$#.971"&''(8!0)$"$$*% .%%.$$.$$,# $#!$.$ %#$5$$")$ ***$%-$$ $.$7-1"&''(8! )$%,#$2+)$.# 9*.$)$ #$$$*!$.%%.$ )*$!)*$ .$%%.$#%$.$$*$ $$)..$ $.,#$,$7,"/>B68! $$#*$/>@':" .$..)*$$$".)$ $$:.$$ .$7"/>('8!*#$,$ .$)$. $.$$#+)$$$ @M%$97-1"&''(8!

PAGE 34

&&"! n)1n,,**$%%%.$ .$**.$," $.$$",$".*.$$*"$ #"%*$!F .*#$,$%$** $,2$)$" $.$$"$$$...*.$* $$$"$$*%. *$G7-1"&''(8!7)*"$$ FG%$%$$$ #%,.$!8,$$ $#$*$"$$ .,$,$..#$),. *.$"*#,$" $#"Q$$$$7,"/>B&8!# "$%" .@'M..$$$, ,**$%$ $$$%*).7"&''&8! %"%$#, ..$$$)"$.$*$ #,%.%$ ,,**$%$! $%)."2"$$ 9%$ .$).$,,,$ )7 89$ .$$ 9"..1)$! 9))$$ .*#$,$%6''$=''*)*+) .!))% $.$" %$.$).$#!$ *$$$ $2$ %),B@'1**+). %='$/&'1**+).75,"/>>(8!

PAGE 35

&6 $%"1,.) $.$).$!$ 9$)$1,.$.#1 ,$%6$/&M! 9.#'!?$&M7-1"&''(8!#" 1,..$ *$2$%$.$$,$!$# .)$). 1,!..,$-.01,"$ ).$"$),, ,,,$"$)....)9.# 1,..1,701," *.).$"),)$&/"&'//8! )$%$#,$$ $9.$).$ $!,%.$).$$"$, $$$$$$ $!$..),$$ .),.$ #"%.*.$ "%2$,! $%$$%! ,$)$" $,%*$.) $$." $%$#$$.) .$)$$,$ )$7-1"&''(8! $%%%)*$.$# $.%.%$ $.n)$$$%. #$$7-." />=68!$.).#$ %$*$.$ ,),%#,.%.$* $!$*$) #$***.!-*$ .$$)*$. $$$$.)$*#) .$,$$

PAGE 36

&? .$$),.*.$! $).%$,%$ .$$$%$!*#))$.# ,1.$.. .*.$%$))$ %$$%%$%$7 $$" />=68! 0$n-9.$%$ )$/=(@!$ /=>/$%"" #! )*$.$$%$$* $*%$! $)$(.%,$%$).. )$% #7*$"/>=68!$.$" .). $$.$).$**$ ,!). #**.$$%), $$! $.$).$,..$"$" $$$ )$%$,)),$1*$$$%$ $%., n$..$"%$$... .,$ $!0#.%$).$ )$.n)$$" ,$.$%$,!

PAGE 37

&@ ( -$nn)$nrnn.$).$)$#).$ ),$! #"$A)$$1*$% ,) )$2$!%$A)$ $.$).$%." .)$..#$,.$%$ $"$.$ .$$$!$$3)%$% !3)%$. $9*#..$$,#)$ %%$.)! $)$$)%.$).$ $*.*$% %),$!-**# +)$),$ .))$%$")$$* $). ..$%$! $$$.$).$$# $#!%$ $$"*)$$,$*$ $$.2$ ).,!**.9* .$.)$..$ .$).$+)*$$.$%$.$ ).$.$)2! )%$%$.$).$$ ..%$ )%.$)!....$".)%" $%,#

PAGE 38

&( #,"*$$$$.$ )%# $%.$).$!0"$*.*$ %*),$ .,$.$$).$))$! Ln$Ln?&>=.$$* )$ ),$$"" *.1!$.#$ $$,+)$.$%$.$).$ $C.$$%$ /@M7-$1"&''68! *$$$.,..$$#$ />>& ;)*$7$$"&'//8!$$ $2$..,*)" 1$%!.)9%$$. ,$$$$ ;)*$#$!%..,*)9 $)$$$$ *1,$%$9%#$$)$! $..$$ %%%$)$$,$)*1, $!$,$%$ $@''$/'''*)*+).$ 9%%%$*.$ ,*)$=@*.$,$701,"&'''8 ,,)$$".$$$$ ,$.$).$ .,$!.,*)$$!$ ,*)$$$" $.$!$,$1,. )*)$!"$$ ).$$$.$$.) $$#$$$,..$ $$.$R/@"'''7$$"&'//8! $#$$1$ %%.)$$%%$%.,.#% $..*.1

PAGE 39

&B $$)1..%3) !#"$)..% $$$$*)$# $.$).$$!

PAGE 40

&= 23%nnn4$n*)*%$$)$,*) $9),.. #3*).$$$$.) $..#$$ .9*..#$..$. $).$+)*$!. $**%$$9.) %%,,,$." .%+)""*%)$.$ ).$!$,$**$ $$)13,"*)" )9$$$$ +)$%.$).$%6''*.* $,$@'* ))%)*$)7-9. ),"&''>" "&''(8!n1, $.%$9)$9. $$$%$Ln?&>= 7Ln$$$"/>>=8!

PAGE 41

&>! *nn n&5n9,%$$*$ .2$)$! $%*$.32$)$.)# $$**9$$*%$ -%0)0)*$+)$&" *$2*$.2 $)$!$#$,%, 9$-%0) 0)! 0$".,$$#..) $$$7$. #,%*$.$)$.)#8"$ #)%F G),,$ -$1#$.$$ )$#*$% *.$.)!)9)#)) %F G'!/@'!6 *.$#7n0,)(8! n."**.@'*.$%$ *$.*,$ N&''#$.$1%, !$,$% $*$.$$N&'',# #% *.$$#%$!% 9**.$$*%$ ,#*0,)("$$, $%$$$$ $%.$$9!

PAGE 42

6' n!n0r n5n*n% 1n0,)B$*$.32$)$.)# %$#)9 ,$#$,$%$9*$! %$."2C.) %.$$,!7)% 2+)#$$! $,$$$$$) ,#%$.),.1!8 nnnrn n r r r r !! r "#$% &$$r'

PAGE 43

6/ !" n ()* +)* ,( ./// /r 0r r +r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 # r r 4r n6n5n-$n)r n4.n*n %n0 2.%*$$0 n". "!; 2; .%$; $<"n* ".!, )0.%$,E)0$ n*".! $$.$n% n*$0$;)*$!... $#$), n*.% (!%$$ *.1+)$"$"$ *$.!

PAGE 44

6& ;$,,$$9! **$%$. %*...".)$.) .!$$,$" .)$+)$%%3,". ).A).$$ ,:*$.$.$$$$* *$. !$$,;$%;*# n* ;+);$%6=$.$9%&/! ).$$. $3,:.$.$. *.$#$ -$$!%9$$ .$%$ .#*$$%,1," )$,.*#$,$! n7nrrr$8n) rnrn .nr$n r&n7n

PAGE 45

66 #,,$%$0 2"; 2", )0%$! $$0; 2,! ,)0,*,! :$$$$,)0 )..% ),9.)$,*$,32 $)$.)%$ $$1$.$-n" .$*,! ...$,,$!

PAGE 46

6? ,$$.F$G9"$#), $. $$.+)$6! ( ) = # (( ((/rn"n+r$rn#r n5n/rn# ((O*.$*,$ $#%$9 ((O*.$*,$ $#%$ $,$ ,$ O*.$,$ $,$1)*%$9 0,)>$),/&$#))$,*$ .2$)$ .)#,)*A.$#,,,$, $!$$.$n.A,$! )$$$$ $,$%,#9!,#* 0,)(*$ .%$9,%,)!#) .*%$9,$ $,#*!

PAGE 47

6@ ;9"0,)>$.$ $,#*)$ 9$*%$$$$2 *$.!.$$$$ 9$,!9$*)) %)$.)$9 **$$$%$$$,$)$ #*! r#$ !%" n #r +5#r r #r+)*5/r5#rr +5#r()*5#rr #r+)*50r r5#rr #r+)*5,5#rr #r+)*5.///5#rrnn9$n:.n5n

PAGE 48

6( ,*,,%$, 2$# $$9," 0,)/'!$%9$*)) %)$)$$)! %$ !%" n #r ,)*5#r r #r,)*5/r5#rr ,5#r()*5#rr #r,)*50r r5#rr #r,)*5+5#rr #r,)*5.///5#rrnn$n:.n5n

PAGE 49

6B ....$9%$) %$, #*"#$0,)//!#"$ )1)$%)3 $.$$....$!. $.)*#$,$ ).$7$.)%$##8! .)%$).$ #"$9$*))%)$! #%&!&! !%" n #r .///)r 5#r r #r.///)r 5/r5#rr .///5#r()*5#rr #r.///50r r5#rr #r.///5+5#rr #r.///5,5#rrnn' $nn5n

PAGE 50

6= 0 29"0,)/&"** #$$ ; 29!#"$0 29 #$.)#$ $;9!09.$ $).! '$ !%" n #r()*5#rr #r()*5/r5#rr #r()*50r r5#rr #r()*5+5#rr #r()*5,5#rr #r()*5.///5#rrnnn:.n5n

PAGE 51

6> $90,)/6)$1 $$*.! ,,,$$*$$*.$$$$ $,,,$,$! n 06725n(5r 06)25(5r 0625(5rn"n5n;$nn0n$9##,$*9! $$90 2;!.*9$%$9 )..)$ *.%,$$$ ,)$%$ ,$).$*#$$)$ .)#,$%)$! %,$*)$$!n .$9$ *.$..$"$.$,.$ %$.$$)*% $9!$,$)*@$(G.)$$ )*#1

PAGE 52

?' 9!n$.%.9$$ .$$.)$ $$,$)*)!/$ )$!$$$) $).$$%$..)%. .)$%!

PAGE 53

?/ 0r nn4 &1n&r&nnn&5n,$%$#" -9 ,$% ,$% ,,,$n)* /''M/'M -$")* ) /@'M/@M?!&@S @'M/=M/!B@S @BM&'M@!B@S 6@M&?Mn$%%")*) ?'M&=MB!&@S 0/$#$$$$)*%. 9$#$$ .$$!0-9$)*%?!&@G** *$!)*%@!B@G %-9 ,$$,$!n.$)*% -92$$.$$% &?M%,,,$,$)*%BTG) $$.$$% &=M"$,9$9$$.$ $%&(M!

PAGE 54

?& 6 51&n$1n$*%*.+)%.9 $..*$ +)$$I.1"."1, 9!n#.1%.9 ,+)!%$.1% @!@G@!@G/?G! n9%$.1%63*$))%)*$ )$$$$% $$$C**$$!n9. %.9, +)!.%(G$ /&G$!9. %.*$$!1,9+ )%.9! 1,9&G&G&?G!1, 9)$$$ *.$%1,.9!$$$ $#)+)$%$ %=!=%$6!#$#,),%,#99 ,%/'!@ %$6! &$)%$9,$)% 9,)$$ $'!'@!

PAGE 55

?6 0r nnnn&5n$nn&rn-9,,$%,$ -90 2"" $"7$C$$ ,$8 ?/=!B?(!@(>!=/@M &>/!6@/@(!>=>!(@&'M /&B!6&>B!////!?&(M %$$$%$$$),$ *% *%.1%.9!# .*$!$$ ,*$.9$$%%.$1,$ $$%$$ *$.$$%$$$$$. $).$!%",$ $$$.*$$*.!6 rn&5nn*$?"&'//$$9 .$ $*$$)!9%$$ 1)$$9$$ 9),..*9!1 ,*$)$. *$.$$%)$%$ $9!6 5n#n-9.$)9.!%),$%. 7?(!@*)8 $7(>!=*)8*)$$#>%$6..$$$,)9!7 ..$9)n$$).$ +)*$ )>@-!8$.*)$ 2)

PAGE 56

?? @'*).$)$?/=!@*) !9$ )*)$?UG$9*)$$) $1! %$1,%**9$&')"$9 $,$$* %%$97n0,)/?8!$$ $*%%$$)$ %,)8!$9),* $$9! )*$)$@VG! n(n5n#n#n4rn

PAGE 57

?@6 5n:n-9 9%$%$.!79 % $..)$$),$$%)9) $%$$9.$9 .*.$>%$6$9)**$/'!@%$6!8/$%%$$. $9,6>!&%$ B=!?@%.$$9! 7)#$9$/B!@M$$, ,,$$!$ $$$$$%$)*%@UG.) ).!8.)% .$)*$/''*)"$.* $$9$$%%$ **9!9$$1)$%$9 $$. &'M$$,,,$$!%$%%$ 9$*)$$)$1! .%%$$.9 ),&'M$ $,,,$$!$%9$*)$ $$)$,$9 ),*$$9!)* )%$$$(UG!

PAGE 58

?( %$1,%),&')"$9$ ,$$*# ).%$97n0,)/@8!$9 ),*$$ 9!)*$)$BT G! n,n5n:n#n4rn 6" 5nn-99$9,&>B!/*) %.///!? *)%$$$)$.)% @'*) .$!)*)$BUG$ %$9,!9 $*)$$$)$$1!

PAGE 59

?B %$1,%),&')"$9$ ,$$*% %$9!7n0,)/(!8*$$ 1%$$9, ..!*9.$, $9!8)$% $1)$%$$$%$$)! $,$9), *$$9!)* $)$@UG! n!n5nn#n4rn

PAGE 60

?=6 )nn0n41&n$$$*.%n*$@"&' //!,$" -9$$$1$.).$# $..$!-9 $$$1$.)$$.1 $%%!-9 $$.1 )$$$$1$-9! 1,9%.# *$.! A$$$*.$.. )1,$*#$$% 1,$,$*$.! %*.$9&G &G&?G!1,9$$ %**$$ *)$$1$)$,$$ 9,7n0,)/BQ /=8!

PAGE 61

?> n6n4rn:5n1nnr$$n1$nr n

PAGE 62

@' n7n4rn5n$$.1. %$*)$ $!7$.!8

PAGE 63

@/ nn: n&nr$n $n $n
PAGE 64

@& .$/"&'//$.1#%$ %!.1 $,$*)$),$$ *!#0,)&'" $%%$-9.17$%,)8 $$$.1 %.)$.)$9$)1 ). 7$ %$$.1 $8! nn: n'&%$n&n0n&n*)$$1,9!0 ,)&/$ 1,9$-9$%,)"-9 $"-9 %$$.1!1,"#0,)&/ "%)$.$$ )$%.79*.$8")$9.#. .1#$!$

PAGE 65

@6 *)$%$9$1$1, %%.#)! .$$$$#%$ !#/&"&'//$ .#%$)$$ $*! nn4rn:5nrn$n**,%$...0)B"& '/&!%, $.0,)&&!.*% $,$)) %,,$)%.%$.*% $!

PAGE 66

@? nn $nr11n&n-9..**%$$. $%$ $.*$).1$$%7n0,)&68! $**$$%$ .*#$*..**!n %$-9 $.**)$$)!

PAGE 67

@@ n"n $n
PAGE 68

@( n(n $n&nrn5n.1$+)%)$**$ $%$$$$ )$!6" 0n 6" 4rn0n1,$$*),$%).) 9.1, 9$%$9!$.%$ ,%$9$$.$ ,%$.)9#$$$,$ %$9!$

PAGE 69

@B *$*.$,$9*$)$ .$%$**!Ln ?&>=r/>>=$$1,%*)$$' !&M!6" n0n$$%$$$$ .**9 %Ln?&>=r/>>=$%.n) $$*)$ *$!.1$$$*.$ *%/)$#$.%.& 2$)$!/'')$$*$ $$$*?''7/@UG8# $*.!*),.$ %$.1$$ .$.$$$)%),.),!) $$$A)$$$ /''%$)*$$.1$&' $(')$*!0,)&@ $$)*%$-9$$n*.! $$.*$ *.%.9!

PAGE 70

@= n,nn0n4n;1n$%$$/''%$*. ..%$ $*$6!/7/C=G8$) $)$*$% $*$*$$*.!..* *.,$*$ .1,$%,.$*$$ $$*$*$n0,) &(8!*$%*$.*$$ 9*#$Ln ?&>=r/>>=!n*).$%$9 6!

PAGE 71

@> n!n)n*1nr&n0r n"n$ n$5n$*$" 78 $ 9 'WW@& @XW/'6 /'XW/@? Y/@@7%8

PAGE 72

(' $%$),$*$*$$.1 1$$*$ *$%$*$$)$$$*$%! %$$*$/&' 7?UG8$9)%$$$!0,) &B$-9$$ *..$%$,1%! $$$$*! n6n$n*1n#nn0n%$$)$$1$*. %$$! .$*."$$$ $*.$%.2, ..1"$$*..1".,"*$$," )%.%,"%%..7 Ln$$$"/>>=8!%%$ .$9$*. $)%$Ln?&>=!

PAGE 73

(/6"" =*n#11rr n0n*$%$$$$$$) $%9$*$ $C..!$C**$$*% %%$*. )$$$!$$$ $C**$$)$ **9%Ln?&>=7Ln$$$ "/>>=8!$$, **$))%$*** ))1,$$ %),/@!@.7Z(G8&=!@7Z/ /TG8.,?!@. 7Z/UG8*!0).@.$.7.18 *.$$$%$ $)**$$*.!$$$ $/.7ZVG8*$! .*.*.$*%/)$7n 0,)&=!8* .%$/.*$$.*. *.$$1, %/! $$,,*$%(..! *.9$%$9$ .2,$$* ..1,".,*$$,")%. $)*1,," $*$$*$B'M%$*. ,$),1,# $%$*."%$*. 9.%@.7&G8$ $@.7&G8%$*.,"%%. .!%$*. %$*$$$). )..*$$Ln ?&>=r/>>=")$$$$$F)%)% ..$,$*#$

PAGE 74

(& *%.%$$$%$$C** $$)$$.*%$ n$G7Ln$$$"/>>=8!6"( &1n0n.*$$),&'"'''*) .*.$$$, .-n$)%&'?!(6; !$**$ *.,!$%.*$ $&=''*)*)$)$ %)..)!),/''*)* +).*)$%(G $*.!0,)&=*.** $.)! .*$$*%(*.%. 9!

PAGE 75

(6 n7n&1n0n4>1n 6", n$ nn'1n0n-))%)*$)$$.*$),$ *$,$$! .*..$7&8/G$** //G*$!$** *.$*..$$$)**$ **!;$$ %/''*)*)$)$%)..)! +)#$$),/' *)*+).*)$)*$)$% @VG@VG*.!0,) &>*.**$$$!) )%)*$)$$ *%(*.%.9!

PAGE 76

(? nn41&n'r$nn$ nn'1n0 n 6"! +r$rn#r n%$$))%)*$)$$. *$"%.1 %.9$1%,$!. *.%$1$ .)1!)$)%%.$$1)*$ -9-9 n*.! -9)$1),$.)*$ $)$ %.$)$*.! .)1$$$1$* .! )%%.$%-9$.#)%%.$* $.%$9$*%$

PAGE 77

(@ !.#$)%-9 -9 +)$$$*. $$*.!*. *)$/@',#" )$$*A)$$!$*. $#%$# 1$)%%.$*.), )$!* $$)$$#$%)! .$*"$*."$,, @'',"%. **)$$N&'',#!*$ )$$% $),$#!..*.%) $*. $$!*$.%$$ #.%).1$ $!.$,$*. $*.$/(' ,#)$%)! "$*.,)$), $.1%*3 ,#!#$$.1$. $$#)$ ,,$*#$$9 ,$!#) N?"N="N/("N6'"N@'"N/''"N&''!# $.1$1%$ )$),..1!$# #)$*.$%*,. #..)$!

PAGE 78

(( 7 0n' nn 7 4rn0n)$6$10)& "&'/&! )$$1$$. *.! 0r n(n4rn n8r-0r 9 06 :%r ; +-$ 99 3 +-$ 99 8r-$ : 7:n: ):: ::

PAGE 79

(B ()! &!%!!!n(: : : : : : : : : ::::::::: !! r#&%#"() n"n)$nrn4rnn' rnn n rnn 7 n0n$$.*$0)/="&'/ &!@$ )$%$$$! ),$$$"$*.#)$* $-9*.! *$$%$$*. $$1!),$$$%$ -9*."$$+).1,$)$ .1$$#! $$$+).1%%$.1 $1!-9 *..$$!

PAGE 80

(=0r n,nnn n06 < 3#$ 99 ; 3#& 7=8 )=$8 =$8 0,)6/$$*$..$$ $ *$! n!*%#+*%# ::::: !! r#&%#"!! <3#>999 #>999 n"n$ n?n)&r n

PAGE 81

(> 0,)6&$-9$$*.%$ $!..1 ,**$$.1! n"n5n#nn0n41&n#n*n

PAGE 82

B' 0,)66$-9 $$*.%$ ,! #..1,$.1$ $$$! n""n5n:nn0n41&n#n*n

PAGE 83

B/ 0,)6?$)%.%$-9*.! $$$ .2,..1! n"(n5nnn0n41&n#n*n 7" =*n#11rr n),.)..#$$,...*. $.*$# !-9$$$-9$$ $!()2$ .$#),$$C**!

PAGE 84

B& 0r n!n=*n#11rr n4&&rn -? 06706)06 r*r#/r/8 @@ < %9% +/r -@@ r9# %9 %r/r% r8+/r#-@@@ +/r-r % r ? %r:%&/8 ?/8( %r/% % -r##r r ?/8( %r/% % -r##r r ;r#r#r:%&/8#@@@ + %r%r-9 r-%&/8@@@ %% // @@@

PAGE 85

B6 0,)6@$-9n*.$$$C **!$$ #$.%.%.,$.$%.$$ 1),$$$! n",n5n#n41&n)nn=*n#11rr n

PAGE 86

B? 0,)6($-9*.%$$$ **!.1 )%.%),$** )$$$%$.1! n"!n5n#n41&n#nn=*n#11rr n

PAGE 87

B@ 0,)6B$-9 n*.$$$C **!$$ #$.%.%.,$.$%.$$ 1),$$$! n"6n5n:n41&n)nn=*n#11rr n

PAGE 88

B( 0,)6=$-9 n*.%$$** !%., $$$$%! n"7n5n:n41&n#nn=*n#11rr n

PAGE 89

BB 0,)6>$-9n*.$$$C **!$$ #$.%.%.,$.$%.$$ 1),$$$! n"n5nn41&n)nn=*n#11rr n

PAGE 90

B= n(n5nn41&n#nn=*n#11rr n 7( &1n0n0,)?/"?&"?6$.*$$ )$%$-9"-9 "-9.*.$#!0,)?6 $$F (G,*.)$$$*)$ %$$$!*. #,)$$$,$$* )$.!B )2%$$$.%.$%.9!0, )??$#,

PAGE 91

B> .*$$%)%.9$ $$*.$,%.$ 9! "&!!( %('!%*n(n5n#nn?n*1 r&nn&1 n0n

PAGE 92

=' "&!!( %'!%*n(n5n:nn?n*1 r&nn&1 n0n "&&!!( %'!%* n("n5nnn?n*1 r&nn&1 n0n n

PAGE 93

=/n 0r n6n)$nrn&1n4n4r n#/9 r(r 06 r 0r6$ # 0$ < 7r$ # rr 3r$ # %%/ % Arr 7:: ):n: :n: n !n(&!!( ::::::::: !! r#&%#"'% 7rr(r 067 06 06)n((n)$nrn&1n4nn' r nn rnn

PAGE 94

=&n 7, $ nn'1n0n0,)?@"?("?B$)$%$) )%)*$)$$%-9 ""*.$#!=)2% $$$.%.$%.9! 0,)?=$#,))%)*$)% .9$$. .$$%$9! "!%! %'!%*n(,n5n#nn?n*1 r&nn$ nn'1n0n

PAGE 95

=6 "!%! %'!%*n(!n5n:nn?n*1 r&nn$ nn'1n0n "&!%! %'!%*n(6n5nnn?n*1 r&nn$ nn'1n0n

PAGE 96

=? 0r n7n)$nrn'1n4n4rn#/9 r(r 06 r 0r6$ # 0$ < 7r$ # rr 3r$ # %%/ % Arr 7:: ):: :n: !n(( n ::::::::: !! r#&%#"'% 7rr(r 067 06 06)n(7n)$nrn'1n4nn' r nn rnn 7! +r$rn#r n0,)?>"@'"@/$)$%$, $%-9" -9 "-9"*.$#!%,)$ $$.*$.$)$ .)#%)),+)$6,$$$, $).9!

PAGE 97

=@ ,#*#.%,)! %,)$ *$.2$$N&''#.) ,$$) $,9! 067rr7r n r9$99
PAGE 98

=( 0,B).737?,C@7@7+D, n r9$99
PAGE 99

=B n)$%$1,$$$$-9 1,# .$$1,$$Ln?&>=r/> >=!$#$$$; #.$#.! $$$$$,$.. $$$9$ $$$$9!0#$ ),$$$$) $$,*$.%$2.$,* 3*#1!$* .)$*.1)*#$,*$.% .1")$$%*$.% .".$),$$"$ *.!#"$ *$%$.$. ..$$!$ 9*.$.).*$!. 2,..19$$-9 *..$$$$9)))$ %9$.$).$! n$$$$"$$C** $$$$$, $..$$$$$$9$ ,.)$!.., $$.$$*$$%Ln?&>=r/>>=" %$9***$% ).)9$$% 7L n$$$"/>>=8!#"#$$ $$$,$.)$

PAGE 100

== $$%)%..$,!$ ***$)%..$," ).$*$",$, %#"-9.) $! .*#$,$))%)*$)% $9$ 9.$+)$%$-9. ), 7-9. ), "&''>8! $%$)%$,$ %)$.$. .$$%$.!.$ ,$**$$. ..$$,)$.$.. $9! ,$)$$$+)$6 ,A% **9$,$,$%,9! $ %$,$ *.$$$$$.,$ $$9*.$ *$$%,$$$! %$$9"-9$$$$. $$+)$ $)$$A.$#%$n$)!$1 $$)1..$!$$ $).*))%)*$)$ ,$+)$ -9. ),!$$$)$ %$$9") $$$$C**!#"$ 1,)$ ).$$$+)$%Ln?&>=! 9$%$ ).$1,$$..*$,% Ln?&>=r/>>= $,,,$!$$#"$**$ ,.$).$+).,$

PAGE 101

=> ..)$%$1,"#-9.) )%.$).$$ -9".*)$+)$6"$.$. $-% 0)$ %'!/@!),,$$$%$*%*$ .%) $9"'!/@$***$9*$$ )%9,*)*), $-%0)!#"-9$ 9$$%). ,..,$$%n%. $n$7"&''&8!-9 $.)*%,.%%, -9.% ,!$9"$%" .$$**$%$ %$$*$.2$)$!* $$,$%$$ 9)$$$,;$%$! )%)$.! $*#)"$9)*# $#$$ .$$!-9$)*$%'G$?TG$ @M$).$$.,! $#$#,-9!$ %%)$)." #$$$,;$%9.) )$..$2$1$ )*$,#$$,,,$$!

PAGE 102

>'#11$5n%,*,.$%).*%$% $)$$ ,,,$.)$$*# n*! 0 2[[[[[[[[[[![[!!![[[[[[[[[[>/3/'/;[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[!!/'&3/'@; 2[[!![[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[/'(3/'B, 2[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[/'=...$[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[!/'>.$n[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[//'-n[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[!!!///

PAGE 103

>/

PAGE 104

>&

PAGE 105

>6

PAGE 106

>?

PAGE 107

>@

PAGE 108

>(

PAGE 109

>B

PAGE 110

>=

PAGE 111

>>

PAGE 112

/''

PAGE 113

/'/

PAGE 114

/'&

PAGE 115

/'6

PAGE 116

/'?

PAGE 117

/'@

PAGE 118

/'(

PAGE 119

/'B

PAGE 120

/'=

PAGE 121

/'>

PAGE 122

//'

PAGE 123

///

PAGE 124

//& ''@4nn-$$!7&'/'8!F&6>&C&6>&-n$<) %,%$ ),n$!Gn-$$"! $$"!7/>=68!F$.$%$$ $!G ($( )nrr "$,0)$%2" 2"6>3??! *$"!7/>=68!G$2$$.+) !G ($( )nrr "$,0)$%2" 2"6@36=! $$"7&'//8!F#)$#$$ $$.$).$!GW $$*rCC!.$$!.C,C..!$N.='&(? &\7)&6"&'//8! ).%$!7&'//8!F%$ %$.).%$ .!GW$$*rCC!.$$),!.C)$!$\ 7)&"&'//8! "!7&''@8!Fn$$%$$r$n$$!G *'n+) W$$*rCC!$!)C-CC)$$$!$ \7)/B"&'//8! !7&''&8! (n "@$!" 1C".%. <#"! #"!" )" !7/>('8! +,+++( ",. )$&(B" ,$"!!"&=3?@! $"!7&''B8! )nnn "<),"$# ).$"D$! 01,"-!7&'''8!F$$r#)$ ) ,.*$!G ),$!")30)&'''"6B36> <)$"!""!7&''68! )n n.$ )"!

PAGE 125

//6 "!"#"!7/>('8! + ",. )$&(B",$" !!"/?3&B! "!7&'/'8 'n-n, !$% $$#.,"5! $2"!"!7/>=/8 rn $.3".!"! )1"! ,"!"-$.%"!7/>B68! " Qn"41! ;."!"n"!7/>('8! r*n ",. )$ &(B",$"!!"/3/6! ;$$" !"-$"!7&''/8! /nn0 $.$"),"n.$! 5," )."!!7/>>(8! /n ".,.," n)$"%! -$"D!"1"!7&''68! rn$ $) ),.,<)*"#$% $ -."!7/>=68!F$%*#$!G ($()n rr "$,0)$%2"2"/3?! -."!7/>>(8! )n0 "..$% $$,,",$"!! -1"
PAGE 126

//? -1"8!F$/?3), .$).$.*$B ),.,!G W$$*rCC!.*!$$!!)C.C^$$/?C/?''B!$ \!7)/B"&'//8 Ln$$$!7/>>=8!"Ln?&>=r />>=-$ 1*%$),!n$L "L! "!7/>=68!F-$*$% ;$!G ($ ()nrr "$,0)$ %2"2"@3> "!7&''>8! 'nrn ".$.$.$)"41" 41! #"!7&''/8! )nn "('8!#*$% $$%$%,* .$,.)$3.$. $).$!, )$&(B",$"!!"&=3? @! n$"D!7&''>8!F%*%. %)),$ !G ($'n++/(r <,"n.$" /@6'3/@6B! n$)"!""D!"-"!"$"!"-2 "!"-$"-!7&''?8!F ,%%.$)%)R6"'''!G ($1223r ''r ,'# $