Conversion Factors between Non-Destructive Tests of Cubic and Cylindrical Concrete Specimens

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Civil Engineering Department, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.

2 Department of Civil Engineering, Sistan and Balouchestan University

Abstract

Assessment of existing structures is an essential topic for engineers working in the field of construction in most industrial countries. Evaluation of compressive strength is one of the most critical factors for concrete structures. Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) techniques are the most extensively used techniques for the prediction of compressive strength in the existing concrete structures. Among NDTs, ultrasonic pulse velocity and rebound hammer are more common to predict the compressive strength of the concrete. This study also investigates surface electrical resistivity as an NDT.  In many studies, concrete specimens are constructed in cubic or cylindrical shapes, but the role of conversion factor has been overlooked that may change the NDT results from cubic to cylindrical specimens and vice versa. Hence, in the present paper, an experimental study was conducted on concrete specimens based on NDTs. In this experimental process, cubic and real cylindrical specimens were assessed in the same mix designs at the ages of 7, 28, and 90 days. Herein, some accurate equations were also proposed to convert NDTs and compressive strength of cubic concrete specimens to cylindrical specimens based on experimental data and response surface methodology. Results showed that the proposed equations perform sufficient accuracy for the conversion intended.

Keywords

Main Subjects


 [1] M.R. Polimeno, I. Roselli, V.A. Luprano, M. Mongelli, A. Tatì, G. De Canio, A non-destructive testing methodology for damage assessment of reinforced concrete buildings after seismic events, Engineering Structures, 163 (2018) 122-136.
[2] Y. Tan, H. Yu, R. Mi, Y. Zhang, Compressive strength evaluation of coral aggregate seawater concrete (CAC) by non-destructive techniques, Engineering Structures, 176 (2018) 293-302.
[3] L. De Lorenzis, A. Nanni, International workshop on preservation of historical structures with FRP composites, National Science Foundation (NSF) Arlington, VA, 22230 (2004).
[4] D. Breysse, What is the value of nondestructive techniques, Concr Plant Int,  (2011) 96-101.
[5] f.l.d. Prüftechnik, Condition control of existing structures by performance testing, Otto-Graf-Journal, 17 (2006) 19.
[6] A. Gonçalves Brief historical notes on pull-out tests, LNEC Memory,  (1985).
[7] V.M. Malhotra, N.J. Carino, Handbook on nondestructive testing of concrete, CRC press, 2003.
[8] J. Facaoaru, Draft recommendation for insitu concrete strength determination by combined nondestructive methods, Materials and Structures, 26(155) (1993) 43-49.
[9] CECS, Technical specification for detecting strength of concrete by ultrasonic-rebound combined methods, Chinese Standards,  (2005).
[10] S. Pessiki, In-place methods to estimate concrete strengths, in, ACI, 2003.
[11] D. Breysse, M. Soutsos, A. Moczko, S. Laurens, Quantitative non destructive assessment of in situ concrete properties: the key question of calibration, Structural faults and repair, Edinburgh, 1517 (2010).
[12] N.B.R. Office, Design and construction of concrete structures, National Building Regulations,  (2013).
[13] A. C597-02, Standard test method for pulse velocity through concrete, Annual Book of American Society of Testing and Materials,  (2002) 04-02.
[14] A. C586, Test for pulse velocity through concrete,  (1981).
[15] T.C.S. No, Guidebook on non-destructive testing of concrete structures, in, Vienna, Austria: Int. Atomic Energy Agency, 2002.
[16] C. ASTM, 805-85, Test for Rebound Number of Hardened Concrete, ASTM, USA,  (1993).
[17] A. Committee, In-place methods for determination of strength of concrete.", ACI Mater. J, 85(5) (1988).
[18] B.P. 202, Recommendations for surface hardness testing by rebound hammer, B. Standard,  (1996).
[19] S. Amasaki, Estimation of strength of concrete structures by the rebound hammer, CAJ Proc Cem Conc, 45 (1991) 345-351.
[20] W.E. Grieb, Use of Swiss hammer for estimating compressive strength of hardened concrete, Highway Research Board Bulletin, (201) (1958).
[21] C. Willetts, Investigation of Schmidt Concrete Test Hammer, Miscellaneous Paper No. 6-267, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS,  (1958).
[22] A.M. Neville, Properties of concrete, Longman London, 1995.
[23] R.B. Polder, Test methods for on site measurement of resistivity of concrete—a RILEM TC-154 technical recommendation, Construction and building materials, 15(2-3) (2001) 125-131.
[24] C. ASTM, Standard test method for bulk electrical conductivity of hardened concrete, West Conshohocken (PA): ASTM,  (2012).
[25] D. Breysse, Nondestructive evaluation of concrete strength: An historical review and a new perspective by combining NDT methods, Construction and Building Materials, 33 (2012) 139-163.
[26] J.-C. Liu, M.-L. Sue, C.-H. Kou, Estimating the strength of concrete using surface rebound value and design parameters of concrete material, Tamkang Journal of Science and Engineering, 12(1) (2009) 1-7.
[27] Y. Lu, G. Shi, Y. Liu, Z. Ding, J. Pan, D. Qin, B. Dong, H. Shao, Study on the effect of chloride ion on the early age hydration process of concrete by a non-contact monitoring method, Construction and Building Materials, 172 (2018) 499-508.
[28] G. Monfore, The electrical resistivity of concrete, 1968.
[29] C.G. Bucher, U. Bourgund, A fast and efficient response surface approach for structural reliability problems, Structural safety, 7(1) (1990) 57-66.
[30] I. Enevoldsen, M. Faber, J.D. Sørensen, Adaptive response surface techniques in reliability estimation, in:  6th International Conference on Structural Safety and Reliability, CRC Press/Balkema, 1993, pp. 1257-1264.
[31] B. Gaspar, A. Teixeira, C.G. Soares, Assessment of the efficiency of Kriging surrogate models for structural reliability analysis, Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 37 (2014) 24-34.
[32] S.-H. Kim, S.-W. Na, Response surface method using vector projected sampling points, Structural safety, 19(1) (1997) 3-19.
[33] M. Lemaire, A. Mohamed, Finite element and reliability; a happy marriage?”, Reliability and optimization of structural systems,  (2000).
[34] M. Lemaire, A. Mohamed, O. Flores-Macias, The use of finite element codes for the reliability of structural systems, Reliability and optimization of structural systems, 96 (1997).
[35] Y.W. Liu, F. Moses, A sequential response surface method and its application in the reliability analysis of aircraft structural systems, Structural Safety, 16(1-2) (1994) 39-46.
[36] Y. Moodi, S.R. Mousavi, A. Ghavidel, M.R. Sohrabi, M. Rashki, Using Response Surface Methodology and providing a modified model using whale algorithm for estimating the compressive strength of columns confined with FRP sheets, Construction and Building Materials, 183 (2018) 163-170.
[37] M.R. Rajashekhar, B.R. Ellingwood, A new look at the response surface approach for reliability analysis, Structural safety, 12(3) (1993) 205-220.
[38] B.N.-W. Aggregates, ASTM C 33, Class 3S coarse aggregate or better, graded, Provide aggregates from a single source, 1  1-1.
[39] D. ENGLISH, Testing hardened concrete-Part 2: Making and curing specimens for strength tests; English version of DIN EN 12390-2,  (2001).
[40] F. FDOT, FM 5-578: Florida method of test for concrete resistivity as an electrical indicator of its permeability, Florida Department of Transportation,  (2004).
[41] B.P. 203, Recommendations for Measurement of Velocity of Ultrasonic Pulses in Concrete, BSI,  (1983).
[42] O. Sengul, O.E. Gjørv, Electrical resistivity measurements for quality control during concrete construction, ACI Materials Journal, 105(6) (2008) 541.
[43] S. Mindess, F. Young, D. Darwin, Concrete 2nd Editio, Technical Documents,  (2003).