1

GEN
This research was carried out to study the comparison of non-destructive testing of concrete with the destructive testing of concrete for assessing concrete strength. An experimental research was carried out, involving both destructives and non-destructive testing methods applied to same concrete mix proportion of 1:2:4 at different days strength of concrete ranging from 14 days to 42 days. The specimens of cubes (6"6"6") and cylinders (6" 12") were cast for the purpose of testing samples.

GEN
Statistical and Graphical analysis was used to establish a relationship and comparison between destructives and non-destructive test readings. For the strength estimation by non-destructive testing, two methods are used, one is Rebound hammer test and other is Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity test, which gives the predicted values of the strength of concrete. Direct values of the strength of the testing samples are obtained by crushing the testing samples in Compression testing machine.

Destructive Testing Methods

Compression Testing Machine.

NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING
There is no standard definition for non-destructive tests as applied to concrete. From some persons,
These are the tests that do not alter the concrete

Non-destructive methods have been in use for about four decades. These methods are relatively simple to perform. In the NDT the specimens are not loaded to failure. These methods can also be used to measure some other properties of concrete such as strength, durability and elastic parameters.

NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING
NDT techniques are widely used in the construction industry as a tool for estimating concrete strength. During initial construction stages they can be used to optimize construction time and enhance safety for example removing of formwork early without compromising safety. NDT can also be used to assess residual concrete strength for developing optimal repair mechanisms in deteriorating concrete structures.

Need of NDT
Non-destructive testing is required in following
situations. Confirming or negating doubts concerning the

workmanship

involved

in

batching,

mixing,

placing, compacting or curing of concrete. Monitoring of strength development in relation to formwork removal, end of curing etc.

Need of NDT
Determine the concrete uniformity.

Determining the position, quantity or condition of

reinforcement. Quality control of pre-cast units.

Objectives/Advantages of NDT
Comparison of concrete quality w.r.t a standard. Detection of cracks, voids/ other imperfections. To determine the density and strength of concrete in a structure. To determine the location of reinforcing bars and the cover over the bars. To determine the number and size/diameter of

reinforcing bars.

Limitations of NDT Methods

All NDT methods are indirect methods.
Co-relation between measured parameter and

concrete strength is never exact.

Results are dependent on too many parameters.

Normally achievable level of accuracy is 25%.

Interpretation judgment. of results requires sensitive

Non-Destructive Testing Methods

There are several methods for Non-destructive testing. Some of them are mentioned here. 1. Visual inspection 2. Rebound hammer 3. Ultrasonic pulse velocity meter 4. Penetration resistance 5. Cover meter 6. Permeability test 7. Radiography

SCHMIDT REBOUND HAMMER

In 1948 Ernst Schmidt, a Swiss engineer, developed a device for testing concrete, based upon the rebound principle.
Currently, different models of the instrument are available. They differ in the mass of the hammer and the rigidity of the spring.

SCHMIDT REBOUND HAMMER

Fundamental Principle
The Schmidt rebound hammer is principally a surface hardness tester. It works on the principle that the rebound of an elastic mass depends on the hardness of the surface

against which the mass impinges.

How to Find Rebound Number

Apply light pressure on the plunger, this will release plunger

from the locked position and

allow it to extend to the ready position for the test. Grind and clean the concrete surface stone. using the abrasive

How to Find Rebound Number

Press the plunger against the surface of the concrete, keeping the instrument perpendicular to the test surface. Apply a gradual increase in pressure until the hammer impacts.

How to Find Rebound Number

Press the button after impact. By pressing the push-button, the indicator can be held in that position to allow the reading to be taken. Take the instrument away from the surface.
Release the button.

How to Find Rebound Number

In this condition the indicator will show the rebound value obtained during the test, on the graduated scale. Examine the impression, if the impact crushes or breaks through a near surface void, discard the reading and take

another reading.
Take 10 readings in similar manner on the test area. Calculate the average of the ten readings.

Rebound Number verses Compressive Strength of cylindrical concrete specimen in N/mm2

Rebound number verses compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimen in lb/in2 (PSi)

Rebound number verses compressive strength of cubical concrete specimen in N/mm2

Advantages of Rebound Hammer Test

The test is inexpensive The test is simple and quick method of obtaining an indication of concrete strength

This test gives immediate results

Disadvantages of Rebound Hammer Test

The test gives accuracy of 15% and 20% only for
specimens cast, cured and tested under condition for which calibration curves has been established. The concrete should be 14 to 56 days old. Frozen concrete should not be tested, as it will results high rebound number.

Rebound Hammer Readings, Compressive Strength for the Test Specimens (Cubes & Cylinders) & Graphs

14-Days Cubes (6"6"6")

Cube Number Cube-1 16 22 23 18 21 Rebound Numbers 21 20 20 23 24 Average 6 Range Discarded Readings Remaining Average Final Average 20.8 14.8-26.8 _ _ 20.8 19 16 23 26 22 21.8 15.8-27.8 _ _ 21.8 21 18 18 22 30 20.4 14.4-26.4 30 19.33 19.33 Cube-2 24 19 27 20 22 Cube-3 21 18 18 18 20

Taken Rebound Number = 21 Compressive Strength from graph = 15.8 N/mm2 Compressive Strength in PSi = 2292 PSi

Graph between Average Rebound Number and Compressive Strength of Cubes

Average Rebound Number 21 22 23 24 24.5 Compressive Strength Of Cubes From Corresponding Graph (PSi) 2292 2393.1 2611 2872 2900.72

Days

14 21 28 35 42

Compressive Strength Of Cubes From Corresponding Graph (PSi)

3000

Compressive Strength (PSI)

2900 2800 2700 2600 2500 2400 2300 14 days 2200 28 days 35 days

42 days

21 days

20.5

21

21.5

22

22.5

23

23.5

24

24.5

25

Rebound Number

Graphs between Compressive Strength of Cubes and Time (In Days)

Compressive strength by Rebound Hammer 2292 2393.1 2611 2872 2900.72

Time (days)

Crushing strength (PSi) 1784.57 2027.122 2231.71 2888.5 2957.3

%Age Difference +28.434% +18.05% +16.9% -0.57% -1.91%

14 21 28 35 42

Graphs between Compressive Strength of Cubes and Time (In Days)

3000 2800 2600

2400
2200 2000

1800
1600 1400

1200
1000 Crushing strength (PSi) Compressive strength by Rebound Hammer 14 days 1784.57 2292 21 days 2027.122 2393.1 28 days 2231.71 2611 35 days 2888.5 2872 42 days 2957.3 2900.72

Graph between Average Rebound Number and Compressive Strength of Cylinders

Compressive Strength Of Cylinders From Corresponding Graph (PSi) 2100 2300 2700 2800 2900

Days

Average Rebound Number

14 21 28 35 42

21.5 23 25 26 26.5

Compressive Strength Of Cylinder From Corresponding Graph (PSi)

3000 42 days 35 days 28 days

Compressive Strength (PSI)

2900 2800 2700 2600 2500 2400 2300 2200 2100 2000 14 days 21 days

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Rebound Number

Graphs between Compressive Strength of Cylinders and Time (In Days)

Time (days)

Crushing strength (PSi) 1328.2 1501.5 1680.8 2103 2261.6

14 21 28 35 42

Compressive strength by Rebound Hammer 2100 2300 2700 2800 2900

%Age Difference

+58.108% +53.18% +60.637% +33.143% +28.23%

Graphs between Compressive Strength of Cylinders and Time (In Days)

3000 2800 2600

2400
2200 2000

1800
1600 1400

1200
1000 Crushing strength (PSi) Compressive strength by Rebound Hammer 14 days 1328.2 2100 21 days 1501.5 2300 28 days 1680.8 2700 35 days 2103 2800 42 days 2261.6 2900

ULTRASONIC PULSE VELOCITY TEST

In 1946 and 1947, Engineers at the Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario worked on the development of a device to investigate the extent of cracking in dams. The device that was developed was called as Soniscope. It had a 20 kHz transmitting transducer which was capable of penetrating up to 15 m of concrete and could measure the travel time with an accuracy of 3%. The purposes of the Soniscope were to identify the presence of internal cracking. The fundamental measurements was the travel time.

ULTRASONIC PULSE VELOCITY TEST

The development of a field instrument to measure the pulse velocity occurred nearly simultaneously in Canada and in England. The earlier approach involved two receivers attached to the concrete surface. A specially designed electronic interval timer was used to measure the time for the pulse to travel from the first to the second receiver.

Fundamental Principle
A pulse of longitudinal vibrations is produced by an electro-acoustical transducer, which is held in contact with one surface of the concrete under test. A complex system of stress waves develops, and propagates through the concrete. The first waves to reach the receiving transducer are the longitudinal waves, which

are converted into an electrical signal by a second

transducer. Electronic timing circuits enable the transit time T of the pulse to be measured.

Significance and Use

This test method is applicable to assess the uniformity and the presence of voids and cracks.

This method is also applicable to indicate changes in the

properties of concrete. The pulse velocity in saturated concrete may be up to 5% higher than in dry concrete.

How to Find Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity

Relevant Standards: ASTM C 597-83 Procedure: Preparation of Test Surface: For a concrete surface formed by casting against steel or smooth timber shuttering then good coupling can be attained by using grease, if surface is free from dust and grit. BS 1881: Part 203- 1986

How to Find Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity

Determination of Transit Time: Apply coupling agent to the transducer faces or the test surface. Press the faces of the transducers firmly against the surfaces of the concrete until a stable transit time is displayed and measure the transit time. Determine the straight line distance between centers of transducer faces.

Calculation of Pulse Velocity:

The pulse velocity is calculated by using following formula:
Where: V= pulse velocity (m/sec) L= distance between centers of transducer faces (m) T= transit time (sec)

ULTRASONIC PULSE VELOCITY TEST

Pulse Velocity and Compressive Strength of Concrete Specimen

Choice of Transducer Arrangement

Direct arrangement. Indirect direct arrangement

Surface arrangement

Advantages
This method is an ideal tool for establishing whether the
concrete is uniform or not This method can be used to locate the position of reinforcement and depth of cracks in the concrete.

Disadvantages
Great care is required for the measurement of pulse velocity Special skill is required to interpret the test results

14-Days Cubes (6"6"6")

Cube numbers Cube-1
34.8 UPV Readings (s) 34.5 36 Average Transit 35.1 Time = T (s) 35.4 35.6

Cube-2
34.1 34.6 37.5

Cube-3
34.9 36 35.8

Length = L (m)
Velocity = L/T

0.1524
4341.8

0.1524
4305

0.1524
4280.87

(m/sec)

Taken Value = 4309 m/sec Compressive strength from graph = 13 Mpa Compressive Strength in PSi = 1885.46 Psi

Graph between Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity and Compressive Strength of Cubes

Compressive Strength Of Cubes From Corresponding Graph (PSi) 1885.46 1885.46 2175.54 2900 3045.756

Days

Pulse Velocity (m/sec)

14 21 28 35 42

4309 4300 4442 4630 4655

Compressive Strength Of Cubes From Corresponding Graph (PSi)

Compressive Strength (PSI)
3200 3000 42 days

35 days
2800 2600

2400
2200 2000 14 days 1800 4250 4300 4350 21 days 4450 4500 4550 4600 4650 4700 28 days

4400

Pulse Velocity (m/sec)

Graphs between Compressive Strength of Cubes and Time (In Days)

Compressive Crushing strength by strength (PSi) UPV test 1784.57 1885.46 2027.122 1885.46 2231.71 2175.54 2888.5 2900 2957.3 3045.756

Time (days)
14 21 28 35 42

%Age Difference 5.65% -6.98% -2.52% 0.39% 2.99%

Graphs between Compressive Strength of Cubes and Time (In Days)

3000 2800 2600

2400
2200 2000

1800
1600 1400

1200
1000 14 days 1784.57 21 days 2027.122 1885.46 28 days 2231.71 2175.54 35 days 2888.5 2900 42 days 2957.3 3045.756

Crushing strength (PSi) Compressive strength by 1885.46 UPV test

Graph between Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity and Compressive Strength of Cylinders

Compressive Strength Of Cylinders From Corresponding Graph (PSi) 1305.324 1595.4 1725.928

Days

Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (m/sec) 4116 4200 4250

14 21 28

35
42

4300
4400

1885.468
2204.54

Compressive Strength Of Cylinder From Corresponding Graph (PSi)

2300

Compressive Strength (PSI)

2200 2100 2000 1900 1800 35 days 28 days 21 days

42 days

1700
1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 4100 14 days 4150 4200 4250

4300

4350

4400

4450

Pulse Velocity (m/sec)

Graph between Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity and Compressive Strength of Cylinders Time (days) 14 21 28 35 42 Crushing strength (PSi) 1328.2 1501.5 1680.8 2103 2261.6 Compressive strength by UPV test 1305.324 1595.4 1725.928 1885.468 2204.54 %Age Difference -1.72% 6.25% 2.68% -10.34% -2.52%

Graphs between Compressive Strength of Cylinder and Time (In Days)

2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000

Crushing strength (PSi) Compressive strength by 1305.324 UPV test

14 days 1328.2

21 days 1501.5 1595.4

28 days 1680.8 1725.928

35 days 2103 1885.468

42 days 2261.6 2204.54

CONCLUSIONS
The results from Rebound Hammer test are with an

accuracy of 20% for cubes and 60% for cylinders

according to our results. The results for Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity test are obtained with an accuracy of 10% for cubes and cylinders according to our results. More accurate results are obtained from Rebound Hammer for older concrete as compare to concrete at earlier stages.

CONCLUSIONS
The Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity test gives more reliable

results at earlier stages of concrete (up to 14days) than

older concrete. From the test results, it is clear that as the rebound number increases crushing strength also increases. Similarly, in ultrasonic pulse velocity test as velocity increases (or transit time decreases) crushing strength

also increases.

REFERENCES
A.M.Neville. Properties of Concrete, Non-Destructive Testing. N.J.Carino, Non-Destructive Testing of Concrete, History And Challenge, Proceeding Of Malhotra Symposium, ACI SP 144-1994. S.K.Duggar, Building Material. M.S.Shetty, Concrete Technology. Kim Watkeys, Ultrasonic Manual. R.F.Feldman, Canadian Building Digest, CBD-187. Non-Destructive Testing of Concrete, May 1977. Guide Book on Non-Destructive Testing of Concrete Structures, International Atomic Agency, Vienna, 2002. V.M.Malhotra and N .J.Carino, Hand Book on Non-Destructive Testing of Concrete, Second Edition. ASTM Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity through Concrete, C 597-02, Volume 4.02. ASTM Standard Test Method for Rebound Number of Hardened Concrete, C 805-02, Volume 4.02.

11/29/2013

56