Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Non-destructive Testing of Concrete Cubes Under Various Curing Conditions: The Inaccuracies and Flaws

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Civil Engineering

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering ((LNCE,volume 184))

Abstract

In this study, the author’s experience in the estimation of concrete strength by rebound hammer (RH) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) test is summarized and compared with destructive laboratory tests. In the destructive testing of concrete, only the impact resistance, ductility, yield strength can be obtained, whereas through the non-destructive techniques (NDT) testing, discontinuities such as voids, cracks, and differences in material characteristics such as high strength materials or low strength materials can be more effectively attained and material under test can still be utilized after inspection. A various selection of NDT testing is available which can be used to provide information regarding the condition of the material and several other approaches can be used to derive the strength of a material through NDT testing. To perform the test, samples of concrete blocks were prepared and kept under various curing conditions for assorted periods of time. Multiple tests were carried out under various conditions of various aged samples. Measurements and results from NDT are indicative of the properties of concrete such as porosity, complexity of the pore network, water content, and strength. Samples that returned with the highest rebound number and peak compressive strength values using the RH test came from samples that was left for the first 14 days under adequate curing conditions with additional 14 days dry conditions. Another condition that obtained peak results was the samples that buried in the earth for 14 days as a means of curing. In the UPV testing, the strength depends on the aging of the concrete rather than the total curing days. In comparison with samples contained voids tested, it is found that as the voids is larger the UPV reading was more accurate which is indicative that NDTs have flaws which need to be taken into consideration

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Breysse D, Martínez-Fernández JL (2014) Assessing concrete strength with rebound hammer: review of key issues and ideas for more reliable conclusions. Mater Struct 47:1589–1604. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-013-0139-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Wedatalla AMO, Jia Y, Ahmed AAM (2019) Curing Effects on High-Strength Concrete Properties. Adv Civ Eng 2019:1683292. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1683292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Weather FIPC on PCWG on C in H, Précontrainte FI de la, Construction FIPC on P (1986) Concrete construction in hot weather. Thomas Telford Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  4. Aldea C-M, Young F, Wang K, Shah SP (2000) Effects of curing conditions on properties of concrete using slag replacement. Cem Concr Res 30:465–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Zeyad AM (2019) Effect of curing methods in hot weather on the properties of high-strength concretes. J King Saud Univ Sci 31:218–223

    Google Scholar 

  6. Mohamed HA (2011) Effect of fly ash and silica fume on compressive strength of self-compacting concrete under different curing conditions. Ain Shams Eng J 2:79–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. ACI Committee 305 (2007) ACI 305.1–06 Specification for hot weather concreting. ACI Man Concr Pract Part 2 Constr Pract Insp Pavements 305.1-1–305.1-8

    Google Scholar 

  8. Aydin F, Saribiyik M (2015) Correlation between Schmidt hammer and destructive compressions testing for concretes in existing buildings. Sci Res Essays 5:1644–1648

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pessiki SP (Chair) (2003) In-place methods to estimate concrete strengths. ACI 228.1R-03 report

    Google Scholar 

  10. Proverbio E, Venturi V (2005) Reliability of nondestructive tests for onsite concrete strength. 10 DBMC, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  11. Szilagyi K, Borosnyoi A (2009) 50 years of experience with the Schmidt rebound hammer, concrete structures. Ann Tech J 10:46–56

    Google Scholar 

  12. Qaswari HY (2000) Concrete strength by combined nondestructive methods simply and reliably predicted. Cem Concr Res 30:739–746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sturrup VR, Vecchio FJ, Caratin H (1984) Pulse velocity as a measure of concrete compressive strength. In: In situ/nondestructive testing of concrete, special publication SP–82. American Concrete Institute, Detroit; pp 201–228

    Google Scholar 

  14. Trtnik G, Kavcic F, Turk G (2009) Prediction of concrete strength using ultrasonic pulse velocity and artificial neural networks. Ultrasonics 49:53–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Samarin A, Meynink P (1981) Use of combined ultrasonic and rebound hammer method for determining strength of concrete structural member. Concr Int 25–29

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mehta PK (1991) Durability of concrete–fifty years of progress? Spec Publ 126:1–32

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ploix M, Garnier V, Breysse D, Moysan J (2011) NDE data fusion to improve the evaluation of concrete structures. NDT E Int 44(5):442–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sbartaï Z, Breysse D, Larget M, Balayssac J (2012) Combining NDT techniques for improved evaluation of concrete properties. Cem Concr Compos 34(6):725–733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. B. EN:13791 (2007) Assessment of in situ compressive strength in structures and precast concrete components

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lu C, Jin W, Liu R (2011) Reinforcement corrosion-induced cover cracking and its time prediction for reinforced concrete structures. Corros Sci 53(4):1337–1347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Muto M, Beck JL (2008) Bayesian updating and model class selection for hysteretic structural models using stochastic simulation. J Vib Control 14(1–2):7–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Beck JL, Yuen K-V (2004) Model selection using response measurements: Bayesian probabilistic approach. J Eng Mech 130(2):192–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. IS 456 (2000) Concrete, plain and reinforced. Bur Indian Stand Delhi, pp 1–114

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bungey JH (1980) The validity of ultrasonic pulse velocity testing of in-place concrete for strength. NDT Int 13:296–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. IS 13311 (Part 1) (1992) IS 13311–1 (1992) Method of non-destructive testing of concrete, Part Ultrasonic pulse velocity. Bur Indian Standards 1–7

    Google Scholar 

  26. Helal J, Sofi M, Mendis P (2015) Non-destructive testing of concrete: a review of methods. Electron J Struct Eng 14:97–105

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The test was carried out at the Laboratory for Materials and Structures of the Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, India. Authors also grateful to the course teacher and classmates to support on conduction test and data collections.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India

    A. Ghosh, A. Das & N. Apu

Authors
  1. A. Ghosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Das
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Apu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Ghosh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Energy, Geoscience, Infrastructure and Society, Herriot Watt University, Edinburgh, UK

    Scott Arthur

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Saitama University, Saitama, Japan

    Masato Saitoh

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, Chittagong University of Engineering and Technology, Chattogram, Bangladesh

    Sudip Kumar Pal

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Ghosh, A., Das, A., Apu, N. (2022). Non-destructive Testing of Concrete Cubes Under Various Curing Conditions: The Inaccuracies and Flaws. In: Arthur, S., Saitoh, M., Pal, S.K. (eds) Advances in Civil Engineering. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 184. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5547-0_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5547-0_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-16-5546-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-16-5547-0

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation