Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Estimation of compressive strength of various stones based on non-destructive techniques

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Materials and Structures Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This work examines the compressive strength of natural stones, as estimated by Uniaxial compressive strength tests (UCS) and respective non-destructive tests results (Schmidt Hammer Rebound test, SHR, or an Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity transmission, UPV). In practice, aiming to correlate the values of the UCS test with the results of the NDT techniques, three empirical regression models are usually applied, a linear, an exponential, and a power mathematical model. In most cases, the regression analysis is referred to a limited dataset, for a specific type of stone, and thus the investigation is rather limited and cannot be used for the evaluation of a whole category of stones (such as limestone, marble etc.). For this reason, in the present work these three models are examined for a more expanded dataset, including different types of stones, and measured by different researchers. An optimized linear model is proposed for the prediction of the compressive strength based on the NDT results. The proposed models are extremely useful for various applications and different construction works, concerning either modern or historic restoration, especially when stone samples cannot be obtained and information about the properties of the building stone, or calibration curves, are not available.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Balsubramanian A (2017) Properties of building stones. Report number: 5 Affiliation: University of Mysore Project: Educational Video Documentaries in Earth, Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.33338.29122

  2. Siegesmund S, Török Á (2016) Building stones. In: Siegesmund S, Snethlage R (eds) Stone in architecture. Properties, durability (5th edn). Springer, Heidelberg, p 26

  3. Kong F, Xue Y, Qiu D, Gong H, Ning Z (2021) Effect of grain size or anisotropy on the correlation between uniaxial compressive strength and Schmidt hammer test for building stones. Constr Build Mater 299:123941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Schaffer RJ (1932) The Weathering of Natural Building Stones, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. Building Research. Special Report No. 18. Pp. x + 149. H.M. Stationery Office, London

  5. Smith BJ, Gomez-Heras M, Mc Cab S (2008) Weathering of stone-built heritage: a lens through which to read the Anthropocene. Prog Phys Geograp: Earth Environ 32(4):439–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Doehne E, Price CS (2010) Stone conservation: an overview of current research, 2nd Edition, Getty Conservation Institute. ISBN: 1606060465: 9781606060469

  7. Benavente D, Such-Basañe I, Fernandez-Cortes PAC, Cazorla-Amorose D, Cañaveras JC, Sanchez-Moral S (2021) Comparative analysis of water condensate porosity using mercury intrusion porosimetry and nitrogen and water adsorption techniques in porous building stones. Constr Build Mater 288(21):123131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. ISRM (2007) Suggested methods for determining the uniaxial compressive strength and deformability of rock materials. In: Ulusay R, Hudson JA (eds) The complete ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing, and monitoring: 1974–2006. ISRM Turkish National Group, Ankara, pp 130–134

  9. ASTM (2008) Standard test method for determination of the point load strength index of rock and application to rock strength classifications (D5731-08). ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA

  10. Vasanelli E, Sileo M, Cali A, Aiello MA (2012) Non-destructive techniques to assess mechanical and physical properties of soft calcarenitic stones. Youth in Conservation of Cultural Heritage, YOCOCU, Proc Chem 8:35–44

    Google Scholar 

  11. Verma K, Bhadauria SS, Akhtar S (2013) Review of nondestructive testing methods for condition monitoring of concrete structure. J Constr Eng 834572

  12. Kumara KH, Babub NV, Lingeshwaran N (2021) A study on repair of concrete structure using nondestructive tests. Mat Today Proc 47(15):5439–5446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Aydin A (2009) ISRM suggested method for determination of the Schmidt hammer rebound hardness: revised version. Int J Rock Mech Min 46(3):627–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. ASTM D5873-00, Standard test method for determination of rock hardness by rebound hammer method

  15. BS 1881, Testing concrete, Pat-t 202, Recommendations or surface hardness testing by rebound hammer: 1986

  16. DIN EN 12398:1996-07, Testing concrete - Non-destructive testing - Determination of rebound number

  17. ISO-DIS 8045, Concrete. hardened—Determination of rebound number using the rebound hammer

  18. ASTM D2845-00 (2000) Standard test method for laboratory determination of pulse velocities and ultrasonic elastic constants of rock. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA, USA, pp 1–7

  19. ISRM (2014) The ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing and monitoring: 2007–2014. In: Ulusay R (ed) ISRM Turkish National Group, Ankara, Turkey, pp 95–99

  20. IS 13311-1: Method of Non-destructive testing of concrete, Part 1: Ultrasonic pulse velocity

  21. Bozdak A (2013) The effect of salt crystallization of engineering parameters of rocks. Ph.D. Thesis, Selçuk University. https://docplayer.biz.tr/53545074-T-c-selcuk-universitesi-fen-bilimleri-enstitusu.html

  22. Dinçer I, Çobanoğlu AAI, Uras Y (2004) Correlation between Schmidt hardness, uniaxial compressive strength and Young’s modulus for andesites, basalts and tuffs. Bull Eng Geol Environ 63:141–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-004-0230-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kirca O, Erdem TK (2005) An experimental study on the construction materials of the Ankara Citadel. Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions—Modena, Lourenço & Roca (eds), Taylor & Francis Group. London: ISBN 04 15363799

  24. Korkanç M (2013) Deterioration of different stones used in historical buildings within Nigde province. Cappadocia Constr Build Mater 48:789–803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Selçuk L, Nar A (2015) Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength of intact rocks using

  26. Yasar E, Guney E (2008) Determination of the thermal conductivity from physico-mechanical properties. Eng Geol Environ 67:219–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Aliabdo AAE, Elmoaty AEMA (2012) Reliability of using nondestructive tests to estimate the compressive strength of building stones and bricks. Alex Eng J 51:193–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Eljufout T, Alhomaidat F (2021) Evaluation of natural building stones’ characterizations using ultrasonic testing technique. Arab J Sci Eng 46:11415–11425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Engidase TA, Barbieri G (2014) Geo-engineering evaluation of Termaber basalt rock mass for crushed stone aggregate and building stone from Central Ethiopia. J Afr Earth Sci 99(2):581–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Man J, Nam S, Young-Suk Y, Jung-Mann KJH (2008) Analysis of engineering properties to Basalt in Cheju Island. J Korean Geosynthet Soc 7(1):13–21

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sertçelik İ, Kurtuluş C, Sertçelik F, Pekşen E, Aşçı M (2018) Investigation into relations between physical and electrical properties of rocks and concretes. J Geophys Eng 15(1):142–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Karakus M, Tutmez B (2006) Fuzzy and multiple regression modeling for evaluation of intact rock strength based on point load, schmidt hammer and sonic velocity. Rock Mech Rock Eng 39(1):45–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hatır ME (2020) Determining the weathering classification of stone cultural heritage via the analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy inference system. J Cult Herit 44:120–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Luodes N, Pirinen H, Bellopede R, Selonen O (2019) Geotechnical report 13 Frost resistance of natural stones—A case study from Finland. 31

  35. Buyuksagis IS, Goktan RM (2007) The effect of Schmidt hammer type on uniaxial compressive strength prediction of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min 44(2):299–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Castro NF, Mozera AGS, Pinto ACR, Felix CC, Mansur KL, Silva REC, Ribeiro RCC (2022) Leptinito gneiss: the heritage stone of the old town. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Resourc. Policy 75:102493

  37. Aydin A, Basu A (2005) The Schmidt hammer in rock material characterization. Eng Geol 81(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Begonha A, Braga MAS (2002) Weathering of the Oporto granite: geotechnical and physical properties. CATENA 49:57–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Jobli AF, Hampden AZ, Tawie R (2017) The role of ultrasonic velocity and Schmidt Hammer hardness—the simple and economical non-destructive test for the evaluation of mechanical properties of weathered granite. AIP Conf Proc 1875:030005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Freire-Lista DM (2017) Exfoliation microcracks in building granite, implications for anisotropy. Eng Geol 220:85–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Tugrul A, Zarif H (1999) Correlation of mineralogical and textural characteristics with engineering properties of selected granitic rocks from Turkey. Eng Geol 51(4):303–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Vasconcelos G, Lourenço PB, Alves CSA, Pamplona J (2007) Prediction of the mechanical properties of granites by ultrasonic pulse velocity and Schmitt hammer hardness. In: Conference on 10th North American Masonry, June 3–6, St. Louis, Misouri, USA, pp 980–991

  43. Wang M, Wan W (2019) A new empirical formula for evaluating uniaxial compressive strength using the Schmidt hammer test. Int J Rock Mech Min 123:104094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Atici U, Comakli R (2019) Evaluation of the physico-mechanical properties of plutonic rocks based on texture coefficient. J S Afr Inst Min Metall 119(1)

  45. Kurtulus FC, Sertcelik F, Sertcelik I (2015) Estimation of unconfined uniaxial compressive strength using Schmidt hardness and ultrasonic pulse velocity. Tehnicki Vjesnik 25(5):1569–1574

    Google Scholar 

  46. Nourani MH, Moghadderb MT, Safaric M (2017) Classification and assessment of rock mass parameters in Choghart iron mine using P-wave velocity. J Rock Mech 9(2):318–332

    Google Scholar 

  47. Gomez-Heras M, Benavente D, Pla C, Martinez-Martinez J, Fort R, Brotons V (2020) Ultrasonic pulse velocity as a way of improving uniaxial compressive strength estimations from Leeb hardness measurements. Const Build Mater 261:119996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Cargill JS, Shakoor A (1997) Evaluation of empirical methods for measuring the uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Int J Rock Mech MinSci Geomech Abstr 27(6):495–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Katz O, Reches Z, Roegiers JC (2000) Evaluation of mechanical rock properties using a Schmidt Hammer. Int J Rock Mech Min 37:723–728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Salihe SJH, Alshkane YM (2018) Statistical analysis of mechanical and physical properties of igneous rocks. J of Garmian University 5(2):174–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Anania L, Badal A, Barone G, Belfiore CM, Calabri C, Russa MF, Mazzoleni P, Pezzino A (2012) The stones in monumental masonry buildings of the “Val di Noto” area: new data on the relationships between petrographic characters and physical-mechanical properties. Constr Build Mater 33:122–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Benavente D, Fort R, Gomez-Heras M (2021) Improving uniaxial compressive strength estimation of carbonate sedimentary rocks by combining minimally invasive. I J Rock Mech Min Scie 147:104915

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Binda L, Saisi A, Tiraboschi C (2021) Application of sonic tests to the diagnosis of damaged and repaired structures. NDT E Int 34(2):123–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Germinario L, Francesco G, Laviano AR (2015) Decay of calcareous building stone under the combined action of thermoclastism and cryoclastism: a laboratory simulation. Cons Build Mater 75:385–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Day MJ, Goudie AS (1977) Field assessment of rock hardness using the Schmidt test hammer. Brit. Geomorph Res Group, Tech Bull 18:19–29

    Google Scholar 

  56. Molina E, Cultrone G, Sebastian E, Alonso FJ (2013) Evaluation of stone durability using a combination of ultrasound, mechanical and accelerated aging tests. J Geophys Eng 10:035003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Vasanelli E, Micelli F, Colangiuli D, Calia A, Aiello MA (2020) A nondestructive testing method for masonry by using UPV and cross validation procedure. Mater Struct 53:134. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-020-01568-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Guo J, Sun Y, Shu L, Zhu W, Liu D, Wang F, Li B (2009) Physicomechanical parameters of sedimentary rocks in eastern Sichuan China. J Geophys Eng 6:426–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Kahraman S, Alberb M, Fener M, Gunaydin O (2010) The usability of Cerchar abrasivity index for the prediction of UCS and E of Misis Fault Breccia: regression and artificial neural networks analysis. Expert Syst Appl 37(12):8750–8756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Sachpazis CI (1990) Correlating Schmidt hardness with compressive strength and young’s modulus of carbonate rock. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 75–86

  61. Yurdakul M, Akdas H (2013) Modeling uniaxial compressive strength of building stones using non-destructive test results as neural networks input parameters. Constr Build Mater 47:1010–1020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Yilmaz I, Sendi H (2002) Correlation of Schmidt hardness with unconfined compressive strength and Young’s modulus in gypsum from Sivas (Turkey). Eng Geol 66:211–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Bilen C (2021) Schmidt Hammer Rebound (SHR) values as a guide for the initial estimates of limestone uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) and Hardgrove grindability index (HGI). Arab J Geoscie 14:2186

    Google Scholar 

  64. Christaras B (1996) Particularities in studying the physical and mechanical properties of stones in monuments, Examples from the Mediterranean basin. the 8th Int. Conf. on Deterioration and Conservation of Stone, Berlin, pp 819–829

    Google Scholar 

  65. Nomikos P, Kaklis K, Agioutantis Z, Mavrigiannakis S (2020) Investigation of the size effect and the fracture process on the uniaxial compressive strength of the banded Alfas porous stone. Proc Struct Int 26:285–292

    Google Scholar 

  66. Parent T, Domede N, Sellier A, Mouatt L (2019) Mechanical characterization of limestone from sound velocity measurement. HAL Id: hal-02005919

  67. Sengun N, Altindag R, Demirdag S, Yavuz H (2011) P-wave velocity and Schmidt rebound hardness value of rocks under uniaxial compressional loading. Int J Rock Mech Min 4(48):693–696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Tumac D (2015) Predicting the performance of large diameter circular saws based on Schmidt hammer and other properties for some Turkish carbonate rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Scien 75:159–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Vasanelli E, Calia A, Colangiulia D, Micelli F, Aiello MA (2016) Assessing the reliability of non-destructive and moderately invasive techniques. Constr Build Mater 124:575–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Yavuz H, Ugur I, Demirdag S (2008) Abrasion resistance of carbonate rocks used in dimension stone industry and correlations between abrasion and rock properties. Int J Rock Mech Min Scien 45(2):260–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Ismaiel HAH, Askalany MM, Ali AI (2021) Statistical analyses and geotechnical evaluation of Nubia sandstone, Golden Triangle Area Egypt. J Geoscie Environ Protect 9:46–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Autiero F, Martino G, Ludovico M, Prota A (2019) Mechanical properties of rock units from the Pompeii archaeological site, Italy. Structural Studies, Repairs and Maintenance of Heritage Architecture XVI 191:341–350. https://doi.org/10.2495/STR190291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Dehgan S, Sattari G, Chegreh G, Aliabadi MA (2010) Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength and modulus of elasticity for Travertine samples using regression and artificial neural networks. Min Scie Tech (China) 20(1):41–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Makalesi A, Çeliki MY, Ergul A (2018) Pore characterization of volcanic tuffs used as building stone in Afyonkarahisar (Turkey). Politeknik Dergisi 21(1):101–112

    Google Scholar 

  75. Pamuk E, Buyuksarac A (2017) Investigation of strength characteristics of natural stones in Ürgüp. J Sci Technol 7(2):74–79

    Google Scholar 

  76. Sert M, Özkahraman HT (2016) The importance of welded tuff stones in construction industry according to their physico-mechanical properties. HU Muh. Der. 01

  77. Topal T, Sözmen B (2013) Deterioration mechanisms of tuffs in Midas monument. Eng Geol 68(3–4):201–223

    Google Scholar 

  78. Liu JB, Zhang ZJ, Lib B (2019) Microscopic & macroscopic characterizations of Beijing marble as a building material for UNESCO heritage sites: New insights into physico-mechanical property estimation and weathering resistance. Constr Build Mater 225(20):510–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Ruedrich J, Knell C, Enseleit J, Rieffel U, Siegesmund S (2013) Stability assessment of marble statuaries of the Schlossbruecke (Berlin, Germany) based on rock strength. Environ Earth Sci 69(4):1451–1469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Sengun N, Altindag R, Demirdag S, Yavuz H (2011) P-wave velocity and Schmidt rebound hardness value of rocks under uniaxial compressional loading. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 48(4):693–702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Yavuz AB, Turk N, Kocab MY (2005) Material properties of the Menderes Massif Marbles from SW Turkey. Eng Geol 82(2):91–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Nobile L (2015) Prediction of concrete compressive strength by combined non-destructive methods. Meccanica 50:411–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Kumavata HR, Chandaka NR, Patilba IT (2021) Factors influencing the performance of rebound hammer used for non-destructive testing of concrete members. Case Stud Constr Mater 14:e00491

    Google Scholar 

  84. Alwash M, Breysse D, Sbartaï ZM, Szilágyi K, Borosnyói A (2017) Factors affecting the reliability of assessing the concrete strength by rebound hammer and cores. Constr Build Mater 140:354–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Briševac Z, Hrženjak P, Buljan R (2016) Classification of methods estimating physicomechanical properties of intact rock materials-Models for estimating uniaxial compressive strength and elastic modulus. GRAĐEVINAR 68(1):19–28

    Google Scholar 

  86. Breysse D (2012) Nondestructive evaluation of concrete strength: a historical review and a new perspective by combining NDT methods. Constr Build Mater 33:139–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Deere DU, Miller RP (1966) Engineering classifications and index properties of intact rock. Technical report no. AFWL-TR 65-116, University of Illinois

  88. Kahraman K (2001) Evaluation of simple methods for assessing the uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 38:981–994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Barham W, Rabab’ah SR, Aldeeky HH, Al Hattamleh OH (2020) Mechanical and physical based artificial neural network models for the prediction of the unconfined compressive strength of rock. Geotech Geol Eng 38:4779–4792

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Singh RN, Hassani FP, Elkington PAS (1983) The application of strength and deformation index testing to the stability assessment of coal measures excavations. In: Proceedings of 24th US Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Texas A&M University, pp 599–609

  91. O’Rourke JE (1989) Rock index properties for geoengineering, underground development. Min Eng 106–110

  92. Aggistalis G, Alivizatos S, Stamoulis D, Stournaras G (1996) Correlating uniaxial compressive strength with Schmidt hardness, point load index. Young’s modulus and mineralogy of gabbros. and basalts (northern Greece). Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 54:3–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Dearman WR, Irfan TY (1978) Assessment of the degree of weathering in granite using petrographic and physical index tests. In Proceeding of international symposium on deterioration and protection of stone monuments, Paris, Unesco, pp 1–35

  94. Gupta V (2009) Non-destructive testing of some higher Himalayan rocks in the Satluj Valley. Bull Eng Geol Environ 68:409–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Yasar E, Erdogarg Y (2004) Correlating sound velocity with the density, compressive strength and Young’s modulus of carbonate rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41:871–875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Moradian ZA, Behnia M (2009) Predicting the uniaxial compressive strength and static young’s modulus of intact sedimentary rocks using the ultrasonic test. Int J Geomech (ASCE) 9:14–19. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-3641(2009)9:1(14)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Abdelhedi M, Jabbar R, Mnif T, Abbes Ch (2020) Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength of carbonate rocks and cement mortar using artificial neural network and multiple linear regressions. Acta Geodyn Geomater 17(199):367–377. https://doi.org/10.13168/AGG.2020.0027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Altindag R (2012) Correlation between P-Wave velocity and some mechanical properties for sedimentary rocks. J South Afr Inst Min Metal 112(3):229–237

    Google Scholar 

  99. Jamshidi A, Zamanian H, Sahamieh RZ (2018) The effect of density and porosity on the correlation between uniaxial compressive strength and P-wave velocity. Rock Mech Rock En 51:1279–1286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Draper N, Smith H (1981) Applied regression analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  101. Goudie AS (2006) The Schmidt Hammer in geomorphological research. Prog Phys Geogr 30(6):703–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Zheng HF, Duan TY, Liu Y, Sun Q (2009) Abrupt solubility of gypsum in water at high pressure and ambient temperature and its implication. Acta Petrol Sin 25(5):1288–1290

    Google Scholar 

  103. Jackson MD, Marra F, Hay RL, Cawood C, Winkler EM (2005) The judicious selection and preservation of tuff and travertine building stone in ancient Rome. Archaeometry 47(3):485–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Ozcelik Y (2011) Determination of the regions used as facing and building stone according to the material characteristics in an andesite quarry. Eng Geol 118 3–4(24):104–109

  105. Raj S, Kumar VR, Bumar BH, Iyer NR (2017) Basalt: structural insight as a construction material. Sādhanā 42:75–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Emanuel A, Minervino BA, Prossera AG, Sileo M, Rizzo G (2020) Evaluation of soft limestone degradation in the Sassi UNESCO site (Matera. Southern Italy): loss of material measurement and classification. J Cult Herit 42:191–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Lakirouhani A, Asemi F, Zohdi A (2020) Physical parameters, tensile and compressive strength of dolomite rock samples, influence of grain size. J Civil Engin Managem 26(8):789–799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Huang S, Wang J, Qiu Z, Kang K (2018) Effects of cyclic wetting-drying conditions on elastic modulus and compressive strength of sandstone and mudstone. Processes 6(12):234. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr6120234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Uchida E, Ogawa Y, Maeda N, Nakagawa T (2000) Deterioration of stone materials in the Angkor monuments. Cambodia Eng Geol 55(1–2):101–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Çelika MY, Ibrahimoglu A (2021) Characterization of travertine stones from Turkey and assessment of their durability to salt crystallization. J Build Eng 43:102592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Barroso CE, Oliveira DV, Ramos LF (2018) Vernacular schist farm walls: materials, construction techniques and sustainable rebuilding solutions. J Build Eng 15:334–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Materials Science and Engineering, School of Chemical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Iroon Polytechniou 9, 15780, Athens Zografou, Greece

    M. Karoglou & A. Bakolas

Authors
  1. M. Karoglou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Bakolas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Karoglou.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Karoglou, M., Bakolas, A. Estimation of compressive strength of various stones based on non-destructive techniques. Mater Struct 56, 85 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-023-02171-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-023-02171-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation