Abstract
Rebound hammer and ultrasonic pulse velocity are preferred as non-destructive testing methods whereas compression test is a type of destructive test. A general series of rebound hammer, ultrasonic pulse velocity and compression tests were carried out at a heavy concrete laboratory to obtain the necessary parameters and to develop correlation and calibration between the tests. A set of 36 concrete cubes measuring 100 × 100 × 100 mm were cast and subjected to water curing for periods lasting 7, 14, 21 and 28 days to obtain cube strength, rebound number, pulse velocity and pulse wave transmission period. Ultrasonic pulse velocity and rebound hammer tests were initially done before the compression test. The results showed that the differences between predicted strength and experimental strength (compression test) were 1.6 and 6.38% for the rebound hammer test and the ultrasonic pulse velocity test, respectively. This indicated that rebound hammer testing managed to predict strength more accurately compared to ultrasonic pulse velocity testing. Both non-destructive tests showed a margin of less than 10% error compared to destructive tests.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Suryakanta (2015). What is the importance of non-destructive testing of concrete structures. civilblog.org
Gopal Mishra (2017). Non-Destructive Testing of Concrete and its Method. The Constructor Civil Engineering Home.
Chai Peng How (2015). Ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) test on concrete under compression. A study on effect of aspect ratio’ FYP from Faculty of Engineering, UniMAS
Helal P, Mendis MS (2015) Non-destructive testing of concrete: a review of methods. Special Issue: Electron J Struct Eng 14(1):2015
BS EN 12390-3 (2002) Testing Hardened Concrete—Part 3: Compressive Strength of Test Specimens
JKR Standard. Proportions and strength requirements for prescribed mixes by volume batching. Standard Specifications for Building Works 2005.
BS EN 12390-1 (2000) British Standard for Testing Hardened Concrete—Part 1: Shape. Dimensions and Other Requirements for Specimens and Moulds, BSI, London
BS EN 1881: Part 203 (1986) Testing Hardened Concrete: Recommendations for Surface Hardness Testing by Rebound Hammer.
BS EN 12504-4 (2004) Testing Harden Concrete: Determination of Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity.
Siddharth S, Joshi H (2015) Comparison of Concrete Properties determined by Destructive and Non-Destructive Tests. J Inst Eng 10(1):130–139
Abdullah N, Yahaya MP, Hudi NS (2008) Implementation and Use of Lightning Detection Network in Malaysia. In: Power and Energy, pp 383–386
Lopez YD, Vanalli L, Ferrari VJ (2016) Concrete compressive strength estimation by means of nondestructive testing: a case study. Open J. Civil Eng. 6:503–515
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to extend their appreciation to the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia, Grant MTUN VOT K122, Industri Grant VOT M007 Universiti Malaysia Perlis and Universiti Tun Hussein Onn, Batu Pahat, Johor.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Rahim, M.A. et al. (2021). Comparison Between Predicted and Experimental Strength for Concrete via Compression and Non-destructive Method. In: Mohd Zuki, S.S., Mokhatar, S.N., Shahidan, S., Bin Wan Ibrahim, M.H. (eds) Proceedings of the Sustainable Concrete Materials and Structures in Construction 2020. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 157. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2187-1_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2187-1_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-2186-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-2187-1
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)