LAB REPORT FINAL DRAFT
Kennan (Terzic)
City College of New York
Writing For Engineering. Professor Jacobson

Lab Report Final Draft
INTRODUCTION
In this analysis, I will analyse the elements of writing a lab report as well as comparing two lab reports within the cement field of Civil Engineering, as a civil engineer is an engineer who designs and maintains roads, bridges, dams, and similar structures. The titles of these Documents are “Evaluation of Cement-Based Grout for Reinforcing Unsafe Rocks of Stone Carvings at Hangzhou Klippe in China ” and “Environmental Impacts of Alternative Cement Binders”. When developing a Lab Report there are 8 key elements that one should incorporate. These elements are the title, abstract, introduction, methods and materials, results, discussion, conclusion and references. There are more elements to the lab report depending on your particular type of research, though these eight are the main components of one. Both documents present similarities and differences of these eight elements, between themselves and to chapter 19 of the textbook, `Technical Communication’. These documents help me understand the writing processes of writing a lab report, also in understanding the types of language that is associated in developing this form of writing.
ELEMENT ONE: TITLE
To start off the first element is the title. The element of a title is to be informative enough to enable readers to decide whether the report interests them. As the title helps the audience such as scientists and engineers save time by using abstracting and indexing services to locate the research most relevant for their needs. The chapter describes that the title should ‘use only words and abbreviations that are familiar to them’ which is describing the combination of words familiar to the field of knowledge, as in this case it would be Civil Engineering. The chapter also describes effective titles to be specific and long. The titles “Evaluation of –
Cement-Based Grout for Reinforcing Unsafe Rocks of Stone Carvings at Hangzhou Klippe in China” and “Environmental Impacts of Alternative Cement Binders” share similarities and differences as they do both share similar keywords. Though they differentiate on the depth of their titles. As the “Evaluation of Cement- based” title is more informative and specific in comparison to “Environmental Impacts of Alternative”, as this title seems to be too broad. When also comparing it to chapter 19, I think that the first title is better than the second, also I believe that the second author could have done a better job. The first author did well, as it was geared towards the audience and was concise.
ELEMENT TWO: ABSTRACT
The document of“Evaluation of Cement-Based Grout for Reinforcing Unsafe Rocks of Stone Carvings at Hangzhou Klippe in China” relates to the abstract of chapter 19, as it summarizes the entire report, mirroring, results, discussion, and conclusion. However this development of an abstract had skipped the information of methodology and went straight into the results. As for the second piece “Environmental Impacts of Alternative Cement Binders”, it’s abstract is far more fluid and less informative gathering, as it mainly focuses on the problem/ research concept then its own research. Relating to the textbook this was an unpopular abstract, as it is a shorter form that simply states the topics covered in the report without presenting the important results or conclusions. There are many reasons for why the authors had made such writing styles. Though in regards to the first abstract it was a well collected short abstract that did not bombard the reader. Though the second one was very hollow, maybe it is because they are still not sure of what they are writing about or they are just bad writers.

ELEMENT THREE: INTRODUCTION
Within the first introduction from “Evaluation of Cement-Based Grout for Reinforcing Unsafe Rocks of Stone Carvings at Hangzhou Klippe in China” relates to the Introduction of chapter 19 as it hold a motive, a question, an abundance of information, including the significance, variable, methods, weaknesses and past knowledge. Within the second introduction from “Environmental Impacts of Alternative Cement Binders” relates to the Introduction of chapter 19 as it attempts to address and why this question is significant. The intro focuses on discussion and concepts. It also aids method. Though this introduction does not define key terms as stated in chapter 19. This introduction does not include citations like the first document. They both include information though the second one is more general. The author’s reasoning may be attributed possibly to the research done in each field. It may be possible that the second document opens doors to a question with little prior research.
ELEMENT FOUR: MATERIALS AND METHOD
Within the Materials and Method from “Evaluation of Cement-Based Grout for Reinforcing Unsafe Rocks of Stone Carvings at Hangzhou Klippe in China” relates to that of chapter 19 as it helped convince the reader of the authenticity of the work. As this author was very specific in most details. As the type of cement was described and the location of purchase was also too. This element has a nice description of the elements used, methods, and procedures taken. Within the second Materials and Method from “Environmental Impacts of Alternative Cement Binders” relates to the Materials and Method of chapter 19 as there is a discussion of the materials and procedure. This is a far better informative element of this piece. This section
includes many charts and graphs. The credibility is supported in this section. Another
researcher could replicate this procedure. These reports slightly differentiate as the second document has more charts and graphs, also in that the procedure should be taken view in a different light. As the author states that the results should be for theoretical exercise only. These differences are clear in the resources of knowledge available to these scientists. As it is impossible to give a full description of a picture that one has not fully seen.
RESULTS
Within the Results from “Evaluation of Cement-Based Grout for Reinforcing Unsafe Rocks of Stone Carvings at Hangzhou Klippe in China ” relates to that of chapter 19 as it greatly presents the raw data and presents justification of the information.There is a heavy discussion of the theories and prior knowledge, bridging information that is relevant to the study. There is a lot of organisation. Which greatly improves the credibility of this report. Within the second Results from “Environmental Impacts of Alternative Cement Binders” relates to the Results of chapter 19 as there is discussion and evaluation of the results. These pieces differentiate as the second
document seems more clustered and less organised, the author seems to have attempted to discuss more about the topic, rather than the results. These results are less numbers based.The differences in author’s choice is equivalent in the answer that one is aiming to obtain. It is clear that the second Author is aiming towards a more theoretical approach to answering this question and concept.
DISCUSSION
The Discussion from “Evaluation of Cement-Based Grout for Reinforcing Unsafe Rocks of Stone Carvings at Hangzhou Klippe in China” relates to that of chapter 19 as it is brief and explains the pros and limitations of the experiment.There is an abundance of discussion relating to many forms of knowledge. Within the second Discussion from “Environmental Impacts of
Alternative Cement Binders” relates to the Discussion of chapter 19 as it is transferring knowledge and perception. Though it is quite different as it is more theoretical. Theoretical discussions have a sense of uncertainty and uncertainty is from insufficient variables of information. The choices in authors are quite different as the first document is much crafted around the results and the other on thoughts toward the results.
CONCLUSION
Within the Conclusion from “Evaluation of Cement-Based Grout for Reinforcing Unsafe Rocks of Stone Carvings at Hangzhou Klippe in China” relates to that of chapter 19 as it is straight to the point of repeating the results and variables . Within the second Conclusion from “Environmental Impacts of Alternative Cement Binders’ ‘ there is no conclusion. I think this is the author’s choice as they believe that they had addressed their theoretical answer within the results and discussion segment of the paper. As they did not believe that it was necessary to go on.
REFERENCES
Within the References from “Evaluation of Cement-Based Grout for Reinforcing Unsafe Rocks of Stone Carvings at Hangzhou Klippe in China” relates to that of chapter 19 as knowledge from other sources is cited in an organised manner. Within the second References from “Environmental Impacts of Alternative Cement Binders” relates to the References of chapter 19 as it is cited in an organised manner. These choices are very important for credibility and for official publication. Also for other researchers to look onto other works that you as an author had chosen to include.
CONCLUSION
There are many similarities and differences between these documents. They share these elements for various reasons. Though the biggest reason is for the type of information that one is trying to obtain. As in the sciences not everything is a one, two and done exercises, though in many other cases it is a theoretical approach to organising an answer.

References
Fang, Shiqiang. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering. (2019.). Retrieved from https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002584
Miller , S. (2019, December 19). Environmental Impacts of Alternative Cement Binders. Retrieved from https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.9b05550

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.