Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Ultrasonics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ultras

Compressive strength evaluation of structural lightweight concrete

by non-destructive ultrasonic pulse velocity method
J. Alexandre Bogas , M. Glria Gomes, Augusto Gomes
DECivil/ICIST, Instituto Superior Tcnico, Technical University of Lisbon, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper the compressive strength of a wide range of structural lightweight aggregate concrete mixes
Received 17 July 2012 is evaluated by the non-destructive ultrasonic pulse velocity method. This study involves about 84 differ-
Received in revised form 13 December 2012 ent compositions tested between 3 and 180 days for compressive strengths ranging from about 30 to
Accepted 17 December 2012
80 MPa. The inuence of several factors on the relation between the ultrasonic pulse velocity and com-
Available online 3 January 2013
pressive strength is examined. These factors include the cement type and content, amount of water, type
of admixture, initial wetting conditions, type and volume of aggregate and the partial replacement of nor-
Keywords:
mal weight coarse and ne aggregates by lightweight aggregates. It is found that lightweight and normal
Lightweight aggregate concrete
Non-destructive tests
weight concretes are affected differently by mix design parameters. In addition, the prediction of the con-
Ultrasonic pulse velocity cretes compressive strength by means of the non-destructive ultrasonic pulse velocity test is studied.
Compressive strength Based on the dependence of the ultrasonic pulse velocity on the density and elasticity of concrete, a sim-
Admixtures plied expression is proposed to estimate the compressive strength, regardless the type of concrete and
its composition. More than 200 results for different types of aggregates and concrete compositions were
analyzed and high correlation coefcients were obtained.
2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction According to Eq. (1), the relevant physical properties of materi-

The non-destructive ultrasonic pulse velocity method has been
widely applied to the investigation of the mechanical properties
and integrity of concrete structures [17]. It is easy to use and re-
sults can be quickly achieved on site. The ultrasonic pulse velocity
(UPV) of a homogeneous solid can be easily related to its physical
and mechanical properties. Based on the theory of elasticity ap-
plied to homogeneous and isotropic materials, the pulse velocity
of compressional waves (P-waves) is directly proportional to the
square root of the dynamic modulus of elasticity, Ed, and inversely
proportional to the square root of its density, q, according to Eq. (1)
[7,8]. td is the dynamic Poissons ratio. Concrete is heterogeneous
and so these assumptions are not strictly valid. However, the high
attenuation in concrete limits the UPV method to frequencies up to
about 100 kHz [9], which means that compressional waves do not
interact with most concrete inhomogeneities [9,10]. In this case,
concrete can be reasonably regarded as a homogeneous material
[5].
s ter correlations when they also took into account other variables
Ed 1  td
UPV  1
q 1 td  1  2td
Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 218418226; fax: +351 218418380.
E-mail address: abogas@civil.ist.utl.pt (J.A. Bogas).
als that inuence pulse velocity are the density, elastic modulus
and td. Thus, correlations between the pulse velocity and the com-
pressive strength of concrete, fc, are based on the indirect relation
between this property and the elastic modulus, Ec. EN 1992-1-1
[11] suggests the expression Eq. (2) to relate Ec and fc, where q is
the oven-dry density.
 0:3 
fc q 2
Ec  22   GPa 2
10 2200
However, it is well known that the compressive strength and
elastic modulus may be inuenced differently, depending on the
concrete composition. Therefore, the relation between UPV and fc
is not unique and can be affected by factors such as the type and
size of aggregate, physical properties of the cement paste, curing
conditions, mixture composition, concrete age and moisture con-
tent [8,1217]. Ben-Zeitun [15] and Trtnik et al. [16] achieved bet-
such as the w/c ratio, volume and size of aggregates, concrete
age and curing conditions. Thus, although in situ estimation of fc
from UPV is covered in EN 13791 [18], there is no standard corre-
lation between these properties. So far, the correlation between fc
and UPV must be calibrated for each specic concrete mix
[18,19]. Moreover, the heterogeneous nature of concrete caused
by the introduction of aggregates results in increased scatter, i.e.,

0041-624X/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2012.12.012
 J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972
dispersive properties. This is why Philippids [20] found that the
ultrasound velocity increased 11% in concrete specimens through-
out the 15200 kHz band.
Nonetheless, several relationships between UPV and fc have been
proposed, especially for normal density concrete (NWC)
[1,6,13,15,21,22]. Sturrup et al. [21] proposed a logarithmic relation-
ship between UPV and fc, while Price and Haynes [6], Phoon et al.
[13] and Ben-Zeitun [15] suggested linear relationships. However,
exponential relationships are the commonest [1,3,10,13,14,16,23].
The various relations proposed in the literature prove the different
inuence of concrete composition on fc and UPV. For example, differ-
ent volumes of normal weight aggregate (NA) affect UPV but have
little, if any, inuence on fc. Depending on the mix design, the higher
NA content can even cause a UPV increase and, at the same time, a
loss of compressive strength [14,16].
Most investigations have focused on NWC behavior. Published
studies involving lightweight concrete (LWC) are still limited. Nas-
ser and Al-Manaseer [24] reported expressions of the type fc =
aUPVb for NWC and LWC produced with expanded clay aggregates.
The authors also showed that UPV depends on the concrete density,
which is lower in LWC than in NWC of the same compressive
strength. Chang et al. [10] established exponential relationships
between UPV and fc for LWC with two types of lightweight aggre-
gates. Hamidian et al. [25] found poor correlations when several
LWC mixes were analyzed together. Tanyidizi and Coskun [26]
used the analysis of variance (ANOVA) to study the inuence of
curing conditions, maximum size of aggregate, mineral admixtures
and curing time on UPV and the compressive strength of light-
weight concrete. The maximum size of the aggregate was the main
parameter governing UPV and fc.
Expanded clay LWC is almost one hundred years old, and a lot of
old LWC structures that have been built since the 1950s, especially
in North America and Europe, now represent a major issue in terms
of maintenance and rehabilitation. Non-destructive ultrasound
pulse velocity tests have proved to be very helpful in the inspection
of old structures. However, the experience acquired in this eld
and the correlations that have been built between the quality of
concrete and its UPV are essentially limited to NWC. Therefore,
due to the specicity of LWC, new correlations must be established
for this type of concrete, regardless the type of LWA. Knowledge of
general correlations between fc and UPV will be a major advance in
the inspection and assessment of existing LWC structures.
This study investigates the use of the non-destructive ultrasonic
pulse velocity method to assess the compressive strength of LWC
produced with different types of expanded clay aggregates. The
experimental work was comprehensive, testing at various ages
several concrete specimens produced from different compositions.
The inuence of mix design parameters such as the water/binder
(w/b) ratio, type, volume and initial water content of aggregates
and type and volume of binder was analyzed. Finally, based on
the dependence of UPV on density and elasticity (Eq. (1)) and tak-
ing into account the empirical relationship between fc and Ec (Eq.
(2)), a general simplied expression is proposed and assessed that
relates fc and UPV, irrespective of the type of concrete, mixture
composition and test age.
2. Experimental program
2.1. Materials
Three Iberian expanded clay lightweight aggregates were ana-
lyzed: Leca and Argex from Portugal and Arlita from Spain. Their
total porosity, PT, particle density, qp, bulk density, qb, and 24 h
water absorption, wabs,24h, are indicated in Table 1. They differ in
terms of porosity, geometry and bulk density, which makes it
963
possible to produce concrete with strengths ranging from about
25 to 70 MPa [27], thereby covering the most common structural
LWC. A more detailed microstructural characterization of these
aggregates can be found elsewhere [28,29].
Normal weight coarse and ne aggregates (NA) were also used.
For the reference NWC, two crushed limestone aggregates of differ-
ent sizes were combined so as to have the same grading curve as
Leca (20% ne and 80% coarse gravel). Fine aggregates consisted
of 2/3 coarse and 1/3 ne sand. Their main properties are listed
in Table 1. The two fractions of Argex were also combined to have
the same grading curve as Leca (35% 24 and 65% 38F, Table 1).
The maximum aggregate size was 12.5 mm. Cement type I 52.5
R, I 42.5 R, II-A/L 42.5, II-A/D 42.5 (8% of SF by weight), II-A/V
42.5 (20% of FA by weight) and IV-A 42.5 (8% SF and 20% FA)
according to EN 197-1 [30], were considered. Their main physical
and mechanical properties are listed in Table 2. For low w/b ratios,
a polycarboxylate based superplasticizer (SP) was used. A water
dispersed RHEOMAC VMA 350 nanosilica (NS) with an average den-
sity of 1.1 and about 16.1% solids content was also tested.
2.2. Concrete mixing and compositions
Based on an extensive study of the durability and mechanical
characterization of structural lightweight concretes produced with
different types of aggregates that was conducted at the Instituto
Superior Tcnico [27], the ultrasonic pulse velocities of about 84
different compositions were measured. The compositions varied
in terms of type, volume (150450 L/m3), and initial wetting con-
ditions of aggregates (initially dry, pre-wetted and pre-soaked),
different water/binder (w/b) ratios (0.30.65), the types and
amounts of cement (300525 kg/m3), the types and volumes of
mineral admixtures (22% and 40% of y ash (FA), 8% of silica fume
(SF) and 1.3% of nanosilica), the partial replacement of normal
weight coarse aggregates by lightweight aggregate (LWA) and also
the partial replacement of natural sand by lightweight sand (light-
weight sand concrete LWSC).
The concretes were produced in a vertical shaft mixer with bot-
tom discharge. Except for initially dry or pre-wetted aggregates,
the LWA was pre-soaked for 24 h to better control the workability
and effective water content of the concrete. The aggregates were
then surface dried with absorbent towels and placed in the mixer
with sand and 50% of the total water. After 2 min of mixing, the
binder and the rest of the water were added. When used, the SP
was added slowly with 10% of water, after 1 more minute. The total
mixing time was 7 min.
All the concrete mixtures studied for this paper are listed in de-
tail elsewhere [27]. The main characteristics of each composition
are summarized in Table A1 in the appendix. The w/b ratio signies
the effective water available for binder hydration. The denomina-
tions NA, L, A and Argex correspond to the mixes with normal
weight aggregate, Leca, Arlita and Argex. These denominations are
usually followed by the volume of binder and then by the w/b ra-
tio, when it differs from 0.35. The prex V refers to different vol-
umes of aggregate. The compositions were basically variations of a
reference mixture with 450 kg/m3 of binder, 158 L/m3 of water (w/
b = 0.35), 350 L/m3 of coarse aggregate (Leca, Arlita, Argex, NA) and
0.51.0% of SP. Except for LWSC, natural sand was used in combi-
nation with coarse LWA. For LWSC, the 2/3 coarse natural sand
was replaced by the lightweight sand indicated in Table 1 (Leca
03). Modied normal density concretes (MND) were produced
with partial replacement of NA by 35% and 65% of Leca or Arlita.
To study the inuence of pre-wetting aggregate, some concrete
specimens with initially dry LWA (PD) or pre-wetted LWA (PW)
were also produced. The PD aggregate is added during mixing
and the PW aggregate is previously wetted for 3 min with 50% of
the total water before mixing.
964 J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972

Table 1
Aggregate properties.

Property Normal weight aggregates Lightweight aggregates

Fine sand Coarse sand Fine gravel Coarse gravel Leca 03 Leca 412 Argex 24 Argex 38F Arlita AF7
Particle dry density, qp (kg/m3) 2620 2610 2631 2612 1060 1068 865 705 1290
Loose bulk density, qp (kg/m3) 1416 1530 1343 1377 562 613 423 397 738
24 h water absorption, wabs,24h (%) 0.2 0.5 1.4 1.1 12.3 22.9 23.3 12.1
Total porosity, PT (%) 59 60 67 73 52
Granulometric fraction (di/Di) 0/2 0/4 4/6.3 6.3/12.5 0.5/3 4/11.2 4/8 6.3/12.5 3/10
Los Angeles coefcient (%) 33.3 30.5

Table 2
Main characteristics of cement, silica fume and y ash.

Parameter Standard Fly ash Silica fume Cement I 52.5 R Cement I 42.5 R Cement II/A-L 42.5 R
Residue on the 45 lm sieve (%) EN 451-2 10.2 92.0a 1.1 4.7 8.3
Blaine specic surface (cm2/g) EN 196-6 5102 3981 4477
Compressive strength of reference mortar (MPa) 2 days EN 196-1 40.4 32.8 27.2
28 days
62.7 54.9 51.4
Activity index at 28 days (%) EN 196-1 83.7b 106.7c
Activity index at 90 daysa (%) EN 196-1 103.1
Expansion (mm) EN 196-3 0.5a 0.5 0.5 0.5
Loss on ignition (LOI) (%) EN 196-7 6.5 3.7 1.64 3.06 5.34
SiO2 + A12O3 + Fe2O3 (%) EN 196-2 83.0 94.0 29.1 27.6 26.1
CaO (%) 3.38 0.83 61.6 63.5 61.6
Free CaO (%) EN 451-1 0.36 Not detected 1.45 1.31 1.8
Density (g/cm3) EN 196-6 2.33 2.25 3.11 3.11 3.05
a
Residue on the 90 lm sieve.
b
Mortar with CEM I42.5 R + 25% y ash.
c
Mortar with CEM I42.5 R + 10% silica fume.

2.3. Specimen preparation and test setup
For each mix at each age, three 150 mm cubic specimens were
tested for ultrasonic pulse velocity and then for compressive
strength according to EN 12390-3 [31]. After demolding at 24 h,
specimens were kept in water until testing, according to EN
12390-3 [31]. UPV measurements were performed on unloaded
wet specimens.
The ultrasonic pulse velocity was obtained by direct transmis-
sion according to EN 12504-4 [17]. The equipment used was the
portable ultrasonic non-destructive digital indicating tester (PUNDIT),
shown in Fig. 1 [8]. In this method an ultrasonic pulse is generated
by a pulse generator and transmitted to the surface of concrete
through the transmitter transducer. The time taken by the pulse
to travel through the concrete, tus, is measured by the receiver
transducer on the opposite side. The 54 kHz transducers were posi-
tioned in the middle of each opposing face, orthogonal to the direc-
tion of concreting. The propagation time of the ultrasonic waves
transmitted through the 150 mm cubic specimens was measured
with accuracy up to 0.1 ls. A digital readout is displayed in a
4-digit LCD. Finally, UPV is the ratio between the length traveled
by the pulse (150 mm) and the measured time, tus. A thin couplant
(solid vaseline) was used on the interface between transducers and
concrete to ensure good contact. Before each measurement the
equipment was calibrated with a cylindrical Perspex bar of known tus.
Three measurements were taken for each test specimen by
switching the position of the transducers between the two oppo-
site faces of the concrete cubes. For all mixes ultrasonic pulse
velocity was measured at 28 days. Tests were also performed at
1, 3, 7, 90 and 180 days on certain selected mixtures (Table A1).
3. Test results and discussion
All the average results of compressive strength, fc, and pulse
velocity, UPV, are listed in Table A1, for each composition at each
age. Fig. 2 summarizes the mean values of UPV and fc obtained
for each mixture, between 3 and 90 days. A total of about 208 aver-
age results were considered, involving different concrete strengths
ranging from about 3080 MPa and UPV from 3.5 to 5.2 km/s.

90
80
70
60
y = 3.38e0.62x
50
R = 0.61
40
30
20
3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4
UPV (Km/s)

Fig. 2. Relationship between UPV and fc for different concrete compositions and
Fig. 1. Scheme of the ultrasonic pulse velocity measurement in concrete specimens. different types of aggregate at ages between 3 and 90 days.
 J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972
The coefcients of variation of UPV, CVUPV, for the specimens
measured at 28 days are also presented in Table A1. For other ages
the CVUPV is of the same order. As it can be seen, the CVUPV obtained
from 3 specimens of each composition at each age (three speci-
mens measured in three directions) was generally lower than 0.5.
This shows the lower variability of the UPV method and also the
homogeneity of the concrete specimens produced.
As expected, when different compositions, types of aggregate
and test ages are considered simultaneously there is a poor corre-
lation between UPV and fc (Fig. 2). Therefore, the inuence of the
type and volume of aggregate, age of testing, w/b ratio and type
of binder are analyzed separately in the following sections.
3.1. Inuence of type of aggregate
When the mixtures with different types of aggregate, light-
weight sand (LWSC) and the partial replacement of coarse NA by
LWA (MND) are analyzed separately, there is a natural increase
of the correlation coefcient (Fig. 3). Based on Eqs. (1) and (2)
and as documented in [27], the introduction of lightweight aggre-
gate has a greater impact on elasticity than on density, leading to
the reduction of UPV.
For similar values of UPV, the strength is higher in LWC of higher
density. Conversely, the lower the density of the LWA the higher
the UPV for a given compressive strength. This trend is likely to
be primarily related to the: lower proportional increment of UPV
in relation to fc, for higher strength levels; simultaneous reduction
of density and stiffness in LWC, which means a smaller variation of
UPV (Eq. (1)); slight variation of fc for LWC with rich mortars and
more porous aggregates; higher compacity of richer mortars in
more porous LWC of the same strength; small differences between
the ultrasonic pulse velocities of lightweight aggregates, UPVag;
higher water content in LWC with lower density aggregates.
The importance of the aggregate type is highlighted in Fig. 4,
where the UPV in reference mixes with a w/b ratio of 0.35 is com-
pared with that obtained for a mortar with an equivalent composi-
tion (Mortar_0.35 with the same w/c ratio and sand/cement ratio,
Table A1). The absence of coarse aggregates leads to a reduction of
UPV in NWC and the opposite effect in LWC. The difference is high-
er in NWC, which means the aggregate has greater inuence on
this type of concrete. Assuming that the aggregate stiffness varies
with the square of its density, q2ag [32], then the UPVag decreases
more or less in line with q0:5
ag (Eq. (1)).
Taking concrete as a two-phase composite material, let us as-
sume that the ultrasonic pulse velocity in concrete, UPVc, is related
to the ultrasonic velocity of the aggregate, UPVag, and the ultrasonic
velocity of the mortar, UPVm, according to Eq. (3) (series model,
[16]). tag and tm are the respective relative volumes of aggregate
and mortar. The inuence of the transition zone paste/aggregate
is neglected.
100
Leca
80 Arlita
R = 0.85
Argex
60
NWC
R = 0.91 LWSC
40
MND(Leca)
20 R = 0.84 R = 0.84 MND(Arlita)
Mortar
0
3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4
UPV (km/s)
Fig. 3. Different relationships between UPV and fc for each type of aggregate,
considering different compositions at ages between 3 and 90 days (Table A1).
965
80
Leca
70
60 Arlita
50 Argex
40 NWC
30
Mortar
20
4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2
UPV (km/s)
Fig. 4. Relationship between UPV and fc in reference concrete and in the respective
mortar of equivalent composition at 7 and 28 days (the same sand/cement ratio and
w/b ratio of 0.35). The volume of coarse aggregate in concrete is 350 L/m3.
1 tag tm
3
UPV c UPV ag UPV m
Based on the UPV average values obtained at 28 days for the
mortar (UPVm = 4.5 km/s) and for the reference concretes A/L/Ar-
gex/NA450 with tag of 0.35 (Table A1 and Fig. 4), the UPVag values
are 3.6, 4.1, 4.1 and 6.3 km/s, respectively for Argex, Leca, Arlita
and normal aggregate (NA). Thus, the UPVag/UPVm ratio is 1.4 for
NA and only 0.9 for Leca and Arlita. This conrms that NWC is af-
fected more by the volume of aggregate. Moreover, the dispersion
effect caused by concrete heterogeneity should be lower in LWC.
On the other hand, since the NWC strength is essentially con-
trolled by the mortar, the UPV decreases with the volume of aggre-
gate, without a signicant variation of fc, i.e., the relation between
UPV and fc strongly depends on the proportion of aggregate in the
mix. Thus, the correlation between fc and UPV has to be established
for each type of NWC with a given volume of aggregate. The same
is concluded by Lin et al. [14] and Popovics et al. [12].
LWC behaves differently. The strength is also affected by LWA,
and hence both UPV and fc decrease with the greater volume of
aggregate. Therefore, one would expect the relation between UPV
and fc to be less affected. However, although UPV varies in the same
direction as fc, they may progress differently. Since UPVag/UPVm is
close to unity, the fc variation can be higher than that of UPV. More-
over, the compressive strength of LWC is affected by the strength
level, whereas UPV is not. This is especially noticeable in LWC with
more porous aggregate (Leca and Argex) and higher strength levels,
since fc is limited by the capacity of LWA and cannot follow UPV.
However, this phenomenon occurs later in LWC with less porous
aggregates (Arlita). That is why the regression curves of Fig. 3,
for different types of LWA, diverge from each other with the incre-
ment of fc. The mortar quality has a greater impact on the strength
evolution of the higher density LWC. As expected, UPV and fc de-
crease with the partial replacement of natural sand by lightweight
sand. The simultaneous inclusion of normal and lightweight aggre-
gates leads to values between those obtained for NWC and LWC
(Fig. 3).
Data from Fig. 3 can also be approximated by more common
exponential relationships, with similar correlation coefcients
(Eqs. (4)(7)). The estimation of fc by means of Eqs. (4)(7) leads
to an average error of 5.5% for Argex, 4.9% for Leca, 7.3% for Arlita
and 6.3% for normal aggregate. The standard deviations of these er-
rors are respectively 3.4%, 4.6%, 5.3% and 5.8%. There were more
LWC compositions with Arlita, which is why the largest error
was obtained in this type of concrete.
Arlita : fcm 1:07  e0:92UPV ; R2 0:82 4
Leca : fcm 3:00:63UPV ; R2 0:82 5
966 J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972

Argex : fcm 1:65  e0:70UPV ; R2 0:82 6 5.2

5.0
Normal aggregate : fcm 0:023  e1:6UPV ; R2 0:88 7 4.8 R = 1.00
NWC
4.6

3.2. Inuence of concrete age
The fc and UPV trend for some illustrative mixes with different
w/b ratios and different types and amounts of aggregate is shown
in Fig. 5. VL250 is a reference mixture with 250 L/m3 of coarse Leca.
As expected, UPV and fc increase with curing time [13,33]. In fact,
since the pulse velocity through voids is lower than that through
solid matter, the greater the paste hydration the lower the volume
of pores and the greater the UPV [33].
High correlations are obtained when each concrete composition
is individually assessed. However, the correlation decreases when
different compositions are analyzed together. For example, there
is a greater dispersion when different w/b ratios are considered
in LWC with Leca (dashed line in Fig. 5). In fact, whereas Vus tends
to increase faster with age than fc, fc increases more with the w/c
ratio than Vus does. Therefore, the simultaneous consideration of
distinct ages and w/c ratios implies different relations between fc
and Vus. However, the relation between fc and UPV seems to be less
affected by the volume of aggregate (VL250 vs L450), contrary to
what is normally reported for NWC [14,16]. As mentioned before,
LWA affects both fc and Vus.
The concrete strength tends to increase faster than UPV, espe-
cially in NWC, where fc is not limited by the strength of the aggre-
gate (Fig. 5 and Table A1). The same is documented in [10,14,21].
The fc trend in LWC is less steep and hence less sensitive to small
changes in UPV. As shown in this study, the inuence of each
mix designs parameters must be analyzed at the same age, and
this is done in the next sections.
3.3. Inuence of the w/c ratio
Fig. 6 shows the UPV at 28 days for each type of aggregate and
different w/c ratios. Since only one parameter of the mixture is
changed for each type of cement, the correlations are high. Mixes
with the same volume of coarse aggregate and the same type
and cement content were considered in LWC with Leca or Arlita.
Different w/c ratios were obtained by varying the amount of water
and the respective volume of sand. Mixes with the same volume of
water and coarse aggregate were considered in NWC. Different w/c
ratios were obtained by varying the amount of cement and the
respective volume of sand. This is why the UPV trend with the
w/c ratio is less pronounced in NWC (the higher w/c ratio is
partially offset by the greater volume of sand). Otherwise, the slope
UPV (km/s)
Arlita
4.4
4.2 Leca
R = 0.97 R = 0.99
4.0
LWSC
3.8
3.6 R = 0.96
3.4
0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65
w/c
Fig. 6. UPV versus the w/c ratio for different types of aggregate at 28 days (w/c ratio
obtained by varying the amount of water LWC with Leca or Arlita; w/c ratio
obtained by varying the cement content NWC).
of each aggregate curve should be similar. LWSC mixes are associ-
ated with different amounts of cement, sand and water.
When the regression analysis takes different water and cement
contents into account at the same time, there is a reduction of the
correlation coefcient (Figs. 7 and 8). As shown in Fig. 8, fc is less
sensitive than UPV to the type of w/c, i.e., fc tends to be less affected
by different amounts of water, sand and cement than UPV, for a gi-
ven w/c ratio. For the same w/c ratio and different cement con-
tents, UPV can vary by more than 100 m/s (Fig. 8). Therefore, the
relation between UPV and w/c also depends on how the w/c ratio
is changed. Furthermore, moisture content helps the propagation
velocity in concrete [27,34] but may affect compressive strength
negatively.
3.4. Inuence of the volume of aggregate
For LWC, fc and UPV decrease as the volume of LWA increases
(Fig. 9). But UPV increases with the volume of aggregate in NWC.
The NWC compressive strength also increases, albeit only slightly,
with the volume of aggregate. An opposite trend is reported by
other authors [14,16], which may explain the better correlation ob-
tained in this work for NWC (Fig. 3).
As expected, differences are higher when different w/c ratios
and volumes of aggregate are considered at the same time
(Fig. 10). In lower density LWC (Leca), the relation between fc
and UPV seems to be less affected by the w/c ratio and the volume
of aggregate. Since the compressive strength of these concretes is
also affected by the aggregate, the variation of fc with w/c is lower
than in NWC and LWC of higher density.

80
90

80 R = 0.97 70 R = 0.84
70
R = 0.93 60
60 R = 0.85 Arlita
50 Leca
R = 0.95 50
40 R = 0.98
R = 0.96
30 40 R = 0.83
R = 0.90
20
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 30
UPV (Km/s) 3.6 4.0 4.4 4.8
UPV (km/s)
Fig. 5. Relationship between UPV and fc at different ages (between 1 and 180 days)
for different w/b ratios (0.35, 0.45, 0.55), types and volumes of aggregate (250 and Fig. 7. Relationship between fc and UPV at 28 days for different w/c ratios (0.3, 0.35,
350 L/m3). 0.4, 0.45, 0.55) by varying the amount of cement and water (Arlita and Leca).
 J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972 967

5.4 LWC, above which the fc is governed by the paste, is much higher
70 than that of LWC with less porous aggregates. As shown in
5.0 60 [27,35], up to about 60 MPa the compressive behavior of LWC with
Arlita is similar to that of NWC.
UVP (km/s)

4.6 50

40 3.5. Inuence of the type of binder

4.2
30
UPV= -2.27.(w/c) + 5.23 There is a high correlation between UPV and fc regardless the
3.8 type of mineral admixture (Fig. 11). The regression takes into
20
account LWC produced with different types of admixture (8% of sil-
3.4 10
ica fume SF; 1.3% of nanosilica NS; 22% and 40% of y ash FA)
0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55
tested at ages ranging from 7 to 180 days.
w/c
The densication of the porous structure was not detected in
350 kg/m3 450 kg/m3 525 kg/m3 400 kg/m3 LWC with silica fume or nanosilica, which was less efcient than
expected. It is likely that there was no effective dispersion of such
Fig. 8. fc and UPV versus the w/c ratio for LWC with Arlita and different water and
cement contents at 28 days (CEM I52.5). admixtures. Moreover, the strength limitation imposed by LWA
and the better quality of the aggregatepaste transition zone in
LWC also play a part in the lower efciency of SF and NS. It is also
shown that the replacement of cement by y ash leads to less
dense microstructures at early ages. However, this recovers over
8.5 75 Leca-UPV time and after some months the microstruture of y ash concrete
tends to be as dense as the reference LWC without admixtures.
Arlita-UPV
7.5 60 This is more clearly shown in Fig. 12, where both UPV and fc con-
Argex-UPV tinuously increased between 28 days and 180 days, due to the pro-
gressive development of the pozolanic reactions. These results
6.5 45 NWC-UPV conrm the ndings of Ulucan et al. [36] and Demirboga et al.
[23] for y ash NWC.
Leca-fc
5.5 30 The correlation is also high for LWC produced with different types
Arlita-fc of cement (Fig. 13). The data in Fig. 13 relates to LWC with Arlita and
4.5 15 different w/b ratios, tested at 28 days. It is thus shown that when a
Argex-fc given type of binder is used without interfering with the other con-
stituents of concrete, there appears to be little effect on the relation-
3.5 0 NWC-fc
200 250 300 350 400
ship between fc and UPV. Note, however, that SF was ineffective.

3.6. Inuence of the initial wetting conditions of LWA

Fig. 9. UPV and fc for different volumes of aggregate at 28 days.
Fig. 14 summarizes the data from LWC produced with LWA pre-
soaked for 24 h and with initially dry (PD) or pre-wetted LWA
(PW).
For ages between 3 and 180 days, the correlation is high in LWC
with Leca but less reasonable in LWC with Arlita, for which differ-
ences from the regression line are up to 5%. Therefore, one can only
conclude that there is no clear distinction between the different
wetting conditions. Contrary to what might be expected, lightweight
concretes with higher initial water content do not show higher
ultrasonic pulse velocities (A450 with pre-soaked LWA, Fig. 14). This
is probably because all the data are very close to each other and
small differences can be masked by the variability of the tests

70 A450
65 AFA22
Fig. 10. Relationship between UPV and fc for different w/c ratios (0.3, 0.35, 0.4, 0.45,
60 R = 0.87 AFA40
0.55) and volumes of aggregate (150, 250, 300, 350 and 400 L/m3) at 28 days.
ASF8
55
ANS
Moreover, the strength of LWC is more affected by the volume 50
L450
of aggregate than that of NWC. In other words, UPV and fc are both
45
affected by the propagation velocity and the strength of aggregate LFA22
and mortar. Therefore, there is a greater interdependence between 40 R = 0.93
LFA40
UPV and fc in LWC than in NWC. However, when LWC reaches its
35 LNS
ceiling strength the behavior may change. After a given strength
3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6
level a further increase of fc is not meaningful, contrary to what
happens with UPV. UPV (km/s)
The LWC with less porous aggregates exhibits similar behavior Fig. 11. Relationship between UPV and fc for LWC produced with different types of
to that of NWC. This is because the limit strength of higher density admixtures and tested at different ages (7180 days).
968 J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972

70 5.0 Leca 28d fc 70

60 Leca 180d fc A450

4.8 65
50 Arlita 28d fc
R = 0.64 A450 PW

UPV (km/s)
40 4.6 Arlita 180d fc 60
A450 PD
30 Leca 28d UPV
4.4 55
20 Leca 180d UPV L450
4.2 Arlita 28d UPV 50
10 L450 PW

0 4.0 Arlita 180d UPV 45 R = 0.83

L450 PD
0 22 40
% FA 40
4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6
Fig. 12. UPV and fc for 0%, 22% and 40% cement replacement by y ash (by weight)
at 28 and 180 days. UVP (km/s)

Fig. 14. Relationship between UPV and fc for LWC with Leca or Arlita with different
initial wetting conditions (3180 days).

60

55 CEM I 42.5

100
50 CEM II AL
90 y = 18.43x Leca
R = 0.86
45 CEM II AV R = 0.86 Arlita
80
Argex
40 CEM II AD 70 NWC
LWSC
CEM IV A 60
35 MND (Leca)
50 MND (Arlita)
30
3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 40
3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4
UPV (km/s)
UPV (km/s)
Fig. 13. Relation between UPV and fc for LWC with Arlita and different types of
cement and w/b ratio (28 days). Fig. 15. UPV as a function of fc and for different concrete compositions and types of
aggregate at ages between 3 and 90 days (Table A1).

themselves. The probably better quality of the interface aggregate
paste offered by non-pre-soaked LWA [27,37] may also play a part.
4. Proposed expression to estimate LWC compressive strength
from UPV
Taking into account Eq. (1), which relates UPV to Ed and q, and
the expression suggested by EN1992-1-1 [11] that relates Ec with fc
and q (Eq. (2)), the equation Eq. (8) can be obtained. The parame-
ters A, B and KUPV are constants. This is an approximate expression,
since Eq. (8) is given by combining a theoretical formula (Eq. (1))
with an empirical relation obtained from curve tting analyses
(Eq. (2)). The reasonable accuracy of Eq. (2) applied to LWC is dem-
onstrated in [27,38].
If we compare with Fig. 2, the application of Eq. (8) leads to a
signicant improvement of the correlation coefcient, even taking
different compositions, types of aggregate and test ages into ac-
count (Fig. 15). The approximation for LWC with more porous
aggregates (Argex) is poorer. This is probably because these con-
cretes work near their ceiling strength. For that reason, the corre-
lation coefcient indicated in Fig. 15 (0.86) only takes into
account the LWA with density above 1000 kg/m3. Also note that
better correlations should be obtained for concrete dry densities.
In fact, contrary to UPV, the modulus of elasticity is hardly affected
by the water content. However, even for Argex the correlation
coefcient would be 0.81. Therefore, expressions similar to Eq.
(9) allow a better estimation of fc from UPV and are practically
independent of the type of concrete and its composition. In Eq.
(9), UPV is in m/s and q in kg/m3.

s s
B  fcm 0:3  q 2
Ec 0:15
UPV  A   A: 2200
 K UPV fcm  q0:5 8
q q !2=3
UPV
The constant KUPV can be easily determined from the linear Fc  MPa 9
K UPVq0:5
regression analysis in Fig. 15. Wet density at 28 days was assumed
in Eq. (8). The difference is not signicant for other ages because all According to the regression analysis of Fig. 15, the KUPV is equal
the specimens were water-cured until the age of testing. The cor- to 54.6 or 54.3 m2.5 MPa0.15 kg0.5 s1, depending on whether Ar-
relation in Fig. 15 is determined by forcing the regression line to gex is included or not. Note that Eq. (9) is assessed for more than
cross the origin. Although better correlations can be obtained with- 200 results considering different types, volumes and wetting
out this condition, the physical meaning is distorted. conditions of aggregates, types and amounts of cement, types
 J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972 969

and volumes of admixtures, w/b ratios, the partial replacement of

(continued on next page)

q28days (kg/m3)
coarse and ne NA by LWA and also a range of test ages between
3 and 90 days (Table A1).

1899
1893
1915
1917

1913
1791
1868
1927

1944
1839
1913
1827
1854
1862

1888
1870

2106

1820

1908
1801
1780
2000
5. Conclusions

UPV90d (km/s)
The non-destructive ultrasonic pulse velocity method was
used to assess the mechanical compressive strength of LWC.

4.4/4.4b
4.4/4.5b

4.4/4.4b

4.3/4.3b
4.2/4.3b
4.4/4.4b
4.4/4.5b
4.2/4.3a
Based on a comprehensive experimental investigation involving

4.3
4.1
4.5
3.8
4.1
4.5

4.7
4.6
4.4
4.3

4.4
more than 80 different compositions the main conclusions are:

fc,90days (MPa)
 Calibrating curves for each type of concrete with a given type of

46.4/46.3b

46.9/48.3b

43.6/47.4b

47.5/47.6b
44.4/45. la

49.8/50.4b

40.7/44.4b
49.3/51b
aggregate must be previously established when the compressive
strength, fc, is to be directly estimated from UPV. More speci-

48.5
38.6
44.1
51.8

53.7
49.7
46.7
46.3

47.3
51.0
37.0

cally, independent curves have to be established for the same

CVUPV (%)
proportion of aggregate or the same mortar characteristics.
 LWCs with less porous aggregates are associated with lower

0.4
0.4
0.2
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.6
0.3
0.5
0.2
0.7
0.4
0.6

0.7
0.2
0.2

0.3
0.2
0.0

0.0
ultrasonic pulse velocity for a given fc and higher fc for a given
UPV.

UPV28 (km/s)
 The relationship between UPV and fc tends to be less affected
by the aggregate volume in LWC than in NWC. In LWC, the
propagation velocity of aggregate is closer to that of the sur-

4.2
4.3
4.4
4.3
3.9
4.5
3.7

4.4
4.6
4.5
4.4
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.3
4.2

4.3
4.3
4.0

4.0

4.0
4.0
rounding mortar, since it is less inuenced by a variation in

fc,28days (MPa)
the proportion of each phase. Moreover, both fc and UPV are
affected by the volume of aggregate, which is not true of
NWC. However, in LWC with more porous aggregates and rich

43.1
44.9
48.6

35.5
49.1
36.1
41.9
51.8
59.3
52.4

45.7
45.3
46.5
46.5
42.4
37.1
47.6
46.7
29.2
32.4
50.3
50.0
mortars there is a greater relative variation of UPV than fc.
 As expected, in lightweight concrete UPV and fc increase with
UPV7d (km/s)

age and decrease with the w/c ratio and volume of aggregate.
However, fc is little affected by the type of w/c ratio, unlike
UPV, which also depends on the proportion of mortar constit-
4.4

3.8
4.4
3.7

4.4
4.5
4.4
4.3

4.3
4.3

4.2
4.3
4.0

4.0
uents. UPV variations of over 100 m/s were obtained for a

given compressive strength.
fc,7days (MPa)

 The relation between UPV and fc was little affected by different

types of cement and additions or by different initial wetting
46.7

31.4
44.8
31.7
38.2
49.3
53.9
48.8
47.4
43.8

45.1
45.3

45.8
45.1
conditions of the aggregates.

UPV3d (km/s)

Finally, a new general simplied expression that allows a more

accurate estimate of fc from UPV was dened that was not af-
4.2a/4.3

fected by the type of concrete and its composition. A high corre-

3.8
4.4
3.6
3.9
4.3

4.3
4.2

4.3

lation coefcient of over 0.85 was obtained for common normal
and lightweight concrete ranging from 30 to 80 MPa and pro-
fc,3days (MPa)

41.3a/44.2

duced with aggregates of density above 1000 kg/m3, even taking

Mix proportions, ultrasonic pulse velocity, compressive strength and wet density.

into account more than 200 results for different types of aggre-
29.5
44.7

35.1
48.7

47.2
45.4
28.0

44.0

gate, concrete compositions and test ages.

This study contributes to a better understanding of the non-
Binder (kg/m3)

destructive ultrasonic pulse velocity method in LWAC, and en-

450(1.3%NS)
450(22%FA)
450(40%FA)
450(8%SF)

ables this technique to be used with greater condence. A more

accurate relation between fc and UPV is provided, regardless the
394

525

295
345
350

450

350
350
450
450
450
450
450
450
450
450
450
450

concrete composition, which improves the rational use of the

UPS method for LWC structures.
Cement type

II42.5 AL
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5

I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5
I42.5
I42.5

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank ICIST-IST for funding the research

c.a.d (L/m3)

and the companies Argex, Saint-Gobain Weber Portugal, Soarvamil

and SECIL for supplying the materials used in the experiments.
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
150
250

350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
300
400

The rst author also would like to acknowledge the nancial sup-
0.45

0.35

0.55
0.35
0.55
0.45

0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.65

port given by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technol-

w/b

0.4

0.3

0.3

0.6

ogy (FCT), under Grant SFRH/BD/27366/2006.

L295_I42.5
L345_I42.5
L350_0.55
L350_0.35
L450_0.55
L450_0.45
L450_0.30

L42.5IIAL
L450 PW
Mixtures

L450 PD
VL150
VL250
VL300
VL400

LFA22
LFA40

Appendix A. Appendix
Table A1

L394

L525
L350

L450

LSF8
Leca

LNS

See Table A1.

Table A1 (continued)

Mixtures w/b c.a.d (L/m3) Cement type Binder (kg/m3) fc,3days (MPa) UPV3d (km/s) fc,7days (MPa) UPV7d (km/s) fc,28days (MPa) UPV28 (km/s) CVUPV (%) fc,90days (MPa) UPV90d (km/s) q28days (kg/m3) 970
c
L345_sat7d 0.6 350 I42.5 345 31.8 3.9 0.2 1785
L345_satldc 0.6 350 I42.5 345 32.6 3.9 0.5 1696
L35 (MND) 0.35 350 I52.5 450 59.8 4.9 0.2 64.2 5.0 2209
L65 (MND) 0.35 350 I52.5 450 53.3 4.7 0.5 54.7 4.7 2077
LWSC
LS450 0.35 350 I52.5 450 37.5 3.8 0.5 37.2 3.8 1618
LS295_I42.5 0.65 350 I42.5 295 25.2 3.5 0.4 1458
LS345_I42.5 0.6 350 I42.5 345 27.5 3.6 0.1 1487
LS440_I42.5 0.45 350 I42.5 440 30.9 3.7 0.3 1501
LS460_I42.5 0.4 350 I42.5 460 34.8 3.7 0.1 1529
Normal weight aggregates (NA)
NA350 0.45 350 I52.5 350 65.8 5.0 0.2 71.4 5.0 2396
NA394 0.4 350 I52.5 394 71.6 5.0 0.8 74.7 5.1 2387
NA450 0.35 350 I52.5 450 71.6 5.0 76.2 5.1 0.2 81.1/85.lb 5.1/5.2b 2411
NA525 0.3 350 I52.5 525 81.6 5.1 0.2 89.7 5.2 2430
NA42.5AL 0.35 350 II42.5 AL 450 71.7 4.9 75.8 5.1 0.7 78.7 5.1 2409
VNA250 0.35 250 I52.5 450 69.9 4.9 74.2 5.0 0.3 2333
VNA300 0.35 300 I52.5 450 69.5 5.0 73.5 5.0 0.5 2382
VNA400 0.35 400 I52.5 450 72.6 5.0 75.6 5.2 0.7 2405
NA295_I42.5 0.65 350 I42.5 295 38.0 4.7 0.2 2351
NA345_I42.5 0.6 350 I42.5 345 41.1 4.8 0.2 2353
NA440_I42.5 0.45 350 I42.5 440 52.6 4.8 0.3 2368
NA460_I42.5 0.4 350 I42.5 460 59.2 4.9 0.5 2378
NA394 JVA 0.55 350 IVA42.5 394 37.8 4.7 0.6 2323
NA420 IVA 0.45 350 IVA42.5 420 50.3 4.8 0.2 2340
Argex
VArgex250 0.35 250 I52.5 450 36.4 4.3 37.1 4.4 38.7 4.4 0.2 39.2 4.7 1924
Argex450 0.35 350 I52.5 450 26.8a/28.4 4.1a/4.1 30.4 4.2 31.2 4.2 0.2 32.8 4.2 1776
VArgex400 0.35 400 I52.5 450 25.1 4.0 26.2 4.0 28.1 4.0 0.4 28.2 4.2 1631
Arilita
A350 0.45 350 I52.5 350 47.5 4.1 51.1 4.1 57.6 4.2 0.3 58.2 4.3 1942
A394 0.4 350 I52.5 394 53.1 4.2 57.1 4.2 62.6 4.3 0.2 62.9 4.4 1964
A450 0.35 350 I52.5 450 55.9a/58.4 4.2a/4.3 61.4 4.3 64.6 4.4 0.2 64.9/66.2b 4.4/4.5b 1982
A525 0.3 350 I52.5 525 62.5 4.3 65.7 4.4 68.5 4.5 0.3 70.3 4.6 1995
A350_0.35 0.35 350 I52.5 350 65.0 4.6 0.2 1995
J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972

A450_0.55 0.55 350 I52.5 450 29.9 3.7 37.0 3.8 43.9 3.9 0.3 48.6 3.9 1862
A450_0.45 0.45 350 I52.5 450 40.1 4.0 46.2 4.1 54.9 4.1 0.2 55.1 4.2 1892
A450_0.30 0.3 350 I52.5 450 63.9 4.5 70.6 4.5 72.1 4.6 0.4 74.7 4.6 2014
VA250_I42.5 0.35 250 I42.5 450 66.2 4.6 0.2 2022
VA400_I42.5 0.35 400 I42.5 450 63.8 4.4 0.3 1884
A42.5IIAL 0.35 350 II42.5 AL 450 53.4 4.3 60.0 4.4 0.2 64.4 4.4 1974
A450 PW 0.35 350 I52.5 450 56.9 4.2 58.8 4.4 63.5 4.3 0.3 67.0 4.6 1943
A450 PD 0.35 350 I52.5 450 62.2 4.4 65.1 4.4 0.2 65.0 4.6 1956
AFA22 0.35 350 I52.5 450(22%FA) 54.3 4.2 60.0 4.3 0.2 64.9/67.5b 4.3/4.4b 1959
AFA40 0.35 350 I52.5 450(40%FA) 41.2 4.0 46.1 4.0 54.3 4.1 0.6 61.5/63.9b 4.3/4.3b 1941
ASF8 0.35 350 I52.5 450(8%SF) 55.7 4.2 60.8 4.2 0.3 64.6 4.4 1931
ANS 0.35 350 I52.5 450(1.3%NS) 56.8 4.3 60.9 4.2 65.5 4.4 0.2 65.9/68b 4.5/4.5b 1976
A295_I42.5 0.65 350 I42.5 295 36.7 4.1 0.2 1872
A345_I42.5 0.6 350 I42.5 345 40.3 4.1 0.0 1872
A440_I42.5 0.45 350 I42.5 440 50.8 4.3 0.3 1901
A460_I42.5 0.4 350 I42.5 460 54.6 4.3 0.4 1913
A345_JIAL 0.6 350 I42.5 AL 345 39.2 4.1 0.4 1890
A440_JIAL 0.45 350 I42.5 AL 440 51.3 4.2 0.2 1896
A460_JIAL 0.4 350 I42.5 AL 460 54.1 4.2 0.2 1904
A345_JIAV 0.6 350 II42.5AV 345 35 3.9 0.3 1882
A394_JIAV 0.55 350 II42.5AV 394 39.1 3.9 0.4 1876
 J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972 971

References

[1] R.S. Ravindrarajah, Strength evaluation of high-strength concrete by

ultrasonic pulse velocity method, NDT E Int. 30 (4) (1997) 262.
1891 [2] A. Galan, Estimate of concrete strength by ultrasonic pulse velocity and
1854
1833
1868
1852
1886
2243
2115
2216
damping constant, ACI J. 64 (10) (1967) 678684.
[3] R. Sols-Carcao, E. Moreno, Evaluation of concrete made with crushed
limestone aggregate based on ultrasonic pulse velocity, Construct. Build.
Mater. 22 (6) (2008) 12251231.
[4] ACI 228.2R-98, Nondestructive test methods of evaluation of concrete in
structures, ACI Committee 228.
4.9 [5] M. Sansalone, W.B. Streett, Impact-echo Nondestructive Evaluation of
4.7
4.7
Concrete and Masonry, Bullbrier Press, Ithaca, NY, 1997.

[6] W.F. Price, J.P. Haynes, In situ strength testing of high strength concrete, Mag.
Concr. Res. 48 (176) (1996) 189197.
[7] S. Nazarian, M. Baker, K. Crain, Assessing quality of concrete with wave
propagation techniques, ACI Mater. J. 94-M35 (1997) 296305.
[8] Pundit, Pundit Manual for use with the Portable Ultrasonic Non-Destructive
75.9

71.2
70.6

Digital Indicating Tester, C.N.S. Electronics LTD, 1991.

[9] P. Anugonda, J.S. Wiehn, J.A. Turner, Diffusion of ultrasound in concrete,

Ultrasonics 39 (6) (2001) 429435.
[10] T.-P. Chang, H.-C. Lin, W.-T. Chang, J.-F. Hsiao, Engineering properties of
lightweight aggregate concrete assessed by stress wave propagation
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.2

methods, Cem. Concr. Compos. 28 (1) (2006) 5768.

[11] EN 1992, Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures Part 11: General rules
and rules for buildings, European Committee for standardization CEN, 2004.
[12] S. Popovics, J.L. Rose, J.S. Popovics, The behavior of ultrasonic pulses in
concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. (20) (1990) 259270.
4.1

4.1
4.2
3.9
4.2

4.7
4.5
4.0

5.0

[13] K.K. Phoon, T.H. Wee, C.S. Loi, Development of statistical quality assurance
criterion for concrete using ultrasonic pulse velocity method, ACI Mater. J.
96-M70 (1999) 568573.
[14] Y. Lin, S.-F. Kuo, C. Hsiao, C.-P. Lai, Investigation of pulse velocitystrength
relationship of hardened concrete, ACI Mat. J. 104-M38 (2007) 344350.
[15] A.E. Ben-Zeitun, Use of pulse velocity to predict compressive strength of
48.1
39.9
41.5

37.1
52.8
72.3
66.5
64.8
50.1

concrete, Int. J. Cem. Compos. Lightweight Concr. 8 (1) (1986) 5159.

[16] G. Trtnik, F. Kavcic, G. Turk, Prediction of concrete strength using ultrasonic
pulse velocity and articial neural networks, Ultrasonics 49 (2009) 5360.
[17] EN12504-4, Testing concrete-Part 4: Determination of pulse velocity,
European Committee for Standardization CEN, 2004.
[18] EN 13791, assessment of in situ compressive strength in structures and
precast concrete components. European Committee for Standardization CEN,
4.5

2007.
[19] S. Popovics, J. Popovics, A critique of the ultrasonic pulse velocity method for
testing concrete, NDT E Int. 30 (4) (1997) 260.
[20] T.P. Philippidis, D.G. Aggelis, Experimental study of wave dispersion and
attenuation in concrete, Ultrasonics 43 (7) (2005) 584595.
61.1

[21] V. Sturrup, F. Vecchio, H. Caratin, Pulse velocity as a measure of concrete

compressive strength, Situ/Nondestruct. Testing Concr. ACI SP-82 (1984)

201227.
[22] D.A. Anderson, R.K. Seals, Pulse velocity as a predictor of 28 and 90 day
strength, J. Am. Concr. Inst. 80 (2) (1981) 116122.
[23] R. Demirboga, I. Trkmen, M.B. Karako, Relationship between ultrasonic
velocity and compressive strength for high-volume mineral-admixtured

concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 34 (12) (2004) 23292336.

[24] K.W. Nasser, A.A. Al-Manaseer, Comparison of Nondestructive testers of
hardened concrete, ACI Mater. J. 84-M38 (1987) 374380.
[25] M. Hamidian, M. Shariati, M.M.K. Arabnejad, H. Sinaei, Assessment of high
strength and light weight aggregate concrete properties using ultrasonic
pulse velocity technique, Int. J. Phys. Sci. 6 (22) (2011) 52615266.

[26] H. Tanyidizi, A. Coskun, Determination of the principal parameter of

ultrasonic pulse velocity and compressive strength of lightweight
concrete by using variance method, Russ. J. Nondestr. Test. 44 (9) (2008)
639646.
[27] J.A. Bogas. Characterization of structural lightweight expanded clay
345
394

394
420

420

420
450
450
702

aggregate concrete. PhD thesis in civil engineering, Technical University of

Lisbon, Instituto Superior Tcnico, Portugal (in Portuguese), 2011.
[28] J.A. Bogas, A. Mauricio, M.F.C. Pereira, Microstructural analysis of Iberian
expanded clay aggregates, Microsc. Microanal. 18 (2012) 11901208.
II42.5 AD
II42.5 AD
II42.5 AD
II42.5AV

IIVA42.5
IIVA42.5

[29] J.A. Bogas, A. Gomes, M.G. Gloria, Estimation of water absorbed by expanding
clay aggregates during structural lightweight concrete production, Mater.
I52.5
I52.5
I52.5

Struct. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1617/s11527-012-9857-7.

[30] EN 197-1, Cement Part 1: Composition, specications and conformity
criteria for common cements. European Committee for Standardization CEN,
Oneorseven days water-cured.
Results obtained at 180 days.

2011.
[31] EN 12390-3, Testing hardened concrete Part 3: Compressive strength of
Results obtained at l day.
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350

test specimens, European Committee for Standardization CEN, 2009.

c.a. coarse aggregate.
0

[32] J. Mller-Rochholz, Determination of the elastic properties of lightweight

aggregate by ultrasonic pulse velocity measurements, Int. J. Lightweight
0.45

0.55
0.45
0.55
0.45
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.6

Concr. 1 (2) (1979) (Lancaster, UK).

[33] A.A. Ikpong, The relationship between the strength and non-
Mortar 0.35

destructive parameters of rice husk ash concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 23

A35 (MND)
A65 (MND)
A345_JIAD
A394_JIAD
A420_JIAD
A420_JIAV

A394_JVA
A420_JVA

(1993) 387398.
[34] E. Ohdaira, N. Masuzawa, Water content and its effect on ultrasound
propagation in concrete the possibility of NDE, Ultrasonics 38 (2000) 546
552.
c
b
a

d
972 J.A. Bogas et al. / Ultrasonics 53 (2013) 962972

[35] J.A. Bogas, A. Gomes, Compressive behavior and failure modes of structural
lightweight aggregate concrete Characterization and strength prediction,
Mater. Des. 46 (2013) 832841.
[36] Z.. Ulucan, K. Trk, M. Karata, Effect of mineral admixtures on the correlation
between ultrasonic velocity and compressive strength for self-compacting
concrete, Russ. J. Nondestr. Test. 44 (5) (2008) 367374.
[37] J. Punkki, O. Gjorv. Effect of aggregate absorption on properties of high-
strength lightweight concrete, in: I. Holand et al. (Eds.), International
Symposium on Structural Lightweight Aggregate Concrete, 2024 June.
Sandefjord, Norway, 1995, pp. 604616.
[38] T. Faust, The behaviour of structural LWC in compression, in: S. Helland et al.
(Eds.), Second International Symposium on Structural Lightweight Aggregate
Concrete, 1822 June. Kristiansand, Norway, 2000, pp. 512521.