NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF CONCRETE IN ...

VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY Belagavi-590014, Karnataka

A Project Report on

“NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF CONCRETE IN STRUCTURES” In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the degree in

Bachelor of Engineering in Civil Engineering

Submitted by

CHIRANTH P L 1NH13CV023

MOHAMMED OWAIS QURAISHI 1NH13CV143

SHANIL PARAMBATH 1NH13CV114

PRAVAL SETH 1NH13CV080

Under the guidance of

Mr Vijay N.C

Assistant Professor,

Department of Civil Engineering,

N.H.C.E, Bangalore.

Department of Civil Engineering

NEW HORIZON COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (ISO-9001:2000 certified, Accredited by NAAC „A‟,

Permanently affiliated to VTU) Outer Ring Road, Panathur Post, Near Marathalli,

Bangalore – 560103

NEW HORIZON COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (ISO-9001:2000 certified, Accredited by NAAC ‘A’,permanently affiliated to VTU)

Outer Ring Road, Panathur Post, Near Marathalli,Bangalore – 560103

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

CERTIFICATE Certified that the project work entitled “NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF CONCRETE

STRUCTURES” carried out by Chiranth P L(1NH13CV023), Mohammed Owais

Quraishi(1NH13CV143), Shanil Parambath(1NH13CV114), Praval Seth(1NH13CV080), Bonafide

students NEW HORIZON COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, in partial fulfillment for the award of

Bachelor of Engineering in Department of Civil Engineering of the Visvesvaraya Technological

University, Belagavi during the year 2016-2017. It is certified that all corrections/suggestions indicated

for Internal Assessment have been incorporated in the report deposited in the departmental library. The

project report has been approved as it satisfied the academic requirements in respect of project work

prescribed for the said degree.

Dr. NIRANJAN P.S Mr. Vijay N.C Dr. MANJUNATHA

Head of Department Project Guide Principal

Department of Civil Engineering Assistant Professor NHCE

NHCE NHCE

Name of the Examiners Signature with Date

1.____________________ ________________

2.____________________ ________________

DEPT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, NHCE, BANGALORE. Page 3

NEW HORIZON COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (ISO-9001:2000 certified, Accredited by NAAC ‘A’,permanently affiliated to VTU)

Outer Ring Road, Panathur Post, Near Marathalli,Bangalore – 560103

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

DECLARATION

We, the undersigned students of VIII

th semester of Civil Engineering from New Horizon College of

Engineering, declare that our project work entitled “NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF

CONCRETE”, has been prepared by us under the guidance of Mr. Vijay N.C, Assistant Professor,

Department of Civil Engineering, NHCE. This work has been submitted for the partial fulfillment of

the requirement for the award of Bachelor of Engineering Degree. We also declare that this project was

not entitled for submission to any other university in the past and shall remain the only submission made

and will not be submitted by us to any other university in the future.

Name USN Signature

CHIRANTH.P.L 1NH13CV023

MOHAMMED OWAIS 1NH13CV143

QURAISHI



Place: Bengaluru

Date:


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly, we are thankful to our college New Horizon College of Engineering for providing us an

opportunity to work on this project as part of academics. This seminar would not have been possible

without the guidance and the help of several individuals, who in one way or another contributed and

extended their valuable assistance in the preparation and completion of this study.

First and foremost, we would like to thank Dr. MOHAN MANGHNANI, Chairman of New

Horizon Educational Institutions for providing the brilliant infrastructure and facilities which enabled us

to work in a very productive environment which was directly responsible in the completion of this

report.

We would like to thank Dr. MANJUNATH, Principal of New Horizon College of Engineering

for providing us extended use of the college facilities which played an important role in the preparation

of this project.

We would like to express utmost gratitude to our beloved guide, Dr. NIRANJAN P.S Head of

Department of Civil Engineering, New Horizon College of Engineering for his invaluable support,

suggestion, precious advice and patient guidance, helped us to prepare this project.

I wish to express my sincere gratitude to my teacher and guide Mr. Vijay, Asst. Professor in the

Department of Civil Engineering, NHCE, for his valuable suggestions, guidance, care & attention shown

during the planning, conduction stages of this seminar work.

Our special thanks to all my friends for their valuable support provided throughout the course of

preparation of project.

We also express our sincere gratitude to all those who were involved with us directly or

indirectly during our project work.

CHIRANTH P L 1NH13CV023

MOHAMMED OWAIS QURAISHI 1NH13CV143




SYNOPSIS

The basic method of verifying whether concrete complies with specification is to test its strength

using cubes or cylinders made from samples of fresh concrete. It must be noted that non-compliance by

a single test specimen or even by group, does not necessarily mean that the concrete from which the test

specimens have been made is inferior to that specified; the engineer‟s reaction should be to investigate

the concrete further. This necessitates Non-Destructive tests on the concrete in the structure.

Nondestructive testing methods have been used on civil engineering structures such as dams and bridges

since the 1960‟s. In NDT, the development has taken place to such an extent that it is now considered as

a powerful method for evaluating existing concrete structure with regard to their strength, durability,

investigation of crack depth, micro cracks and progressive deterioration are also studied by this method.

The aim of the present paper is to describe, how the NDT is done using ultrasonic pulse velocity

for assessing concrete strength that are widely used in structural field. The main purpose of this test is to

detect and identify defects in materials, measure its dimension and estimate its strength as well as to

decide whether it is to be accepted or rejected.


NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF CONCRETE IN

STRUCTURES

1 INTRODUCTION

The testing of hardened concrete plays an important role in controlling and confirming the quality

of cement concrete used at site has developed the required strength. The quality of the product was

checked and evaluated by NDT methods. Most material in building, bridges, dams, tunnethrrt are world

lords of theorem and hearer content and another are world all was the less, etc., are made of concrete.

This construction requires concrete of high quality in terms of strength and durability. NDT has the

ability to determine the strength and durability of critical construction without damaging them and the

test can be carried on site (Bungey, 1989).

To monitor the service behavior of concrete structure over a long period, it was imperative that

tests be nondestructive. There are several NDT methods applicable to concrete structures. The

importance of NDT is checking certain properties according to the type of structure. The NDT methods

applicable for concrete inspection include ultrasonic, rebound hammer and cover meter tests. It is clear

that ultrasonic method has a superior capability in the sense that it is capable of providing more

information on concrete parameters as compared with other methods.

The main advantage of non destructive method is that the strength and durability and other

factors such as corrosion of bars, number of bars, bar spacing, quality of concrete, etc. can be easily

determined, without damaging the concrete structure. All these factors are determined with less time and

less cost by this method. In other words, we can get complete information of the old and the newly

constructed concrete structure.


2 SCOPE OF WORK

1. Detailed observation of the building and study of structural system.

2. Detailed study of available Architectural and Structural drawing.

3. Carrying out Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test on identified beams and columns at random for

assessment of in-situ strength of concrete.

4. Carrying out Rebound Hammer Test on identified r c slab for assessment of surface

hardness and strength of concrete.

5. Carrying out Theoretical analysis and design verification for assessment of structural

soundness.

6. Working out appropriate strengthening measures for deficient r c members along with

specifications and sketches.

7. Furnishing detailed report with sketches, specifications and photographs.

3 NEED FOR TESTING

The need for testing may arise from a variety of causes, which include (Chapman and Hall);

1. Proposed change of usage or extension of a structure.

2. Acceptability of a structure for purchase or insurance.

3. Assessment of structural integrity or safety following material deterioration or structural

damage such as caused by fire, blast, fatigue or overload.

4. Serviceability or adequacy of members known or suspected to contain material that does not

meet specifications or with design faults.

5. Assessment of cause and extent of deterioration as a preliminary to the design of repair or

remedial schemes.

6. Monitoring of strength development in relation to formwork stripping, curing, Prestressing

or load application.

7. Monitoring long-term changes in materials properties and structural performance.


4 METHODOLOGY

IS: 13311 (part I) specifies non-destructive testing method using ultrasonic pulse velocity and

part II specifies rebound hammer method. But the test selection procedure will be based on a

combination of factors such as non-destructiveness, cost, speed and reliability, and may conveniently

follow a procedure such as that shown in Table1.

TYPES OF TESTINGS:

1. Non-destructive tests

2. Destructive tests

3. Semi/partial destructive test

Table1: Test selection procedure

Inspection schedule Methods

First survey

History of structure

Visual inspection

Second survey

Ultrasonic testing

Rebound hammer

Cover test

Arrangement of bars

Other NDT (if necessary)

Third survey

Core test

Vibration test

Displacement test

5 NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTING METHODS

5.1 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity

Fig.1 Ultrasonic pulse velocity equipment


It was found that the velocity depended primarily upon the elastic properties of the material and

was almost independent of geometry.

Portable ultrasonic non-destructive digital indicative technique (PUNDIT) is an apparatus for non

destructive evaluation of concrete quality by ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) measurement method. The

equipment consists of a pair of transducers (probes) of different frequencies, electrical pulse generator,

and electrical timing device and cables (Fig.1). It is used to measure the transmission time of ultrasonic

pulses in the test specimen by placing transducers, from which the velocity can be computed. A set of

UPV readings can be used for further interpretations of structural concrete. The equipment is designed to

comply with the recommendations of IS-13311 (Part I) 1992.

Three types of waves are generated by an impulse applied to a solid mass. Surface waves having

an elliptical particle displacement are the lowest, whereas shear or transverse waves with particles

displacement at right angles to the direction of travel are faster. Longitudinal waves with particle

displacement in the direction of travel (some times known as compression waves) are the most

important since these are the fastest and provide more useful information. Electro-acoustical transducers

produce waves primarily of this type; other type generally cause little interference because of their lower

speed.

As we said earlier that velocity depends upon the elastic properties and mass of the medium, and

hence if the mass and velocity of wave propagation are known it is possible to assess the elastic

properties.

Transducers with natural frequencies between 20 kHz and 150 kHz are the most suitable for use

with concrete, and these may be of any type, although the piezo-electric crystal is most popular.

An alternative form is the exponential probe transducer, which makes a point contact, and offers

operating advantages over flat transducers on rough or curved surfaces. The time delay adjustment must

be used to set the zero reading for the equipment before use, and this should also be regularly checked

during and at the end of each period of use.


5.1.1 Methods of testing

There are three methods of testing generally adopted at site depending on the accessibility of

structural members (Shetty, 2002).

1. Direct transmission

2. Indirect transmission and

3. Semi-direct transmission

Fig.2: Types of transmittions

In direct transmission method pulse velocity will be measured in concrete by placing transducers

across the member exactly opposite to each other. Since the maximum pulse energy is transmitted at

right angles to the face of the transmitter, the direct method is the most reliable from the point of view of

transit time measurement. Also, the path is clearly defined and can be measured accurately, and this

approach should be used wherever possible for assessing concrete quality.

In indirect transmission method pulse velocity will be measured in concrete by placing

transducers on the same plane of members. This method is definitely the least satisfactory, since the

received signal amplitude may be less than 3% of that for a comparable direct transmission. The

received signal is dependent upon scattering of the pulse by discontinuities and is thus highly subjected

to errors. The surface zone concrete, which may not be representative of the body, and the exact path

length is uncertain will predominantly influence the pulse velocity. A special procedure is necessary to

account for this lack of precision of path length, requiring a series of readings with the transmitter fixed

and the receiver located at a series of fixed incremental points along a chosen radial line. This is the least

reliable method of testing to ascertain the quality or strength of concrete. This method will be adopted

only when there is no other option.

concrete concrete concrete

Direct Semi-direct Indirect


In semi-direct transmission method pulse velocity will be measured in concrete by placing

transducers intermediate between those of the other two methods. This method is sometimes be used

satisfactorily if the angle between the transducers is not too great, and if the path length is not large. The

sensitivity will be smaller, and if these requirements are not met it is possible that no clear signal will be

received because of attenuation of the transmitted pulse. The path length is also less clearly defined due

to the finite transducer size, but it is generally regarded as adequate to take this from center to center of

transducer faces. This is a moderately reliable method of testing to ascertain the quality or strength of

concrete.

5.1.2 How PUNDIT works?

Concrete is a multi-phase material. Speed of sound in concrete depends on the relative

concentration of its constituent materials, degree of compacting, moisture content, and the amount of

discontinuities present. The instrument generates pulses of ultrasonic frequency, which are coupled into

the concrete specimen under test by the transmitting transducer. The receiving transducer is used to

detect these pulses and to convert them back into electrical pulses. Suitable coupling media are used to

minimize losses due to acoustic mismatch at the transducer-specimen interfaces. A 10 MHz quartz time

base ensures accurate measurement of pulse transit time (T) with a resolution of 0.1 microseconds. The

path length (L) can be measured with a tape and hence the Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV) in the

specimen under test can be computed as

V = L / T

Pulse Velocity in concrete will be represented in km/Sec.

Appropriate correction factors to be applied depending on site condition and factors influencing velocity

of pulse. There are many factors relating to measurements made on in-situ concrete. which may further

influence result.

1. Temperature

2. Stress history

3. Path length

4. Moisture conditions

5. Reinforcement


Table2: Acceptance criteria

Pulse Velocity (km/sec) Concrete Quality Grading (as per

IS:13311 (Part-1)-1992)

Above 4.5

3.5 to 4.5

3.1 to 3.5

below 3.0

Excellent

Good

Poor

Very poor

To evaluate strength of concrete based on the pulse velocity an appropriate calibration chart can

be established based on the laboratory tests. The equipment is used for estimation of properties of

concrete such as strength, uniformity, crack depths, etc. This is the most appropriate and reliable method

of testing to ascertain the quality or strength of concrete.

5.1.3 Reliability and limitation

Ultrasonic pulse velocity measurement has been found to be a valuable and reliable method of

examining the interior of a body of concrete in a truly non-destructive manner. Even though this test

method has limitations, UPV method of test is generally preferred to assess the strength / quality of

concrete in structural members. The method provides the only readily available method of determining

the extent of cracking within concrete; however, the use for detection of flaws within the concrete is not

reliable when the concrete is wet.

5.1.4 Applications

The applications of pulse velocity measurements are so wide-ranging that it would be impossible

to list or describe them all. The principal applications are outlined below-the method can be used both in

the laboratory and on site with equal success.

1. Laboratory applications

2. In-situ applications

Measurement of concrete uniformity

Detection of cracking and honeycombing

Strength estimation


Assessment of concrete deterioration

Measurement of layer thickness

Measurement of elastic modulus

Strength development monitoring.

5.2 Rebound Hammer Technique

Fig.3 Rebound hammer

One of many factors connected with the quality of concrete is its hardness. The Schmidt rebound

hammer is basically a surface hardness test with little apparent theoretical relationship between the

strength of concrete and the rebound number of the hammer. The only known instrument to make use of

the rebound (impact) principle for concrete testing is the Schmidt hammer, which weighs about 1.8 kg

and is suitable for both laboratory and field work. It consists of a spring-controlled hammer mass that

slides on a plunger within a tubular housing. The plunger retracts against a spring when pressed against

the concrete surface and this spring is automatically released when fully tensioned, causing the hammer

mass to impact against the concrete through the plunger. When the spring-controlled mass rebounds, it

takes with it a rider, which slides along a scale and is visible through a small window in the side of the

casing. The rider can be held in position on the scale by depressing the locking button. The equipment is

simple to use, and may be operated either horizontally or vertically. The plunger is pressed strongly and

steadily against the concrete at right angles to its surface, until the spring-loaded mass is triggered from

its locked position. After the impact, the scale index is read while the hammer is still in the test position.

The scale reading is known as the rebound number, and is an arbitrary measure since it depends on the


energy stored in the given spring and on the mass used. This equipment is most suitable for concretes in

the 20-60 Mpa strength range. The reading is very sensitive to local variations in the concrete, especially

to aggregate particles near to the surface. It is therefore necessary to take several readings at each test

location, and to find their average. IS: 13311 recommends 15 readings taken over an area not exceeding

300mm square, with the impact points not less than 20mm from each other or from an edge. The use of a

grid to locate these points reduces operator bias. The surface must be smooth, clean and dry, and should

preferably be formed, but if trowelled surfaces are unavoidable they should be rubbed smooth with the

carborundum stone usually provided with the equipment. Loose material can be ground off, but areas,

which are rough from poor compaction, grout loss, spalling or tooling, must be avoided since the results

will be unreliable.

The test is based on the principle that the rebound of an elastic mass depends on the hardness of the

surface upon which it impinges, and in this case will provide information about a surface layer of the

concrete defined as no more than 30mm deep. The results give a measure of the relative hardness of this

zone, and this cannot be directly related to any other property of the concrete. Many factors influence

results but must all are considered if rebound number is to be empirically related to strength.

Fig.4: Testing by rebound hammer

The hammer is forced against the surface of the concrete by the spring and the distance of rebound is

measured on a scale. The test surface can be horizontal, vertical or at any angle but the instrument must

be calibrated in this position.

5.2.1 Factors influencing test results

Results are significantly influenced by all the following factors.

1. Mix characteristics


Cement type

Cement content

Coarse aggregate type.

2. Member characteristics

Mass

Compaction

Surface type

Age, rate of hardening and curing type

Surface carbonation

Moisture condition

Stress state and temperature.

5.2.2 Advantages

The Schmidt hammer provides an inexpensive, simple and quick method of obtaining an indication

of concrete strength, but accuracy of ±15 to ±20 percent is possible only for specimens cast cured and

tested under conditions for which calibration curves have been established.

5.2.3 Applications

The useful application of surface hardness measurements can be divided into four categories.

1. Checking the uniformity of concrete quality.

2. Comparing a given concrete with a specified requirement

3. Approximate estimation of strength

4. Abrasion resistance classification.


5.2.4 Limitation of rebound hammers

Whatever the application, it is essential that the factors influencing test results are standardized or

allowed for, and it should be remembered that results relate only to the surface zone of the concrete

under test. A further overriding limitation related to testing at early ages or low strengths, because the

rebound numbers may be too low for accurate reading and the impact may also cause damage to the

surface. It is therefore not recommended that the method is used for concrete which has a cube strength

of less than 10Mpa or which is less than 7 days old, unless of high strength.

It has serious limitations and these must be recognized (Shetty, 2002). The results are affected by:

1. Size, shape and rigidity of the specimen.

2. Age of specimen.

3. Surface and internal moisture condition of the concrete.

4. Carbonation of concrete surface.

5.3 Cover Meter Test

Fig.5 Profometer

The fig.5 shows the locating the reinforcing bars in side the concrete with the help of profometer, which

is advance instrument. Diameter and position of reinforcement in concrete structure are important

parameters for evaluation of the durability and the stability of structure.

The profometer locates reinforcing bars, spacing of bars, diameter of the bar and measures concrete

cover – quickly, simply and with complete accuracy. It also helps in preparing structural drawing or


mapping of structural members in the absence of details about the building. The identified concrete

surface will be cleaned such that it is free from dust, oil and any surface defects to facilitate for

scanning. This instrument, when moved on the concrete member in a structure, it produce a sound when

it comes near the reinforcement bar and in the details of the member is appears on the profometer

screen.

The profometer reinforcement locator is a lightweight, compact unit. It works with non-destructive

pulse-induction that is largely insensitive to external interference i.e., electromagnetic principle. Also

before using the instrument it should be calibrated with the help of the standard given steel rod, which is

20cm long, and 10mm in diameter (Malhotra, 1986).

Limitations of the equipment

1. Only peripheral rebars can be detected.

2. Second layer (if any) of rebars cannot be detected.

3. The accuracy of the diameter of rebar will vary generally in the range of 10 to 20%.

4. The actual numbers and position of rebars cannot be located if the rebars are closely spaced in

one location.

5. If the depth of cover concrete is beyond 60 mm then the estimation of diameter of rebars will not

be accurate or possible.


6.0 CASE STUDY

NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTS FOR STRUCTURAL MEMBERES AT

GROUND FLOOR LEVEL OF THE PROPOSED POST METRIC SC/ST BOY‟S HOSTEL BUILDING LOCATED AT MASTI IN MALLUR TOWN.

Fig No. 1:- General Views Of The Proposed Post Metric Sc/St Boys Hostel Building Located At Masti.


Non Destructive Test conducted at Ground floor level of meadow

in the sun

Fig 2 General view of proposed construction of meadow in the sun


7.0 INTRODUCTION

With reference to the above, the Boy‟s Hostel Block has to be inspected by the concerned quality control

Engineers.

During the inspection, the discussions have to be held with contractor and client.

Then, It was decided to conduct the Non Destructive Tests on Structural members at Ground level

Columns, Beams & Slab of the Boy‟s Hostel Block to assess the compressive strength.

Non Destructive Tests at Ground and First floor levels for Columns, Beams & Slab area were conducted

on 22nd

April.

During conducting Non Destructive Tests

The following personnel were present:

1. Quality control Engineer

2. Contractor

3. Government agencies or Private agencies


8.0 PHYSICAL INSPECTION

8.1 MALUR BOY’S HOSTEL BLOCK

A detailed physical inspection was carried out from 22nd April 2017 the following observations were

made:

1. The NDT conducted The Boy‟s Hostel Block is of RCC framed structure, consist of Ground

floor and First Floor.

2. General views of The Boy‟s Hostel Block are shown in Fig No.1.

3. The Non Destructive Tests namely Rebound Hammer Test and Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test

were conducted Columns, Beams & Slab area at Ground and first floor of Boy‟s Hostel Block.

4. As per the Drawings we received, the grade of concrete in tested Columns, Beams and Slab area

is mentioned as M20.

5. Non Destructive Tests conducted at Ground and first floor level are shown in:

(a) Rebound Hammer Test

(b) Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test


8.2 THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF MEADOW IN THE SUN AT

HARALUR VILLAGE, EAST-BENGALURU

A detailed physical inspection was carried out on 29th April 2017 the following observations were made:

-

1. The NDT conducted to the proposed construction of meadow in the sun at haralur village, East-

Bengaluru-560035 is of RCC framed structure, Ground floor is partially built.

2. General views of the Building are shown in Fig No.1 to 2

3. The Non Destructive Test namely Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test is conducted for Columns, at

Ground floor level which is partially built.

4. As per the Drawings we received, the grade of concrete in tested Columns, is mentioned as M40.

Non Destructive Test conducted at Ground floor level of meadow in the sun


9.0 PHOTOGRAPHS AND DRAWINGS

Fig No.3:-Rebound Hammer Test on Columns is in Progress

Fig No 4:- Rebound Hammer Test on Columns is in Progress


Fig No 5:- Ultrasonic pulse velocity Test on Columns is in Progress

Fig No 6- Ultrasonic pulse velocity Test on Columns is in Progress


Fig7 Markings Done on the Columns


Fig 8 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity on Columns is going on

10 CONDUCTING OF NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTS:

The following Non Destructive Tests were conducted:

1) Rebound Hammer Test.

2) Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test.

10.1 Rebound hammer test:

The Rebound Hammer Test was carried out at Ground and First floor levels of Columns, Beams

& Slab area using the versatile Schmidt Hammer from M/s Proceq, Switzerland. The tests were

conducted as per the guidelines in Indian Standards IS: 13311 (Part-2) 1992 (Reaffirmed in

2004).

The test results are presented in Table.3 along with compressive strength of concrete.

10.2 Ultrasonic pulse velocity test:


Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity test was conducted at Ground and first floor level of Columns, Beams

& Slab area in order to assess the quality / strength of in-situ concrete. The tests were conducted

using PUNDIT (Portable Ultrasonic Non- Destructive Digital India (Tester) equipment from

M/s. Proceq, Switzerland. The guidelines as per Indian Standards IS: 13311-(Part-I)-1992-

(Reaffirmed in 2004) was followed.

The tests results are presented in Table 4.

1-1 REFERENCE STRENGTH CHART FOR REBOUND HAMMER TEST

Technical reference : Based on the Lab Calibration

Rebound

number

Estimated compressive strength

range (n/sq.m.m)

22 to 26 10 to 14

26 to 30 14 to 18

30 to 34 18 to 22

34 to 36 22 to 26


1-2 VELOCITY CRITERIONS FOR CONCRETE QUALITY GRADING

(I S: 13311 (Part 1): 1992 – Non Destructive testing of concrete: Methods of tests,

Part 1 – Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity test (First reprint September 1996)

No. Pulse Velocity

By cross probing (km / sec) Concrete Quality Grading

1. Above 4.5 Excellent

2. 3.5 to 4.5 Good

3. 3.0 to 3.5 Medium

36 to 42 26 to 34

42 to 46 34 to 36


4. Below 3.0 Doubtful

Note: In case of “doubtful” quality it may be necessary to carry out further tests.

Pulse Velocity (Km / Sec)

Estimated Compressive Strength

(Based on Lab Calibration)

(N / Sq.mm)

2.70 to 2.99 10 – 14

3.0 to 3.3 14 – 16

3.3 to 3.5 16 – 18

3.5 to 3.7 18 – 22

3.7 to 4.0 22 – 26

4.0 to 4.3 26 – 28

4.3 to 4.5 28 – 30

4.5 to 4.7 30 - 32

4.7 to 4.9 32 - 35


Table.1: Rebound Hammer Test Results

IS: 13311 (Part 2):1992

Floor Level : Ground & First floor level

Project : Boy‟s Hostel Block In Karnataka Government Technical Training Institute at Gulbarga

Date : 22nd

April 2017

Table.1: Rebound Hammer Test Results

IS: 13311 (Part 2):1992

Floor Level : Ground floor level

Project : Boys‟ Hostel Block Malur.

Date : 22nd April 2017

Sl

No

Structural

Members Position

Rebound

Hammer

Number

Average

Rebound

Hammer

Number

Probable

Strength

Of Concrete

in N/mm2

Remarks

1 Column

24 R

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

31

31

31 18 - 20


2

Column

23 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design

strength is permissible

as per Indian standard

13311-Part-2

3

Beam

23 NS

1

2

3

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

4

Column

22 R

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

31

30

30 18 - 20

5

Beam R

22 - 24

1

2

3

32

31

32

32

18 - 20

6

Slab Area

@

R – U

22 - 19

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

30

32

32

32

32

32 18 - 20

7 Round Column

18 T

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

8 Column

19 x

Top

Middle

32

32 32 18 - 20


Bottom 31

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

9 Round Column

C9

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

30

30

30 18 - 20

10 Round Column

16 Q

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

31

32

32 18 - 20

11 Round Column

14 Q

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

12 Round Column

12 T

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

13 Column

13 Z

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

14 Round Column

16 Z

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

15 Round Column

18 Y

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

16 Round Column

19 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

17 Round Column Top 30 31 18 - 20


18 M Middle

Bottom

30

31

18 Round Column

18 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

19 Round Column

18 I

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

20 Round Column

15 E

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

30

30

30 18 - 20

21 Round Column

12 F

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

31

31

31 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

22 Round Column

12 J

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

23 Round Column

12 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

24 Column

19 L

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

32

31

31 18 - 20

25

Beam L

19 - 22

1

2

3

30

30

31

30 18 - 20


26 Column

22 G

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

27

Beam G

19 - 20

1

2

3

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

28

Slab Area

@

D – G

19 - 22

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

32

31

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

29

Slab Area

@

S – T

18 - 19

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

31

31

31

31

30

31 18 - 20

30

Slab Area

@

A – Y

18 - 19

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

31

30

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

31 Slab Area a – b 32 32 18 - 20


@

A – Z

13 - 15

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

31

32

32

31

32

Slab Area

@

T – W

11 - 12

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

31

30

30

31

30

30 18 - 20

33

Slab Area

@

N – S

10 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

31

32

32

31

31

31

31 18 - 20

34

Slab Area

@

P –Q

15 - 16

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

31

30

31

30

31

31

31 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

35

Slab Area

@

A – M

18 - 19

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

31

32

31

31

31

31 18 - 20


36

Slab Area

@

C – E

14- 16

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

31

32

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

37

Slab Area

@

F – J

11- 12

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

31

30

30

30

31

31 18 - 20

38 Column

20 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

31

30

30

39

Slab Area

@

B – D

17- 21

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

32

31

31

31

31

32 18 - 20

40 Column

15 C

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

31

32

31

41

Slab Area

@

A – C

15- 17

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

32

32

31

31

32 18 - 20


a2 – b2

b2 – c2

31

31

42

Beam

A – C

15

1

2

3

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

43

Beam

C

13 - 15

1

2

3

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

44

Slab Area

@

A – C

13- 15

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

32

31

31

32

32

32 18 - 20

45 Column

15 B

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

46 Column 13 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

47

Slab Area

@

B – E

8 - 13

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

30

30

31

30

30

30 18 - 20


b2 – c2 31

48 Column 11 G

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

32

31

31 18 - 20

49

Slab Area

@

D – G

7 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

30

31

31

30

30

30 18 - 20

50

Beam

G

7 - 11

1

2

3

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

51

Beam

L

7 - 11

1

2

3

31

30

30

30 18 - 20

52

Slab Area

@

G – L

7 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

31

32

31

32

32

32 18 - 20

53 Slab Area

@

a – b

b – c

31

31 31 18 - 20


L – N

11 - 12

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

32

31

31

54 Column

11 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

55

Slab Area

@

S – U

11 - 12

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

31

31

32

31

31

31 18 - 20

56

Beam

Q - U

7

1

2

3

32

31

31

31 18 - 20

57 Column

11 X

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

31

30

30 18 - 20

58

Beam

11 X U

1

2

3

31

30

31

31 18 - 20

59

Slab Area

@

X– U

7 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

32

31

31

32

31 18 - 20


a2 – b2

b2 – c2

31

31

60 Column

A 9

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

61

Beam

X

7 - 11

1

2

3

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

62

Slab Area

@

A – X

7 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

31

30

30

31

30

30

30 18 - 20

63 Column

A 13

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

31

32

32 18 – 20

64

Slab Area

@

A – C

7 - 13

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

31

31

32

31 18 – 20

65 Column

13 C

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

32

31

31 18 – 20

66 Slab Area a – b 30 30 18 – 20


@

B – D

13 - 15

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

31

30

31

30

67 Column

15 B

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 – 20

68

Beam

15 – 18

B

1

2

3

31

30

30

30 18 – 20

69 Column

17 C

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

31

32

32 18 - 20

70

Beam

A – C

17

1

2

3

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

71

Slab Area

@

A –C

15- 17

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

32

31

31

32

32

32 18 - 20

72 Column

17 A

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1


73

Slab Area

@

A – C

16 - 20

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

32

31

31

32

32

32 18 - 20

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

74

Slab Area

@

X – T

19 - 22

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

30

31

30

31

30

30 18 - 20

75

Beam

X – T

22

1

2

3

31

31

32

31 18 – 20

76 Column

P 7

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

31 18 – 20

77

Column

Q 7

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 – 20

78

Column

P 6

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 – 20

79 Top 31 30 18 – 20


Column

Q 6

Middle

Bottom

30

30

80

Column

U 6

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

31

32

32 18 - 20

81

Beam

U

3 - 6

1

2

3

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

82

Column

X 6

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

83

Beam

X

3 - 6

1

2

3

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

84

Slab Area

@

U – X

3 - 6

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

30

31

30

31

30

30 18 - 20

85 1 31 31 18 - 20


Beam

X T

6

2

3

31

32

86

Column

3 U

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

87

Beam

U

1 - 3

1

2

3

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

88

Column

3 X

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

89

Beam

X

1 - 3

1

2

3

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

90

Column

1 X

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design


91

Column

Top

Middle

31

32 31 18 - 20


1 U

Bottom 31 as per Indian standard

13311-Part-2

92

Beam

Q – U

2

1

2

3

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

93

Slab Area

@

X - T

1 - 3

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

32

31

31

32

32

32 18 - 20

94

Slab Area

@

Q - U

2 - 4

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

30

30

31

31

30

30

30 18 - 20

95

Column

P 2

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

31

31

31 18 - 20

96

Column

1 Q

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

31

31

31 18 - 20

97 Top 32 31 18 - 20


Column

M 4

Middle

Bottom

30

31

98

Column

M 2

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

99

Beam

Q – U

4

1

2

3

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

100

Slab Area

@

Q - M

2 - 4

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

31

30

30

31

30

30

30 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

101

Column

H 4

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

31

32

32 18 - 20

102

Double Column

H 2

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

103

Column

1 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20


104

Column

1 H

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

105

Column

4 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

106

Column

5 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

107

Column

6 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

108

Column

6 H

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

31 18 - 20

109

Lintel Beam

D – H

1

1

2

3

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

110

Lintel Beam

1

2

32

32 32 18 - 20


P – M

2

3 31

111

Column

5 H

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

30

30

30 18 - 20

Ref chart 1-1

± 25 % of design



13311-Part-2

112

Slab Area

@

D - H

2 - 6

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

32

31

32

31

32

32

32 18 - 20

113

Lintel Beam

H

2 - 4

1

2

3

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

114

Column

G 22

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20

115

Column

A 22

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

116

Column

Top

Middle

32

32 32 18 - 20


B 21

Bottom 31

117

Column

A 15

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

118

Column

D 6

Top

Middle

Bottom

31

31

32

31 18 - 20

119

Column

D 1

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

31 18 - 20

120

Column

A 1

Top

Middle

Bottom

30

30

31

30 18 - 20

121

Column

A 3

Top

Middle

Bottom

32

32

31

32 18 - 20


Table.2: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test Results IS: 13311 (Part 1):1992

Sl.

No

Structural

Members Position

Ultrasonic Pulse

Velocity in Km/Sec

Average Velocity

Km / Sec

Concrete Quality Grading As Per IS – 13311- PART-1

Remarks

Ref chart 1-2

1 Column

24 R

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.63

3.62

3.65

3.63

Good

2

Column

23 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.62

3.64

3.68

3.64

Good

3

Beam

23 NS

1

2

3

3.67

3.62

3.69

3.66

Good

4

Column

22 R

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.67

3.69

3.61

3.65

Good

5

Beam R

22 - 24

1

2

3

3.67

3.69

3.61

3.65

Good

6

Slab Area

@

R – U

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

3.56

3.58

3.54

3.55


22 - 19 b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.52

3.52

3.58

Good

7 Round Column

18 T

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.65

3.64

3.65

Good

8 Column

19 x

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.69

3.67

3.61

3.65

Good

9 Round Column

C9

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.60

3.62

3.66

3.62

Good

10 Round Column

16 Q

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.54

3.55

3.55

Good

11 Round Column

14 Q

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.68

3.67

3.67

Good

12 Round Column

12 T

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.69

3.64

3.61

3.64

Good

13 Column

13 Z

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.63

3.60

3.60

Good

14 Round Column

16 Z

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.61

3.66

3.65

3.64

Good


15 Round Column

18 Y

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.67

3.69

3.68

3.68

Good

16 Round Column

19 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.60

3.59

3.57

3.58

Good

17 Round Column

18 M

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.60

3.59

3.58

3.59

Good

18 Round Column

18 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.55

3.56

3.54

3.55

Good

19 Round Column

18 I

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.57

3.56

3.57

Good

20 Round Column

15 E

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.65

3.64

3.65

Good

21 Round Column

12 F

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.57

3.51

3.55

Good

22 Round Column

12 J

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.60

3.59

3.58

3.59

Good

23 Round Column

12 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.69

3.64

3.63

Good


24 Column

19 L

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.54

3.50

3.53

Good

25

Beam L

19 - 22

1

2

3

3.56

3.58

3.59

3.57

Good

26 Column

22 G

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.68

3.64

3.66

Good

27

Beam G

19 - 20

1

2

3

3.61

3.59

3.57

3.59

Good

28

Slab Area

@

D – G

19 - 22

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.51

3.56

3.58

3.54

3.57

3.55

3.55

Good

29

Slab Area

@

S – T

18 - 19

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.56

3.58

3.54

3.52

3.52

3.58

3.55

Good

30 Slab Area

@

a – b

b – c

3.66

3.65 3.66


A – Y

18 - 19

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.69

3.68

3.69

3.64

Good

31

Slab Area

@

A – Z

13 - 15

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.50

3.56

3.55

3.57

3.54

3.55

3.54

Good

32

Slab Area

@

T – W

11 - 12

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.61

3.62

3.66

3.68

3.69

3.64

3.65

Good

33

Slab Area

@

N – S

10 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.61

3.59

3.58

3.56

3.59

3.56

3.58

Good

34

Slab Area

@

P –Q

15 - 16

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.56

3.55

3.52

3.59

3.52

3.58

3.55

Good


35

Slab Area

@

A – M

18 - 19

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.61

3.62

3.66

3.68

3.69

3.64

3.65

Good

36

Slab Area

@

C – E

14- 16

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.66

3.69

3.68

3.64

3.66

3.61

3.65

Good

37

Slab Area

@

F – J

11- 12

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.55

3.52

3.51

3.58

3.50

3.59

3.54

Good

38 Column

20 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.60

3.59

3.58

3.59

Good

39

Slab Area

@

B – D

17- 21

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.50

3.56

3.55

3.57

3.54

3.55

3.54

Good

40 Column Top 3.60 3.59


15 C Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.58

Good

41

Slab Area

@

A – C

15- 17

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.66

3.69

3.68

3.64

3.66

3.61

3.65

Good

42

Beam

A – C

15

1

2

3

3.60

3.59

3.58

3.59

Good

43

Beam

C

13 - 15

1

2

3

3.66

3.69

3.64

3.63

Good

44

Slab Area

@

A – C

13- 15

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.55

3.52

3.51

3.58

3.50

3.59

3.54

Good

45 Column

15 B

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.55

3.56

3.54

3.55

Good

46 Column 13 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.57

3.56

3.57

Good

47 Slab Area

@

a – b

b – c

3.66

3.69 3.65


B – E

8 - 13

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.68

3.64

3.66

3.61

Good

48 Column 11 G

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.54

3.55

3.55

Good

49

Slab Area

@

D – G

7 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.61

3.59

3.58

3.56

3.59

3.56

3.58 Good

50

Beam

G

7 - 11

1

2

3

3.56

3.54

3.55

3.55

Good

51

Beam

L

7 - 11

1

2

3

3.66

3.68

3.67

3.67

Good

52

Slab Area

@

G – L

7 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.61

3.62

3.66

3.68

3.69

3.64

3.65

Good

53 Slab Area a – b 3.61 3.58 Good


@

L – N

11 - 12

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.59

3.58

3.56

3.59

3.56

54 Column

11 N

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.58

3.59

3.57

Good

55

Slab Area

@

S – U

11 - 12

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.61

3.62

3.66

3.68

3.69

3.64

3.65

Good

56

Beam

Q - U

7

1

2

3

3.56

3.54

3.55

3.55

Good

57 Column

11 X

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.68

3.67

3.67

Good

58

Beam

11 X U

1

2

3

3.69

3.64

3.61

3.64

Good

59

Slab Area

@

X– U

7 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

3.61

3.62

3.66

3.68

3.65

Good


a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.69

3.64

60 Column

A 9

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.55

3.56

3.54

3.55 Good

61

Beam

X

7 - 11

1

2

3

3.59

3.57

3.56

3.57 Good

62

Slab Area

@

A – X

7 - 11

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.61

3.62

3.66

3.68

3.69

3.64

3.65

Good

63 Column

A 13

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.69

3.67

3.61

3.65

Good

64

Slab Area

@

A – C

7 - 13

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.61

3.62

3.66

3.68

3.69

3.64

3.65

Good

65 Column

13 C

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.58

3.59

3.57

Good



@

B – D

13 - 15

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.62

3.66

3.68

3.69

3.64

67 Column

15 B

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.58

3.59

3.57

Good

68

Beam

15 – 18

B

1

2

3

3.56

3.58

3.54

3.56

Good

69 Column

17 C

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.58

3.59

3.57

Good

70

Beam

A – C

17

1

2

3

3.56

3.58

3.59

3.57

Good

71

Slab Area

@

A –C

15- 17

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.61

3.62

3.66

3.68

3.69

3.64

3.65

Good

72 Column

17 A

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.61

3.59

3.57

3.59 Good


73

Slab Area

@

A – C

16 - 20

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.66

3.69

3.68

3.64

3.66

3.61

3.65 Good

74

Slab Area

@

X – T

19 - 22

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.55

3.52

3.51

3.58

3.50

3.59

3.54 Good

75

Beam

X – T

22

1

2

3

3.56

3.58

3.59

3.57

Good

76 Column

P 7

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.68

3.64

3.66

Good

77

Column

Q 7

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.61

3.59

3.57

3.59

Good

78

Column

P 6

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.52

3.51

3.57

3.53

Good


79

Column

Q 6

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.58

3.59

3.57

Good

80

Column

U 6

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.68

3.64

3.66

Good

81

Beam

U

3 - 6

1

2

3

3.61

3.59

3.57

3.59

Good

82

Column

X 6

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.52

3.51

3.57

3.53

Good

83

Beam

X

3 - 6

1

2

3

3.56

3.58

3.59

3.57 Good

84

Slab Area

@

U – X

3 - 6

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.66

3.69

3.68

3.64

3.66

3.61

3.65 Good

85 3.55 3.55


Beam

X T

6

1

2

3

3.56

3.54

Good

86

Column

3 U

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.57

3.56

3.57

Good

87

Beam

U

1 - 3

1

2

3

3.66

3.65

3.64

3.65

Good

88

Column

3 X

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.69

3.67

3.61

3.65

Good

89

Beam

X

1 - 3

1

2

3

3.55

3.56

3.54

3.55

Good

90

Column

1 X

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.57

3.56

3.57

Good

91

Column

1 U

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.65

3.64

3.65

Good

92

Beam

1

2

3.69

3.67

3.65

Good


Q – U

2

3 3.61

93

Slab Area

@

X - T

1 - 3

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.69

3.62

3.62

3.69

3.65

3.63

3.65

Good

94

Slab Area

@

Q - U

2 - 4

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.66

3.65

3.69

3.68

3.69

3.64

3.66 Good

95

Column

P 2

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.68

3.67

3.67 Good

96

Column

1 Q

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.69

3.64

3.61

3.64 Good

97

Column

M 4

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.63

3.60

3.60 Good

98

Column

Top

Middle

3.61

3.66 3.64 Good


M 2 Bottom 3.65

99

Beam

Q – U

4

1

2

3

3.55

3.56

3.54

3.55

Good

100

Slab Area

@

Q - M

2 - 4

a – b

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.69

3.62

3.62

3.69

3.65

3.63

3.65

Good

101

Column

H 4

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.60

3.59

3.57

3.58 Good

102

Double Column

H 2

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.60

3.59

3.58

3.59 Good

103

Column

1 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.55

3.56

3.54

3.55 Good

104

Column

1 H

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.57

3.56

3.57

Good

105 Top 3.66 3.65


Column

4 D

Middle

Bottom

3.65

3.64

Good

106

Column

5 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.69

3.67

3.61

3.65

Good

107

Column

6 D

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.60

3.59

3.57

3.58 Good

108

Column

6 H

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.60

3.59

3.58

3.59 Good

109

Lintel Beam

D – H

1

1

2

3

3.60

3.59

3.58

3.59 Good

110

Lintel Beam

P – M

2

1

2

3

3.56

3.54

3.55

3.55

Good

111

Column

5 H

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.55

3.56

3.54

3.55

Good



@

D - H

2 - 6

b – c

a1 – b1

b1 – c1

a2 – b2

b2 – c2

3.65

3.69

3.68

3.69

3.64

113

Lintel Beam

H

2 - 4

1

2

3

3.56

3.54

3.55

3.55

Good

114

Column

G 22

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.68

3.67

3.67 Good

115

Column

A 22

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.69

3.64

3.61

3.64 Good

116

Column

B 21

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.59

3.57

3.56

3.57

Good

117

Column

A 15

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.69

3.65

3.68

3.67

Good

118

Column

D 6

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.54

3.55

3.55

Good


119

Column

D 1

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.66

3.68

3.67

3.67 Good

120

Column

A 1

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.69

3.64

3.61

3.64 Good

121

Column

A 3

Top

Middle

Bottom

3.56

3.54

3.55

3.55

Good

Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test

Floor Level : Ground Floor Level

Project : The Proposed construction of Meadow in the sun at Haralur

village, East-Bengaluru-560035

Date : 29th April 2017

Table.2: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test Results

IS: 13311 (Part 1):1992

Sl. No

Structural Members

Position Pulse

Velocity (m/Sec)

Average Pulse

Velocity (m/Sec)

Concrete Quality Grading As Per IS –

13311- PART-1 Remarks

Ref chart 1-2

GROUND FLOOR


COLUMNS

1

Column E11Y

Top Middle Bottom

4.35 4.33 4.31

4.33 Good

2 Column

E11X

Top Middle-1 Middle-2 Bottom

4.30 4.39 4.28 4.24

4.30 Good

3 Column E11W


4.35 4.32 4.34 4.20

4.30 Good

4 Column

E11V


4.41 4.41 4.38 4.36

4.39 Good

5 Column

E11T

Top

Middle-1 Middle-2 Bottom

4.54 4.44 4.40 4.10

4.37 Good

6 Column

E11S


4.59 4.58 4.51 4.46

4.53 Excellent

7 Column

E11R

Top Middle Bottom

4.47 4.25 4.25

4.32 Good

8 Column

E11Q

Top Middle Bottom

4.44 4.42 4.30

4.38 Good

9 Column

E11N

Top Middle Bottom

4.36 4.32 4.32

4.33 Good

10 Column

E11M

Top

Middle

4.48 4.45 4.30

4.41 Good

14


Bottom

11 Column

E9M

Top Middle Bottom

4.48 4.39 4.37

4.41 Good

12 Column

E9N

Top

Middle Bottom

4.34 4.34 4.30

4.32 Good

13 Column

E9Q

Top

Middle Bottom

4.56 4.46 4.30

4.44 Good

14 Column

E9R

Top

Middle Bottom

4.58 4.56 4.48

4.54 Excellent

15 Column

E9S

Top


4.59 4.54 4.57 4.41

4.52 Excellent

16 Column

E9T

Top


4.50 4.44 4.40 4.37

4.42 Good

17 Column

E9V

Top

Middle-1 Middle-2

4.59 4.35 4.30 4.20

4.36 Good


Bottom

18 Column

E9W

Top


4.40 4.38 4.35 4.35

4.37 Good

19 Column

E9X


4.44 4.44 4.48 4.38

4.43 Good

20 Column

E9Y

Top Middle Bottom

4.50 4.50 4.48

4.49 Good

21 Column

E8Y

Top Middle Bottom

4.40 4.38 4.35

4.37 Good

22 Column

E8X


4.40 4.38 4.36 4.30

4.36 Good

23 Column

E8W

Top


4.41 4.39 4.35 4.34

4.37 Good

24 Column

E8V


4.40 4.34 4.32 4.30

4.34 Good

25 Column

E8T


4.39 4.38 4.38 4.28

4.35 Good

26 Column

E8S Top

Middle 4.35 4.31

4.30 Good


Bottom 4.25

27 Column

E8R

Top Middle Bottom

4.41 4.40 4.38

4.39 Good

28 Column

E8Q

Top

Middle Bottom

4.38 4.38 4.33

4.36 Good

29

Column E8N

Top Middle Bottom

4.42 4.40 4.39

4.40 Good

30 Column

E8M

Top Middle Bottom

4.45 4.41 4.36

4.40 Good


11. INFERENCES:-

11.1 MALUR BOY’S HOSTEL:

Based on the NDT tests results & interpolating the values for compressive strength of Columns Beams

& Slab area Tested in Boy‟s Hostel Block at Ground Floor.

The following inference is drawn:-

The assessed Compressive Strength of hardened Concrete tested in the Columns, Beams & Slab area

Tested in Boy‟s Hostel Block at Ground floor on an average, is as follows:

Ground and First floor level:-

Columns Tested = 26 - 28 N / mm2

Beam Tested = 26 - 28N / mm2

Slab area Tested = 26 - 28 N / mm2

11.2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF MEADOW IN THE SUN AT HARALUR

VILLAGE, EAST-BENGALURU

Based on the NDT test results for concrete quality grading for Columns tested for Proposed

construction of Meadow in the sun at Haralur village, East-Bengaluru-560035 Building at Ground floor

level.

The following inference is drawn:-


The assessed concrete quality grading of hardened Concrete tested in the Columns, of the Proposed

construction of Meadow in the sun at Haralur village, East-Bengaluru-560035, as an average is as

follows:

AT GROUND FLOOR LEVEL:-

Columns Tested = Concrete quality grading is GOOD

Dr. M.Keshva Murthy Dr. Sadath Ali Khan Zai,

ME (Psc.) Ph.D. MISTE M.E.(Const.Tech),Ph.D.,MISTE.

Associate Professor, Associate Professor,

Department of Civil Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering,

U.V.C.E, Jnana Bharathi U.V.C.E, Jnana Bharathi

Bangalore University Bangalore University

Bangalore - 560056 Bangalore - 560056


12 . CONCLUSIONS

1. Although nondestructive tests are relatively simple to perform, the analysis and interpretation of

the test data are not so easy because concrete is a complex material. The user is therefore

cautioned that interpretation of the test data must always be carried out by specialists in this field

rather than by technicians performing the tests.

2. If used properly, nondestructive test can form a very important link in the chain of testing and

evaluation of concrete and concrete structures, which commences with the breaking of test

cylinders and may end with the “load testing” of a finished structure.

3. In a structure, strength attained is different from that specified. They depend on real compaction

and consolidation conditions. An attempt is made to know approximate strength of concrete after

the structure has been occupied by using Non-Destructive Testing methods.

4. The first instrument used in NDT is the ultrasonic pulse velocity instrument. Even though this

test method has limitations, UPV method of test is generally preferred to assess the strength or

quality of concrete and other many properties in structural members. NDT is now considered as a

powerful method for evaluating existing concrete structure with regard to their strength,

durability, investigation of crack depth, micro cracks and progressive deterioration are also

studied by this method. But the rebound hammer testing methods are used to co-relate the results

obtained from the ultrasonic pulse velocity method.

5. Cover meter is the method from which approximate mapping of the rebars in structure can be

done. Even though this equipment has limitations still it is very widely used all over the world to

generate the structural details of R.C members, especially in the absence of structural drawings.


REFERENCES

1. Bungey, J.H, (1989), “Testing of Concrete in Structure”, Surrey University pres, USA: Chapman

and Hall, New York.

2. Chapman and Hall, “Testing during Concrete Construction”, proceedings of an International

RILEM Workshop, New York.

3. IS: 13311 (part 1) - 1992, “Methods of non-destructive testing of concrete- Ultrasonic pulse

velocity”, BIS, New Delhi.

4. IS: 13311 (part 2) - 1992, “Methods of non-destructive testing of concrete- rebound hammer”,

BIS, New Delhi.

5. Malhotra, V.M, (1986), “Testing Hardened Concrete- Non Destructive Methods”, ACI and

IOWA State University Press, US.

6. Neville, A.M. (1996), “Properties of Concrete”, ELBS, New Delhi.

7. Shetty M.S, (2002),”Concrete Technology theory and practice”, S. Chand and Company Ltd.

Ramnagar, New Delhi.

NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF CONCRETE IN ...

Documents