Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BAGHDAD IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIRMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING
By
October 2008
Shawal 1429
Certification
Name: (Chairman)
Thamir
K.
Mahmoud
/ 10 / 2008
Signature: Signature: Name: Dr. Rafa'a Mahmoud Abbas Name: Ass. prof. Dr. Ihsan Al-Sharbaf
Date: (Member) / 10 / 2008 Date: (Member) / 10 / 2008
Signature: Name: Dr.Abdul Muttalib I.Said Al-Musawi (Supervisor) Date: /10 / 2008 Approved by the Dean of the College of Engineering Signature: Name: Prof. Dr. Ali Al-Kiliddar Dean of the College of Engineering, University of Baghdad Date: / 10 / 2008
Abstract
Statistical experimental program has been carried out in the present study in order to establish a fairly accurate relation between the ultrasonic pulse velocity and the concrete compressive strength. The program involves testing of concrete cubes and prisms cast with specified test variables. The variables are the age of concrete, density of concrete, salt content in fine aggregate, water cement ratio, type of ultrasonic test and curing method (normal and high pressure stream curing). In this research, the samples have been tested by direct and surface (indirect) ultrasonic pulse each sample to measure the wave velocity in concrete and the compressive strength for each sample. The results have been used as input data in statistical program (SPSS) to predict the best equation which can represent the relation between the compressive strength and the ultrasonic pulse velocity. The number of specimens in this research is 626 and an exponential equation is proposed for this purpose. The statistical program is used to prove which type of test for UPV is better ,the surface ultrasonic pulse velocity (SUPV) or the direct ultrasonic pulse velocity (DUPV) to represent the relation between the ultrasonic pulse velocity and the concrete compressive strength. In this work, some of the concrete mix properties and variables are studied to find its future effect on the relation between the ultrasonic pulse velocity and the concrete compressive strength. These properties like slump of the concrete mix and salt content are discussed by classifying the work results data into groups depending on the variables (mix slump and salt content) to study the capability of finding a private
Abstract
relation between the ultrasonic pulse velocity and the concrete compressive strength depending on these variables. Comparison is made between the two types of curing which have been applied in this study (normal and high pressure steam curing with different pressures (2, 4 and 8 bars) to find the effect of curing type on the relation between the ultrasonic pulse velocity and the concrete compressive strength.
List of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENTs.....V ABSTRACT ....VI LIST OF CONTENTS.VIII LIST OF SYMBOLS .... XI LIST OF FIGURES..XII LIST OF TABLES...XVI CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1-1 General.....1 1-2 Objectives.1 1-3 Thesis Layout...2 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2-1 Introduction....3 2-2 Standards on Determination of Ultrasonic Velocity in Concrete ...4 2-3 Testing Procedure......5 2-4 Energy Transmission.7 2-5 Attenuation of Ultrasonic Waves.8 2-6 Pulse Velocity Tests ..9 2-7 In Situ Ultrasound Testing...9 2-8 Longitudinal and Lateral Velocity ...10 2-9 Characteristics of Ultrasonic Waves....10 2-10 Pulse Velocity and Compressive Strength at Early Ages..13 2-11 Ultrasonic and Compressive Strength.............................................14 2-12 Ultrasonic and Compressive Strength with Age at Different Curing Temperatures....16 2-13 Autoclave Curing .18 2-14 The Relation between Temperature and Pressure 18 2-15 Shorter Autoclave Cycles for Concrete Masonry Units....20 2-16 Nature of Binder in Autoclave Curing.............................................20 2-17 Relation of Binders to Strength...21 2-18 Previous Equations ....22 CHAPTER THREE: Experimental Program 23 3-1 Introduction23 3-2 Materials Used 23 3-2-1 Cements......23
VIII
List of Contents
3-2-2 Sand ...24 3-2-3 Gravel .25 3-3 Curing Type..26 3-4 The Curing Apparatus.26 3-5 Shape and Size of Specimen.28 3-6 Test Procedure..30 3-7 The Curing Process..31 CHAPTER FOUR: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 33 4-1 Introductions...33 4-2 The Experimental Results.33 4-3 Discussion of the Experimental Results...44 4-3-1 Testing Procedure (DUPV or SUPV) .44 4-3-2 Slump of the Concrete Mix ..46 4-3-3 Coarse Aggregate Graded .50 4-3-4 Salt Content in Fine Aggregate51 4-3-5 Relation between Compressive Strength and UPV Based on Slump: .55 4-3-6 Water Cement Ratio (W/C) ...59 4-3-7 Age of the Concrete...59 4-3-8 Density of Concrete...60 4-3-9 Pressure of Steam Curing ......62 4-4 Results Statistical Analysis.63 4-4-1 Introduction .63 4-4-2 Statistical modeling...64 4-5 Selection of Predictor Variables...64 4-6 The Model Assessment66 4-6-1 Goodness of Fit Measures .66 4-6-2 Diagnostic Plots.....67 4-7The Compressive Strength Modeling.68 4-7-1 Normal Curing Samples 68 4-7-2 Salt Content in Fine Aggregate....76 4-7-3 Steam Pressure Curing.77 CHAPTER FIVE: VERVICATION THE PROPOSED EQUATION 5-1. Introduction.....80 5-2. Previous Equations..80 5-2-1 Raouf, Z.A. Equation...80 5-2-2 Deshpande et al. Equation...81 5-2-3 Jones, R. Equation81 5-2-4 Popovics S. Equation81 5-2-5 Nash't et al. Equation.82 5-2-6 Elvery and lbrahim Equation...83
IX
List of Contents
5-3 Case Studies...83 5-3-1 Case study no. 1 83 5-3-2 Case study no. 2..86 5-3-3 Case study no. 3..87 5-3-4 Case study no. 4..88 CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6-1 Conclusion 91 6-2 Recommendations for Future Works.93 REFERENCES....94 ABSTRACT IN ARABIC
List of Symbols
Symbol PUNDIT UPV DUPV SUPV W/C C SO3 DE A R2 Meaning Portable Ultrasonic Non-Destructive Digital Indicating Test Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (km/s) Direct Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (km/s) Surface Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (Indirect) (km/s) Water Cement Ratio by Weight (%) Compressive Strength (Mpa) Salts Content in Fine Aggregate (%) Density of the Concrete (gm/cm3) Age of Concrete (Day) Percent Variation of the Criterion Variable Explained By the Suggested Model (Coefficient of Multiple Determination) Measure of how much variation in ( y ) is left unexplained by the proposed model, and it is equal to the error sum of squares= ( yi yi )2
yi yi
SSE
Actual value of criterion variable for the (i th ) case Regression prediction for the (i th ) case. Quantities measure of the total amount of variation in observed
SST
Mean observed ( y ) . Sample size. Total number of the predictor variables. Surface ultrasonic wave velocity (km/s) (for high pressure steam curing) Surface ultrasonic wave velocity (km/s) (with salt)
XI
n k ~ S
List of Figures
No. (2-1) PUNDIT apparatus (2-2) (2-3) Different positions of transducer placement Forms of the wave surface: a) plane wave, b) cylindrical wave, c) spherical wave (2-4) Comparison of pulse-velocity with compressive strength for specimens from a wide variety of mixes (Whitehurst, 1951). (2-5) Typical strength and pulse-velocity developments with age, (Elvery and lbrahim, 1976) (2-6) (A and B) strength and pulse- velocity development curves for concretes cured at different temperatures, respectively,
(Elvery and lbrahim, 1976)
Title
Page 6 7 12
15
16 17
(2-7)
19 19 22
(2-8) (2-9)
Relation between temperature and pressure of saturated steam from (ACI Journal,1965) Relation of compressive strength to curing time of Portland cement pastes containing optimum amounts of reactive siliceous material and cured at various temperatures (data from Menzel,1934)
Autoclaves no.1 used in the study Autoclave no.2 used in the study Autoclaves no.3 used in the study The shape and the size of the samples used in the study The PUNDIT which used in this research with the direct reading position
26 27 27 29 31
XII
List of Figures
No. (4-1)
Title Relation between (SUPV and DUPV) with the compressive strength for all samples subjected to normal curing
Page 45
(4-2)
Relation between (SUPV) and the concrete age for Several slumps are (W/C) =0.4
47
(4-3)
Relation between the compressive strength and the Concrete age for several slump are (W/C) =0.4
47
(4-4)
Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for several slumps are (W/C) =0.4
48 48
(4-5)
Relation between (SUPV) and the concrete age for Several slump are (W/C) =0.45
(4-6)
Relation between the compressive strength and the Concrete age for several slump are (W/C) =0.45
49
(4-7)
Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for several slump were (W/C) =0.45
49
(4-8)
(A) and (B) show the relation between (UPV) and the compressive strength for single-sized and graded coarse aggregate are (W/C =0.5).
50
(4-9)
Relation between (SUPV) and the concrete age for several slump were (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=0.34%) in the fine aggregate .
51
(4-10) Relation between the compressive strength and Concrete age for several slumps are (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=0.34%) in the fine aggregate
52
XIII
List of Figures
No. (4-11) Title Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for several slump were (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=0.34%) in fine aggregate . (4-12) Relation between (SUPV) and the concrete age for several slumps are (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=4.45%) in fine aggregate (4-13) Relation between the compressive strength and the Concrete age for several slumps are (W/C =0.5) and 53 53 Page 52
(SO3=4.45%) in fine aggregate (4-14) Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for several slump were (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=4.45%) in the fine aggregate (4-15) A and B show the relation between (DUPV and SUPV) respectively with the compressive strength for (SO3=4.45, 2.05 and 0.34%) for all samples cured normally (4-16) Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for several slumps (4-17) Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for several combined slumps (4-18) Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for several (W/C) ratios (4-19) Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for density range (2.3 -2.6) gm/cm3 (4-20) Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for three pressures steam curing 62 61 59 57 56 54 53
XIV
List of Figures
No. (4-21) (4-22) (4-23) (4-24) (4-25) (4-26) Title Diagnostic plot for compressive strength (Model no. 1) Diagnostic plot for compressive strength (Model no. 2) Diagnostic plot for compressive strength (Model no. 3) Diagnostic plot for compressive strength (Model no. 4) Diagnostic plot for compressive strength (Model no. 5) The relation between compressive strength vs. SUPV for different steam curing pressure (2, 4 and 8 bar) (4-27) The relation between compressive strength vs. SUPV for normal curing and different steam curing pressure (2, 4 and 8 bar and all pressures curing samples combined together) (5-1) Relation between compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity for harden cement past, Mortar, And Concrete, in dry and a moist concrete, (Nevill, 1995) based on (Sturrup et al. 1984) (5-2) Relation between compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity for proposed and previous equations. (5-3) Relation between compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity for proposed and popovics equation. (5-4) Relation between compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity for proposed equation and deshpande et al. equation (5-5) Relation between compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity for proposed equation as exp. curves and kliegers data as points for the two proposed slumps 90 88 87 85 84 79 Page 70 71 72 73 74 78
XV
List of Tables
Page 24 25 25 29 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 46 58 60 61 65 65 C-Continued D- Experimental results of cubes and prism (Pressure steam curing 8 bars). The comparison between SUPV and DUPV 2 values for different slump The correlation factor and R combination The correlation coefficients for different ages of concrete The correlation coefficients for different density ranges Statistical Summary for predictor and Criteria Variables Correlation Matrix for predictor and Criteria Variables B-Continued. C- Experimental results of cubes and prism (Pressure steam curing 4 bars). (4-1) Title Chemical and physical properties of cements OPC and S.R.P.C. Grading and characteristics of sands used Grading and characteristics of coarse aggregate used Effect of specimen dimensions on pulse transmission (BS 1881: Part 203:1986) No. (3-1) (3-2) (3-3) (3-4)
(4-1) (4-1) A- Experimental results of cubes and prism (normally curing) (4-1) A-Continued (4-1) A-Continued (4-1) A-Continued (4-1) A-Continued B- Experimental results of cubes and prism (Pressure steam (4-1) curing 2 bars).
XVI
List of Tables
Title
No.
XVII
List of Tables
69 69 Correlation matrix for Predictor and Criteria Variables. 76 77 Correlation Matrix for Predictor and Criteria Variables. 78 84 86 Correlation Matrix for Predictor and Criteria Variables for different pressure. Correlation Matrix for Different Pressure Equations. The comprising data from Neville (1995). Based on (Sturrup et al. 1984) results. Correlation factor for proposed and previous equations Kliegers (Compressive Strength and UPV) (1957) data. 86 89 Kliegers (1957) data. (5-1) (5-2) (5-3) (5-4) (4-10) (4-11) (4-12) Models equations from several variables (Using SPSS program) (4-8) (4-9)
XVIII
Chapter One
1
Introduction
1-1 GENERAL:
There are many test methods to assess the strength of concrete in situ, such us non-destructive tests methods (Schmidt Hammer and Ultrasonic Pulse Velocityetc). These methods are considered indirect and predicted tests to determine concrete strength at the site. These tests are affected by many parameters that depending on the nature of materials used in concrete production. So, there is a difficulty to determine the strength of hardened concrete in situ precisely by these methods. In this research, the ultrasonic pulse velocity test is used to assess the concrete compressive strength. From the results of this research it is intended to obtain a statistical relationship between the concrete compressive strength and the ultrasonic pulse velocity. 1-2 THESIS OBJECTIVES: To find an acceptable equation that can be used to measure the compressive strength from the ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV), the following objectives are targeted: The first objective is to find a general equation which relates the SUPV and the compressive strength for normally cured concrete. A privet equation depending on the slump of the concrete mix has been found, beside that an
(1)
Chapter One
equation for some curing types methods like pressure steam curing has been found. The second objective is to make a statistical analysis to find a general equation which involves more parameters like (W/C ratio, age of concrete, SO3 content and the position of taking the UPV readings (direct ultrasonic pulse velocity (DUPV) or surface ultrasonic pulse velocity (SUPV)). The third objective is to verify the accuracy of the proposed equations. 1-3 THESIS LAYOUT: The structure of the remainder of the thesis is as follows: Chapter two reviews the concepts of ultrasonic pulse velocity, the compressive strength, the equipments used and the methods that can be followed to read the ultrasonic pulse velocity. Reviewing the remedial works for curing methods , especially using the high pressure steam curing methods, and finally Review the most famous published equation's authors how work in finding the relation between the compressive strength and the ultrasonic pulse velocity ,comes next. Chapter three describes the experimental work and the devices that are developed in this study to check the effect of the pressure and heat on the ultrasonic and the compressive strength. And chapter four presents the study of the experimental results and their statistical analysis to propose the best equation between the UPV and the compressive strength. Chapter five includes case studies examples chosen to check the reliability of the proposed equation by comparing these proposed equations with previous equations in this field. Finally, Chapter six gives the main conclusions obtained from the present study and the recommendations for future work.
(2)
Chapter Two 2
Review of Literature
2-1 Introduction:
Ultrasonic pulse velocity test is a non-destructive test which is performed by sending high-frequency wave (over 20 kHz) through the media. By following the principle that a wave travels faster in denser media than in the looser one, an engineer can determine the quality of material from the velocity of the wave this can be applied to several types of materials such as concrete, wood, etc. Concrete is a material with a very heterogeneous composition. This heterogeneousness is linked up both to the nature of its constituents (cement, sand, gravel, reinforcement) and their dimensions, geometry or/and distribution. It is thus highly possible that defects and damaging should exist. Non Destructive Testing and evaluation of this material have motivated a lot of research work and several syntheses have been proposed. (Corneloup and Garnier, 1995). The compression strength of concrete can be easily measured; it has been evaluated by several authors Keiller (1985), Jenkins (1985) and Swamy (1984) from non- destructive tests. The tests have to be easily applied in situ control case. These evaluation methods are based on the capacity of the surface material to absorb the energy of a projected object or on the resistance to extraction of the object anchored in the concrete (Anchor Edge Test) or better on the propagation
(3)
Chapter Two
of acoustic waves (acoustic emission, impact echo, ultrasounds).The acoustic method allows an in core examination of the material. Each type of concrete is a particular case and has to be calibrated. The nondestructive measurements have not been developed because there is no general relation. The relation with the compression strength must be correlated by means of preliminary tests. (Garnier and Corneloup, 2007)
DIN/ISO 8047 (Entwurf) "Hardened Concrete - Determination of Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity". ACI Committee 228, In-Place Methods to Estimate Concrete Strength (ACI 228.1R-03), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2003, 44 pp.
"Testing of Concrete - Recommendations and Commentary" by N. Burke in Deutscher Ausschuss fur Stahlbeton (DAfStb), Heft 422, 1991, as a supplement to DIN/ISO 1048. ASTM C 597-83 (07) "Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity through Concrete" BS 1881: Part 203: 1986 "Testing Concrete - Recommendations for Measurement of Velocity of Ultrasonic Pulses In Concrete" RILEM/NDT 1 1972 "Testing of Concrete by the Ultrasonic Pulse Method" GOST 17624-87 "Concrete Ultrasonic Method for Strength
Determination".
(4)
Review of Literature
STN 73 1371 "Method for ultrasonic pulse testing of concrete" in Slovak (Identical with the Czech CSN 73 1371) MI 07-3318-94 "Testing of Concrete Pavements and Concrete Structures by Rebound Hammer and By Ultrasound" Technical Guidelines in Hungarian.
The eight standards and specifications show considerable similarities for the measurement of transit time of ultrasonic longitudinal (direct) pulses in concrete. Nevertheless, there are also differences. Some standards provide more details about the applications of the pulse velocity, such as strength assessment, defect detection, etc. It has been established, however that the accuracy of most of these applications, including the strength assessment, is unacceptably low. Therefore it is recommended that future standards rate the reliability of the applications. Moreover, the present state of ultrasonic concrete tests needs improvement. Since further improvement can come from the use of surface and other guided waves, advanced signal processing techniques, etc., development of standards for these is timely. (Popovecs et al., 1997)
(5)
Chapter Two
Figure (2-1) PUNDIT apparatus The time that the wave takes to travel is read out from PUNDIT display and the velocity of the wave can be calculated as follows:
V=L/T
(2-1)
Where V = Velocity of the wave, km/sec. L = Distance between transducers, mm. T = Traveling time, sec.
Placing the transducers to the concrete element can be done in three formats, as shown in figure (2-2).
(6)
Review of Literature
1. Direct Transducer
2. Semi-Direct Transducer
2- 4 Energy Transmission:
Some of the energy of the input signal is dispersed into the concrete and not picked up by the receiver; another part is converted to heat. That part which is transported directly from the input to the output transmitter can be measured by evaluating the amplitude spectrum of all frequencies. The more stiff the material the larger the transmitted energy, the more viscous the less. The Ultrasonic signals are not strong enough to transmit a measured energy up to about an age of (6 h) for the reference concrete. However, the mix has been set already and it is not workable anymore. This means that the energy
(7)
Chapter Two
transmission from the ultrasonic signals can not be used as a characterizing property at early age. (Reinhardt and Grosse, 1996)
The weakening of the ultrasonic wave is usually characterized by the wave attenuation coefficient (), which determines the change of the acoustic pressure after the wave has traveled a unitary distance through the given medium. In solids, the loss of energy is related mainly to absorption and dispersion. The attenuation coefficient is described by the relation: =1+2 where: 1 = the attenuation coefficient that describes how mechanical energy is converted into thermal energy, and 2 = the attenuation coefficient that describes the decrease of wave energy due to reflections and refractions in various directions. ( Garbacz and Garboczi ,2003) (2-2)
(8)
Review of Literature
Chapter Two
In
ultrasonic
testing,
two
essential
problems
are
posed.
On one hand, bringing out the ultrasonic indicator and the correlation with the material damage, and on the other hand, the industrialization of the procedure with the implementation of in situ testing. The ultrasonic indicators are used to measure velocity and/or attenuation measures, but their evaluations are generally uncertain especially when they are carried out in the field. (Refai and Lim, 1992)
(10)
Review of Literature
In all the above listed applications of ultrasound testing, the vibrations of the medium can be described by a sinusoidal wave of small amplitude. This type of vibration can be described using the wave equation:
2a 2a = C2 2 t 2 x
where:
(2-3)
a = instantaneous particle displacement in m t = time in seconds C = wave propagation velocity in m/s x = position coordinate (path) in m.
The vibrations of the medium are characterized by the following parameters: - Acoustic velocity, = velocity of vibration of the material particles around the position of equilibrium: = da/dt = Acos( t ) (2-4)
where:
a, t are as above;
= 2f : the angular frequency in rad/s;
- Wave period, t = time after which the instantaneous values are repeated. - Wave frequency, f = inverse of the wave period:
(11)
Chapter Two
f = 1/T in Hz,
(2-5)
- Wave length, = the minimum length between two consecutive vibrating particles of the same phase =c.T = c/f (2-6)
In a medium without boundaries, ultrasonic waves are propagated spatially from their source. Neighboring material vibrating in the same phase forms the wave surface. The following types of waves are distinguished depending on the shape of the wave as shown in figure (2-3).
Figure (2-3) - Forms of the wave surface: a) plane wave, b) cylindrical wave, c) spherical wave - Plane wave the wave surface is perpendicular to the direction of the wave propagation. - Cylindrical wave the wave surfaces are coaxial cylinders and the source of the waves is a straight line or a cylinder - Spherical waves the wave surfaces are concentric spherical surfaces. The waves are induced by a small size (point) source; deflection of the particles is decreased proportionally to its distance from the source. For large
(12)
Review of Literature
distances from the source, a spherical wave is transformed into a plane wave. (Garbacz and Garboczi, 2003)
Chapter Two
A transducer is positioned in a hole in each end of the mould and aligned along the centerline of the specimen. They have not mention in their investigation the effect of the steel mould on the wave front of the pulses sent through the fresh concrete inside the mould .Bearing in mind that in the case of 50 KHz transducer which they have used, the angle of directivity becomes very large and the adjacent steel sides will affect the pulse velocity. Vander and Brant (1977) have carried out experiments to study the behavior of different cement types used in combination with additives, using PNDIT with one transducer being immersed inside the fresh concrete which is placed inside a conical vessel. They have concluded that the method of pulse measurement through fresh concrete is still in its infancy with strong proof that it can be valuable sights on the behavior of different cement type in combination with additives.( Raouf and Ali ,1983).
(14)
Review of Literature 75.9 69.0 Compressive Strength, (Mpa) 62.1 55.2 48.3 41.4 34.5 27.6 20.7 13.8 3.9 4.2 4.5 4.8 5.1 5.4 Pulse Velocity km/s
Figure (2-4) - Comparison of pulse-velocity with compressive strength for specimens from a wide variety of mixes. (Whitehurst, 1951) Another study regarding the interdependence between the velocity of L-waves (DUPV) and compressive strength has been presented by Pessiki and Carino (1988). Within the scope of this work, concrete mixtures with different watercement ratios and aggregate contents cured at three different temperatures are examined. The L-wave velocity is determined by using the impact-echo method in a time range of up to 28 days. And they have found that at early ages, the Lwave (DUPV) velocity increases at a faster rate when compared with the compressive strength and at later ages the strength is the faster developing quantity. L-wave velocity (DUPV) is found to be a sensitive indicator of the changes in the compressive strength up to 3 days after mixing. Popovics et al., (1998) have determined the velocity of L-waves and surface waves by one-sided measurements. Moreover, L-wave velocity (DUPV) is measured by through-thickness measurements for verification purposes. It is observed that the surface wave velocity is indicative of changes in compressive
(15)
Chapter Two
strength up to 28 days of age. The velocity of L-waves (DUPV) measurements is found to be not suitable for following the strength development because of its inherent large scatter when compared with the through-thickness velocity measurements.
2-12 Ultrasonic and Compressive Strength with Age at Different Curing Temperatures:
At the early age the rate of strength development with age does not follow the same pattern of the pulse-velocity development over the whole range of strength and velocity considered. To illustrate this, Elvery and lbrahim (1976) have drawn a typical set of results for one concrete mix cured at a constant temperature as shown in figure (2-5). In this figure, the upper curve represents the velocity development and the other represents the strength development. They have also found that at later ages the effect of curing temperature becomes much less pronounced. Beyond about 10 days, the pulse velocity is the same for all curing temperatures from 5 to 30 oC where the aggregate/cement ratio is equal to (5) and water /cement ratio is equal to (0.45), as shown in figure (2-6).
Figure (2-5) - Typical strength and pulse-velocity developments with age. (Elvery and lbrahim, 1976)
(16)
Review of Literature
Age of concrete
Age of Concrete
(B) Pulse-velocity development curves for concretes cured at different temperatures Figure (2-6) - (A and B) strength and pulse- velocity development curves for concretes cured at different temperatures, respectively. (Elvery and lbrahim, 1976)
(17)
Chapter Two
Pre-steaming period Heating (temperaturerise period with buildup of pressure) Maximum temperature period (hold) Pressure-release period (blow down)
(18)
Review of Literature
Figure (2-7) - Relation between temperature and pressure in autoclave (Surgey et al., 1972) And for the low pressure < 6 bar, the figure (2-7) can be used to estimate the corresponding temperature.
21.0
17.5
14.0
10.5
7.0
3.5
100
110
121
132
143
154
166
177
188
199
210
Tempreture, oC
Figure (2-8) - Relation between temperature and pressure of saturated steam (ACI Journal, 1965)
(19)
Chapter Two
Review of Literature
10-30 percent silica-decreasing 2CaO.SiO2 .H 2 O and increasing tober-morite 30-40 percent silica-tobermorite 40-100 percent silica-decreasing tobermorite and increasing unreacted silica
In 1934, Menzel's results for curing temperatures of 250 F(121 oC), 300 F (149 oC) and 350 F (176 oC) are reproduced in figure (2-9), the specimens have been 2 in (5 cm) cubes made with silica passing sieve no. 200, (30 percent silica and 70 percent cement ) and the time is the total time at full pressure. (The temperature rise and the cooling portions of the cycle are not included) (ACI committee 516, 1965). The curing at 350 F (176 oC) has a marked advantage in strength attainable in any curing period investigated; curing at 300 F (149 oC) gives a significantly lower strength than the curing at 350 F (176 oC). Curing at 250 F (121 oC) is definitely inferior. Families of curves similar to those shown in figure (2-9) can be plotted for pastes other than those with the optimum silica content. Curves for 30-50 percent silica pastes show strength rising most rapidly with respect to time when curing temperatures are in the range of 250-350 F (121-176 oC) (Menzel, 1934). However, such curves for pastes containing no reactive siliceous material have a different relationship. Such curves show that strengths actually decrease as maximum curing temperatures increase in the same range.
(21)
Chapter Two
Curing time, hr
Figure (2-9)- Relation of compressive strength to curing time of Portland cement pastes containing optimum amounts of reactive siliceous material and cured at various temperatures (Menzel,1934)
The detailing of these equations and the verification with the proposed equations will illustrate in chapter five. In spite of that, ACI 228.1R-03 recommended to develop an adequate strength relationship by taking at least 12 cores and determinations of pulse velocity near by location the core taken with five replicate. The use of the ACI in-place method may only be economical if a large volume of concrete is to be evaluated.
(22)
Chapter Three
3
Experimental Program
3-1 Introduction:
This chapter includes a brief description of the materials that have been used and the experimental tests carried out according to the research plan to observe the development of concrete strength during time to compare it with Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV) change. The physical and chemical tests of the fine and coarse aggregate tests have been carried out in the materials laboratory of the Civil Engineering Department of the University of Baghdad. Three gradings of sand have been used with different salt contain. Five grading of coarse aggregate made by distributing the gravel on the sieves and re-form the specified grading in order to observe the influence of the aggregate type on the Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV) and compressive strength of concrete. In this research, two methods of curing are used: normal and high pressure steam curing, for high pressure steam curing, composed autoclave has been made.
(23)
Chapter three
S.R.P.C
Limits of IQS
(5-1984) ____ ____ ____ ____
5.0
2.8 4.0
= 230
= 45 10
290 92 3:30
Fineness (Blaine) cm2/gm Initial setting time (min) Final setting time (Hrs:min) Compressive Strength (Mpa)
= 15 = 23
15.64 23.71
=15 =23
16.55 25.74
3 days 7 days
3-2-2 Sand: Three natural types of sand are used. Its grading and other characteristics are conformed with IQS (No.45-1980) and BS 882:1992 as shown in Table (3-2).
(24)
Experimental Program
Passing Percentage %
Type 1
100 94.76 88.38 79 65.55 17.17 3.79
Type 2
100 99.96 99.86 75.60 44.46 5.02 1.59
Type 3
100 94.69 88.32 78.99 65.50 17.57 3.72
Properties
Fineness Modulus SO3 %
2.51 4.45
value
2.74 0.34 2.52 2.05
IQS limits
0.5
3-2-3 Gravel: For this research, different graded and maximum size coarse aggregate are prepared to satisfy the grading requirements of coarse aggregate according to IQS (45-1980) and BS 882:1992.The coarse aggregate grading and characteristics are given in Table (3-3) Table (3-3) - Grading and characteristics of coarse aggregate used
Sieve
Passing Percentage %
Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5
BS limits 882:1992
Graded aggregate< 20 Single sized aggregate
100 70 40 10 0
100 100 70 40 0
So3 %
0.095
0.1
(25)
Chapter three
Autoclaves
Experimental Program
Figure (3-3) - Autoclaves no.3 used in the study The autoclave working with a pressure of 8 bars curing pressure is designated as (no.1) and the other which work with a pressure of 2 bars
(27)
Chapter three
curing pressure as (no.2) and the manufactured autoclave which have been designed to reach 4 bars curing pressure as (no.3). The autoclave (no.3) manufactured in order to reach a middle state between autoclave (no.1) and autoclave (no.2). The manufactured autoclave had been built to reach a maximum pressure of 5 bars and a temperature of 200 C by using a stainless steel pipe of 250 mm diameter and 20 mm thickness having a total height of 800 mm. covered with two plates, the upper plate contain the pressure gage and the pressure valve which is used to keep the pressure constant as shown in figure (3-3). The autoclave is filled with water to a height of 200 mm to submerge the inner electrical heater. To keep autoclave temperature constant another heater had been placed under the device and the autoclave is covered by heat insulator to prevent heat leakage.
o
(28)
Experimental Program
Table (3-4) Effect of specimen dimensions on pulse transmission (BS 1881: Part 203:1986). Transducer frequency Pulse Velocity in Concrete in (km/s) Vc= 3.5 Vc= 4.0 Vc= 4.5 Minimum Permissible Lateral Specimen Dimension mm mm mm
146 65 43 23 167 74 49 27 188 83 55 30
kHz
24 54 82 150
Depending on that the smallest dimension of the prism (beam) which has been used equal to 100 mm in order to provide a good lateral length for the ultrasonic wave because transducer frequency equal to 54 kHz. In PUNDIT manual the path length must be greeter than 100 mm when 20 mm size aggregate is used or greater than 150 mm for 40 mm size aggregate. And for more accurate value of pulse velocity the pulse path length used of 500 mm. The depth of the smallest autoclave device decided the length of the specimens; therefore the specimens' length which is used was 300 mm. As shown in figure (3-4)
Figure (3-4): Shape and size of the samples used in the study
(29)
Chapter three
(30)
Experimental Program
13. After normal curing (28 day in the water), specimens are marked and stored in the laboratory. 14. Immediately before testing the compressive strength at any age, 7, 14, 21, 28, 60, 90 and 120 days, the prism is tested by ultrasonic pulse velocity techniques (direct and surface). Figure (3-5) shows the PUNDIT which is used in this research with the direct reading position. And then, two cubes specimens are tested per sample to failure in compression device.
Figure (3-5): PUNDIT used in this research with the direct reading position
(31)
Chapter three
a period of 3 hours for the first instrument , whereas the maximum temperature of 130 C, corresponds to a pressure of 2 bars over a period of 2 hr in the second one , and the maximum temperature of 150 C corresponds to a pressure of 4 bars over a period of 3 hr in the third apparatus which is made for this research. This is followed by 5 hr at constant curing temperatures and then the instruments are switched off to release the pressures in about 1 hour and all the instruments will be opened on the next day.
o o
(32)
Chapter Four
4
Discussion of Results
4-1 Introductions:
The concrete strength taken for cubes made from the same concrete in the structure differs from the strength determined in situ because the methods of measuring the strength are influenced by many parameters as mentioned previously. So the cube strength taken from the samples produced and tests in the traditional method will never be similar to in situ cube strength. Also, the results taken from the ultrasonic non-destructive test (UPV) are predicted results and do not represent the actual results of the concrete strength in the structure. So, this research aims to find a correlation between compressive strength of the cube and results of the non-destructive test (UPV) for the prisms casting from the same concrete mix of the cubes by using statistical methods in the explanation of test results.
Chapter Four
(34)
Discussion of Results
(35)
Chapter Four
(36)
Discussion of Results
(37)
Chapter Four
(38)
Discussion of Results
Table (4-1) B- The experimental results of cubes and prism (Pressure steam curing 2 bars).
Sample SLUMP no. (mm) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 68 68 68 68 10 10 10 10 27 27 27 27 27 27 59 59 59 59 95 78 78 55 55 55 29 29 29 8 8 8 105 65 9 15 45 45 85 85 20 20 58 58 72 72 92 92 98 98 70 70 90 90 10 10 10 SLUMP SO3 % range in fine (mm) agregate (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (0-10) 0.34 (0-10) 0.34 (0-10) 0.34 (0-10) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (30-60) 0.34 (30-60) 0.34 (30-60) 0.34 (30-60) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (30-60) 0.34 (30-60) 0.34 (30-60) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (0-10) 0.34 (0-10) 0.34 (0-10) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (0-10) 2.05 (10-30) 2.05 (30-60) 2.05 (30-60) 2.05 (60-180) 2.05 (60-180) 2.05 (10-30) 0.34 (10-30) 0.34 (30-60) 0.34 (30-60) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 2.05 (60-180) 2.05 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 0.34 (60-180) 2.05 (60-180) 2.05 (0-10) 0.34 (0-10) 0.34 (0-10) 0.34 W/C 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.5 0.48 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Coarse Mix Age Aggregate proportions (day) Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 4 Type 1 Type 1 Type 3 Type 3 Type 3 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 3 Type 1 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 4 Type 4 Type 4 Type 4 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 5 Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 1:1.13:1.7 1:1.13:1.7 1:1.13:1.7 1:1.13:1.7 1:1.36:3.03 1:1.36:3.03 1:1.36:3.03 1:1.36:3.03 1:1.26:2.45 1:1.26:2.45 1:1.26:2.45 1:1.26:2.45 1:1.26:2.45 1:1.26:2.45 1:1.17:1.93 1:1.17:1.93 1:1.17:1.93 1:1.17:1.93 1:3.35:4.27 1:1.47:1.86 1:1.47:1.86 1:1.4:2.29 1:1.4:2.29 1:1.4:2.29 1:1.51:2.79 1:1.51:2.79 1:1.51:2.79 1:1.6:3.4 1:1.6:3.4 1:1.6:3.4 1:1.71:1.93 1:1.32:2.18 1:1.69:4.82 1:1.52:3.92 1:1.39:3.26 1:1.39:3.26 1:1.42:2.75 1:1.42:2.75 1:2.37:3.87 1:2.37:3.87 1:1.9:2.74 1:1.9:2.74 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.71:1.93 1:1.71:1.93 1:1.24:2.412 1:1.24:2.412 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.41:2.75 1:1.41:2.75 1:1.82:4.21 1:1.82:4.21 1:1.82:4.21 2 21 28 60 2 28 60 90 2 14 21 28 60 90 2 28 60 90 2 28 60 2 28 60 4 28 60 2 28 60 2 28 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 28 2 28 2 28 2 28 2 28 2 28 5 28 2 28 60 Ult. Ult. Comp. Density V(km/s) V(km/s) str. (gm /cm3) (Mpa) direct surface 37.95 4.20 4.22 2.31 38.39 4.32 4.45 2.33 41.96 4.35 4.45 2.33 38.39 4.40 4.52 2.31 43.08 4.50 4.70 2.54 47.77 4.57 4.84 2.51 52.68 4.62 4.88 2.49 43.75 4.62 4.82 2.48 31.70 4.09 3.77 2.37 33.93 4.37 4.51 2.41 36.16 4.43 4.62 2.44 39.29 4.45 4.64 2.43 41.96 4.54 4.68 2.41 39.73 4.55 4.70 2.41 35.27 4.46 4.63 2.41 43.30 4.56 4.78 2.40 50.89 4.60 4.79 2.39 48.21 4.60 4.78 2.34 22.32 3.90 3.67 2.32 32.59 4.41 4.59 2.39 31.47 4.46 4.68 2.34 23.21 4.02 3.75 2.36 32.59 4.45 4.66 2.43 33.48 4.56 4.75 2.38 22.54 4.20 3.95 2.34 33.04 4.53 4.70 2.37 37.95 4.57 4.74 2.31 25.22 4.02 4.00 2.37 38.39 4.57 4.78 2.41 32.59 4.66 4.89 2.39 13.39 3.83 3.16 2.38 20.09 4.25 3.57 2.28 17.86 4.14 3.21 2.53 12.50 3.97 3.36 2.60 16.07 3.85 3.22 2.34 17.86 4.03 3.86 2.39 16.12 3.94 3.15 2.31 17.41 4.07 3.23 2.35 20.09 3.82 3.25 2.36 25.45 4.45 4.66 2.41 18.75 3.76 3.12 2.38 26.79 4.32 4.60 2.41 16.96 3.90 3.61 2.33 18.30 4.25 4.37 2.39 19.64 3.75 3.81 2.26 22.32 4.08 4.26 2.33 14.29 3.59 3.43 2.33 14.29 3.89 3.73 2.33 15.63 3.80 2.94 2.33 19.87 4.35 4.33 2.34 8.48 3.71 2.71 2.32 10.71 4.16 3.41 2.40 22.54 4.42 4.31 2.43 28.13 4.66 4.72 2.48 28.57 4.71 4.70 2.44
(39)
Chapter Four
(40)
Discussion of Results
Table (4-1) C- The experimental results of cubes and prism (Pressure steam curing 4 bars).
Sample SLUMP no. (mm) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 68 68 68 68 10 10 10 59 59 59 95 78 78 55 55 55 29 29 29 8 8 8 65 9 15 45 45 85 85 20 20 58 58 72 72 92 92 98 98 70 70 90 90 10 10 10 27 27 27 55 55 55 85 85 85 SLUMP SO3 % range in fine (mm) agregate (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (0-10) (0-10) (0-10) (30-60) (30-60) (30-60) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (30-60) (30-60) (30-60) (10-30) (10-30) (10-30) (0-10) (0-10) (0-10) (60-180) (0-10) (10-30) (30-60) (30-60) (60-180) (60-180) (10-30) (10-30) (30-60) (30-60) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (0-10) (0-10) (0-10) (10-30) (10-30) (10-30) (30-60) (30-60) (30-60) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 2.05 2.05 0.34 0.34 2.05 2.05 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 W/C Coarse Aggregate Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type Type 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 2 2 2 4 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mix proportions 1:1.13:1.7 1:1.13:1.7 1:1.13:1.7 1:1.13:1.7 1:1.36:3.03 1:1.36:3.03 1:1.36:3.03 1:1.17:1.93 1:1.17:1.93 1:1.17:1.93 1:3.35:4.27 1:1.47:1.86 1:1.47:1.86 1:1.4:2.29 1:1.4:2.29 1:1.4:2.29 1:1.51:2.79 1:1.51:2.79 1:1.51:2.79 1:1.6:3.4 1:1.6:3.4 1:1.6:3.4 1:1.32:2.18 1:1.69:4.82 1:1.52:3.92 1:1.39:3.26 1:1.39:3.26 1:1.42:2.75 1:1.42:2.75 1:2.37:3.87 1:2.37:3.87 1:1.9:2.74 1:1.9:2.74 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.71:1.93 1:1.71:1.93 1:1.24:2.412 1:1.24:2.412 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.41:2.75 1:1.41:2.75 1:1.82:4.21 1:1.82:4.21 1:1.82:4.21 1:1.76:3.74 1:1.76:3.74 1:1.76:3.74 1:1.71:3.18 1:1.71:3.18 1:1.71:3.18 1:1.75:2.63 1:1.75:2.63 1:1.75:2.63 Age (day) 2 21 28 60 2 28 60 2 28 60 2 28 60 2 28 60 4 28 60 2 28 60 3 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 28 2 28 2 28 2 28 2 28 2 28 5 28 2 28 60 2 28 60 2 28 60 2 28 60 Comp. Ult. Ult. Density str. V(km/s) V(km/s) (gm (Mpa) direct surface /cm3) 39.73 44.20 43.30 41.52 43.75 47.77 43.30 36.16 39.73 34.82 24.33 29.46 33.48 24.55 28.13 31.92 20.54 31.25 35.27 27.23 30.80 32.14 12.50 16.52 16.07 14.29 15.63 17.19 16.07 18.30 25.89 20.98 26.79 17.86 23.66 20.98 23.21 13.84 15.63 16.96 19.87 9.82 11.61 23.21 26.79 27.46 21.43 24.55 26.79 18.30 22.54 25.00 18.30 23.21 26.79 4.17 4.30 4.31 4.37 4.47 4.63 4.60 4.06 4.51 4.53 3.99 4.36 4.42 4.03 4.44 4.53 4.20 4.51 4.54 4.03 4.54 4.58 4.23 4.34 3.83 3.92 3.92 4.00 4.12 4.28 4.44 3.83 4.32 3.92 4.23 3.72 4.07 3.54 3.84 3.85 4.24 3.82 4.09 4.35 4.62 4.64 4.25 4.54 4.64 4.18 4.44 4.57 3.90 4.37 4.40 4.28 4.43 4.45 4.51 4.59 4.78 4.78 4.58 4.75 4.74 3.98 4.51 4.63 4.00 4.60 4.68 4.08 4.63 4.71 3.34 4.76 4.82 3.47 4.02 3.11 3.03 3.43 3.23 3.83 3.82 4.62 3.39 4.55 3.69 4.38 3.81 4.27 3.35 3.92 2.99 4.33 2.93 3.36 4.26 4.69 4.72 3.77 4.51 4.61 3.16 4.53 4.57 3.06 4.51 4.53 2.36 2.37 2.38 2.34 2.43 2.42 2.40 2.45 2.44 2.40 2.26 2.34 2.30 2.07 2.33 2.30 2.34 2.38 2.34 2.33 2.36 2.35 2.37 2.45 2.45 2.33 2.53 2.32 2.37 2.41 2.45 2.33 2.37 2.29 2.35 2.27 2.33 2.33 2.34 2.31 2.34 2.32 2.40 2.45 2.49 2.45 2.41 2.45 2.41 2.36 2.41 2.36 2.37 2.44 2.37
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.48 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
(41)
Chapter Four
W/C
56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96
0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Type 4 Type 4 Type 4 Type 4 Type 4 Type 4 Type 4 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2
1:2.1:5.99 1:2.1:5.99 1:2.:4.9 1:2.:4.9 1:1.92:4.09 1:1.92:4.09 1:1.92:4.09 1:1.96:3.5 1:1.96:3.5 1:1.96:3.5 1:2.27:4.22 1:2.27:4.22 1:2.49:6.72 1:2.49:6.72 1:2.02:4.71 1:2.02:4.71 1:1.91:3.88 1:1.91:3.88 1:1.87:3.33 1:1.87:3.33 1:2.31:3.47 1:2.31:3.47 1:2.31:3.47 1:3.37:5.06 1:3.37:5.06 1:3.37:5.06 1:3.37:5.06 1:3.33:3.33 1:3.33:3.33 1:3.33:3.33 1:3.35:4.27 1:3.35:4.27 1:3.35:4.27 1:3.2:5.23 1:3.2:5.23 1:3.2:5.23 1:3.2:5.23 1:5.29:6.68 1:5.29:6.68 1:5.29:6.68 1:5.29:6.68
2 28 7 28 2 7 28 2 7 28 2 28 2 7 3 7 2 7 2 7 2 28 60 2 21 28 60 2 28 60 2 28 60 2 21 28 60 2 21 28 60
(42)
Discussion of Results
Table (4-1) D- The experimental results of cubes and prism (Pressure steam curing 8 bars).
Sample SLUMP no. (mm) SLUMP SO3 % range in fine (mm) agregate Coarse Aggregate Mix Age proportions (day) Comp. Ult. Ult. Density str. V(km/s) V(km/s) (gm /cm3) (Mpa) direct surface
W/C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
68 10 27 59 95 55 29 8 9 15 45 85 20 58 72 92 98 70 90 10 27 55 85 5 20 35 70 10 15 40 70 50 20 100 95 55 10
(60-180) (0-10) (10-30) (30-60) (60-180) (30-60) (10-30) (0-10) (0-10) (10-30) (30-60) (60-180) (10-30) (30-60) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (60-180) (0-10) (10-30) (30-60) (60-180) (0-10) (10-30) (30-60) (60-180) (0-10) (10-30) (30-60) (60-180) (30-60) (10-30) (60-180) (60-180) (30-60) (0-10)
0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 2.05 0.34 2.05 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 0.34 4.45 4.45 4.45 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.65 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9
Type 2 Type 5 Type 5 Type 2 Type 4 Type 3 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 4 Type 4 Type 5 Type 5 Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 1 Type 4 Type 4 Type 2
1:1.13:1.7 1:1.36:3.03 1:1.26:2.45 1:1.17:1.93 1:3.35:4.27 1:1.4:2.29 1:1.51:2.79 1:1.6:3.4 1:1.69:4.82 1:1.52:3.92 1:1.39:3.26 1:1.42:2.75 1:2.37:3.87 1:1.9:2.74 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.71:1.93 1:1.24:2.412 1:1.91:2.25 1:1.41:2.75 1:1.82:4.21 1:1.76:3.74 1:1.71:3.18 1:1.75:2.63 1:2.1:5.99 1:2.:4.9 1:1.92:4.09 1:1.96:3.5 1:2.27:4.22 1:2.02:4.71 1:1.91:3.88 1:1.87:3.33 1:2.31:3.47 1:3.37:5.06 1:3.33:3.33 1:3.35:4.27 1:3.2:5.23 1:5.29:6.68
2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 7 2 2 2 3 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
46.43 47.77 34.38 35.71 25.22 27.23 30.36 27.68 20.09 13.39 13.39 32.14 20.98 19.64 23.66 22.99 16.96 19.64 9.38 26.79 26.79 19.20 29.91 15.18 10.27 13.39 12.05 25.89 19.64 7.59 13.84 14.29 16.07 13.84 11.16 18.75 4.46
4.10 4.31 4.03 4.28 3.99 3.91 4.14 3.91 4.11 2.97 3.87 3.95 3.97 3.86 3.95 3.70 3.60 3.54 3.84 4.31 4.02 3.91 4.12 3.85 3.45 3.65 3.63 4.06 3.77 3.30 2.57 3.45 3.27 3.38 3.61 3.75 3.13
4.21 4.42 3.71 4.45 3.85 3.33 3.82 3.31 3.57 1.74 3.31 3.11 3.30 3.27 3.88 3.74 3.39 2.78 2.95 3.12 2.90 2.89 3.34 3.05 2.60 2.79 2.77 3.77 3.02 2.42 1.78 3.30 2.52 2.75 2.46 2.89 2.35
2.36 2.47 2.41 2.37 2.25 2.32 2.33 2.37 2.49 2.50 2.34 2.36 2.35 2.33 2.33 2.31 2.27 2.31 2.32 2.41 2.36 2.35 2.35 2.40 2.40
2.37 2.40 2.35 2.34 2.47 2.32 2.33 2.33 2.41 2.35 2.33
(43)
Chapter Four
Discussion of Results
80
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.7 4.9 5.1 5.3 5.5 5.7 5.9
DUPV
A- Relation between (DUPV) with the compressive strength for all samples subjected to normal cured.
80
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.7 4.9 5.1 5.3 5.5 5.7 5.9
SUPV
B- Relation between (SUPV) with the compressive strength for all samples subjected to normal curing.
80
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.7 4.9 5.1 5.3 5.5 5.7 5.9
DUPV SUPV
C- Relation between (DUPV and SUPV) with the compressive strength for all samples subjected to normal curing. Figure (4-1) - Relation between (DUPV and SUPV) with the compressive strength for all samples subjected to normal curing separated and combined, respectively.
(45)
Chapter Four
Table (4-2) - Comparison between SUPV and DUPV UPV type Correlation Factor R2 Value SUPV 0.8329 0.7055 DUPV 0.7389 0.6504 Figure ((4-1) A and B ) shows that the variations of the DUPV are less than the variations in the SUPV for the same variation in the compressive strength, so increasing the DUPV happens at a rate less than increasing the compressive strength where the SUPV is more sensitive for this increasing in the compressive strength. This is because the propagation of surface waves is restricted to a region near the boundaries that is to the free external surface of the material. The depth of the penetration is on the order of one wavelength thickness. The cement paste content of this layer is greater than the average paste content inside the concrete due to the so called wall effect. Therefore, the velocity of a surface wave SUPV is influenced more by the paste properties than that of the direct waves DUPV that travel through the whole mass of the concrete. Since the concrete strength is also controlled by the strength of the hardened cement paste, SUPV may be a better indicator of the concrete strength than DUPV. Figure ((4-1) C) shows that for pulse velocity less than (4.5 km/s), the DUPV is greater than the (SUPV) for the same compressive strength .For pulse velocity greater than (4.5 km/s), the (DUPV) is less than the (SUPV) for the same compressive strength. This happens because at low pulse velocity (less than 4.5 km/s), the ultrasonic wave passes through the coarse aggregate and that cause a high (DUPV) at the time the compressive strength is low. The (SUPV) wave passes through the cement mortar and that will represent the compressive strength more accurately. Beside that, the correlation factor of SUPV is greater than (DUPV), so using (SUPV) is better than using the (DUPV) to represent the relation with the compressive strength. 4-3-2 Slump of the Concrete Mix. The slump (workability) of the concrete mix is studied to check the need of finding a particular equation for every slump. Neville (1981) refers that every project or item of the building is designed according to a particular slump.
(46)
Discussion of Results
In this research, the influence of the slump on the compressive strength and the surface (indirect) ultrasonic wave velocity (SUPV) for normal concrete curing is investigated. Four mixes with the same design, the compressive strength and the same fine aggregate, coarse aggregate, cement type and W/C ratio are made but with changing the proportion of the mix component according to British method of mix design which divides the mixes into four ranges of slump from {(0-10), (10-30), (30-60), (60-180)} mm and then these four mixes are repeated with different design compressive strength. In this study, for (W/C) ratio equal to (0.4) and (0.45), the (SUPV) and the compressive strength are drawn with age of concrete and then the (SUPV) is drawn with the compressive strength to illustrate the influence of slump range on the development of the compression strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity, as shown in figures from (4-2) to (4-7).
5.4 5.3
Uao i Vl ct ( m) l s n eoi y K / t c s
W/C=0.4
Age (day)
Figure
(4-2)
-Relation
between
(SUPV)
and
concrete
age
for
C m r s iv s e g ( M a o p e s e tr n th p )
60
W/C=0.4
55 50 45 40 35 30 0 14 28 42 56 70 84 98
Age (Day)
Figure (4-3) - Relation between the compressive strength and concrete age for different slump (mm) with (W/C) = (0.4)
(47)
Chapter Four
70 65
60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 4.80
W/C=0.4
4.90
5.00
5.10
5.20
5.30
5.40
Figure (4-4) - Relation between (SUPV) and compressive strength for different slumps (mm) with (W/C) =0.4
5.5 5.4
W/C=0.45
14
28
42
56
70
84
98
112
12 6
Age (Day)
Figure (4-5) - Relation between (SUPV) and concrete age for different slump (mm) with (W/C) =0.45
(48)
Discussion of Results
60
50
W/C=0.45
40
slump (0-10) slump (10-30) slump (30-60) slump (60-180)
30
20 0 14 28 42 56 70 84 98 112 1 26
Age (Day)
Figure (4-6) - Relation between compressive strength and the Concrete age for different slump (mm) with (W/C) =0.45
60
C o m pr e ssiv e stre ng th ( M pa )
W/C=0.45
50 40 30 20 10 0 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 Ultrasonic velocity(km/s) 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5
slump (0-10) slump (10-30) slump (30-60) slump (60-180)
Figure (4-7) - Relation between (SUPV) and compressive strength for different slump (mm) with (W/C) =0.45
Figures ((4-2), (4-3), (4-5), and (4-6)) show that the increase in (SUPV) and the compressive strength with concrete age is at the same rate. But figures (4-4) and (4-7) show that at the same (SUPV) there is a different compressive strength depending on the slump range and the great difference appears at slumps (60-180) mm, so to get more accuracy the data can be separated according to slumps.
(49)
Chapter Four
4-3-3 Graded Coarse Aggregate. In this section, two mixes are designed by making the ingredients and curing condition constant for the two mixes. Single- size coarse aggregate with maximum size of 20 mm is used for the first mix and for the second mix graded aggregate is used according to grading requirements for coarse aggregate (BS 882:1992). The cubes and prisms which are made from these two mixes are tested by reading the ultrasonic pulse velocity (direct and surface) before compression test with age at (7, 14, 21, 28, 60, 90 and 120) days as shown in figure (4-8).
60
55 50
W/C=0.5
45 40 35 30 25 20 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1
(A) Relation between (DUPV) and compressive strength for single-sized and graded coarse aggregate
60
55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 4.5 4.6
single-sized coarse aggregate graded coars aggregate
W/C=0.5
4.7
4.8
4.9
5.0
5.1
5.2
(B) Relation between (SUPV) and compressive strength for single-sized and graded coarse aggregate Figure (4-8) - (A) and (B) Relation between (UPV) and compressive strength for single-sized and graded coarse aggregate with (W/C =0.5)
(50)
Discussion of Results
Figure (4-8) Shows that the change in coarse aggregate graded does not make a clear difference in the ultrasonic pulse velocity.
4-3-4 Salt Content in Fine Aggregate For this part, eight mixes are designed with the same compressive strength and same coarse aggregate .The first four mixes are designed for different slumps using sand with a salt content equal to (SO3=0.34 %) .In the other four mixes are the sand used which has the salt content equal to (SO3=4.45 %). Figures (4-9) and (4-12) show the relation between (SUPV) and the concrete age for sand with (SO3= 0.34 %) and (SO3= 4.45 %) respectively, and for different slumps. Figures (4-10) and (4-13) show the relation between compressive strength and the concrete age for sand with (SO3= 0.34 %) and (SO3= 4.45 %) respectively, for different slumps. Figures (4-11) and (4-14) show the relation between compressive strength and (SUPV) for sand with (SO3= 0.34 %) and (SO3= 4.45 %) respectively, and for different slumps.
5.0
4.0
Figure (4-9) - Relation between (SUPV) and concrete age for different slump (mm) with (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=0.34%) in the fine aggregate
(51)
Chapter Four
70
Figure
(4-10)
- Relation
between
compressive
strength
and
the
Concrete age for different slump (mm) with (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=0.34%) in the fine aggregate .
60
C o m p res s iv e s tren g th (M p a )
55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 4.7
W/C=0.5
4.8
4.9
5.0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
Figure (4-11) - Relation between (SUPV) and compressive strength for different slump (mm) with (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=0.34%) in the fine aggregate .
(52)
Discussion of Results
6.0
5.5
W/C=0.5
5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 0 14 28 42 56 70 84 98 112 126 140 15 4
slump slump slump slump (0-10) (10-30) (30-60) (60-180)
Age (Day)
Figure (4-12) - Relation between (SUPV) and concrete age for different slump (mm) with (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=4.45%) in the fine aggregate
60
50
W/C=0.5
40 30 20 10 0 0 14 28 42 56 70 84 98 112 126 140 15 4
Age (Day)
Figure
(4-13)
- Relation
between
compressive
strength
and
the
Concrete age for different slump (mm) with (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=4.45%) in the fine aggregate
50 45
C pressive strength om
40 35
W/C=0.5
(M pa)
30 25 20 15 10 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3
slump slump slump slump (0-10) (10-30) (30-60) (60-180)
Figure (4-14) - Relation between (SUPV) and compressive strength for different slump (mm) with (W/C =0.5) and (SO3=4.45%) in the fine aggregate
(53)
Chapter Four
From figures (4-9) to (4-14), it can be found that the SO3 content in the fine aggregate affects the compressive strength more than the UPV. To study this effect figure (4-15) is drawn by using all the data with SO3 content equal to (0.34%, 2.04% and 4.45%).
c oCompressive strength ( M P a ) m p e siv e str e n g th Mpa
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.6 3.0 3.4 3.8 4.2 4.6 5.0 5.4 5.8
DUPV, SO3=0.34% DUPV,SO3=2.05 DUPV, SO3=4.45
(54)
Discussion of Results
Figure (4-15) (A and B) shows that there is nearly no difference between the curves of SO3=4.45 % and SO3=2.05 % content in fine aggregate (high SO3 content).
Figure (4-15) shows also that at the same UPV there is a difference in the compressive strength near 5 Mpa between the one with SO3 =0.34% and the others with SO3 =4.45% and 2.05 at UPV (DUPV and SUPV) reading less than (4.5 km/s). At UPV reading, more than (4.5 km/s) , the difference is greater than 5 Mpa. That means, the increasing in salt content influences decreasing the compressive strength at the same ultrasonic pulse velocity.
(55)
Chapter Four
70
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0
Comprecive strength
Comprecive strength
Figure (4-16) - Relation between (SUPV) and compressive strength for different slumps (mm)
(56)
Discussion of Results
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 0 1 2
ultrasonic velocity(Km/s)
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Compressiveestrengtha)Mpa C mr c s r n t ( p o p e iv t e gh M
60
R2 = 0.7255
40
30
20
10
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
ultrasonic velocity(Km/s)
70 60
R2 = 0.6921
40 30 20 10 0 0 1 2
ultrasonic velocity(Km/s)
Figure (4-17) - Relation between (SUPV) and the compressive strength for different combined slumps (mm)
(57)
Chapter Four
Table (4-3) - Correlation factor and R2 values for different slump combination Slump (mm) 0-180 0-10 10-30 30-60 60-180 0-30 10-60 0-60 10-180 30-180 Correlation Factor 0.8329 0.8219 0.8762 0.9096 0.8548 0.8588 0.8882 0.8428 0.8588 0.8235 R2 0.7055 0.6926 0.7950 0.8108 0.7456 0.7255 0.7908 0.729 0.7255 0.6924
Table (4-3) represents the results of figures (4-16) and (4-17).Hence, the slump range (0-10) gives an equation with least R2 . Slump (10-60) nearly gets R2 value equal to R2 value of the slump (10-30), therefore ,there is no need to separate the slump into two part the first one (10-30) and the other (30-60).So the slump range taken for (060) and the R2 of the assumed equation will be less than the R2 value of the slump range (10-60), where adding the results of the slump range (10-180) will reduce the R2 value of the assumed equation between the SUPV and the compressive strength. Therefore two equations are suggested to be used one for the slump range (0-60) and the other equation for the slump range (60-180).
The first one adopts the data for the slump range between (10-60) where the data of slump range between (0-10) is excluded because if the equation of the slump range (10-60) is used with the SUPV data of range (0-10), the correlation factor will be equal to (0.8288172) where this range with its own equation give correlation factor equal to (0.8219808).
(58)
Discussion of Results
4-3-6 Water Cement Ratio (W/C). Figure (4-18) shows the relation between the compressive strength and the (SUPV) for different (W/C) ratio (0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8, and 0.9). From this figure it can be found that the rate of changing of (SUPV) with changing the compressive strength is nearly the same for different (W/C).
70
C o m p e siv e S tr e n g th (M P a )
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6
w/c=0.4 w/c=0.5 w/c=0.6 w/c=0.8 w/c=0.9
Figure (4-18) - Relation between (SUPV) and compressive strength for different (W/C) ratios
4-3-7 Age of Concrete. In this part, the age of the concrete samples is examined by separating the samples according to their age and finding the exponential equation that represents every age and finding its correlation coefficient. Before that, the exponential equation for all the samples age have been found using this equation and the correlation coefficient is found again for every age samples as shown in Table (4-4).
(59)
Chapter Four
Table (4-4) - Correlation coefficients for different ages of concrete Age (day) 7 14 21 28 60 90 Correlation coefficient from the equation of this age samples using this age samples 0.84593 0.82029 0.77855 0.81929 0.8852 0.84597 Correlation coefficient from the equation of all samples using this age samples 0.84137 0.82695 0.79139 0.82645 0.88821 0.85659
From table (4-4), it can be found that only the correlation coefficient of the 7th day is a little more than the correlation coefficient from the equation of all samples. All the correlation coefficients for the other ages are less than the correlation coefficients of all samples and that means the 7th day age needs separate equation .For the other age the equation that is found for all the samples can be suitable to be used and this equation can be used for the 7th day age also because the correlation coefficient is a little more than the correlation coefficient from the equation of all samples.
4-3-8 Density of Concrete: The aggregate which is used in this research does not give a wide range of density, therefore, the densities obtained have a range only from 2.3-2.52 gm/cm3, where the available density is divided into three ranges (2.3- 2.4), (2.4-2.5) and (> 2.5) gm/cm3 as shown in figure (4-19).
(60)
Discussion of Results
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
density range (>2.5) gm/cm3 density range (2.3-2.4) gm/cm3 density range (2.4-2.5) gm/cm3
3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 Ultrasonic Velosity (Km/s)
Figure (4-19) - Relation between (SUPV) and compressive strength for different density ranges As shown in figure (4-19), the greatest numbers of specimens are at the range (2.32.4). The other two ranges have fewer specimens; practically, this study does not prefer using the other range of density. To study the effect of the density the data are separated according to the density into three ranges and an equation is found for each range and compared with the main equation which is found from all the data for all densities. Table (4-5), shows that the correlation coefficient between the three equations found from the separated density ranges and using the samples separated according to the density range. Approximately identical with the correlation coefficients of the main equation and use separated samples according to the density range. Table (4-5) - Correlation coefficients for different density ranges Correlation coefficient from eqs. Density rang of separate density ranges using samples separated according to density range 2.3- 2.4 2.4-2.5 > 2.5 0.9227 0.7181 0.96822 Correlation coefficient from main equation using samples separate according to density range 0.92109 0.71469 0.96381
(61)
Chapter Four
From what is discussed above, if the density is within the range of (2.3-2.52 gm/cm3), there is no need to use a separate equation for each density range and the main equation between the compressive strength and the ultrasonic pulse velocity can be used. 4-3-9 Pressure of Steam Curing. To illustrate the effect of changing the steam pressure on the relation between the compressive strength and the (SUPV), three pressures are used to find this effect. Figure (4-20) is drawn with normal curing.
70
60
50
30
20
10
0 0 1 2
Figure (4-20) -Relation between (SUPV) and compressive strength for three pressures steam curing
As shown from figure (4-20), there is a large difference between the normal curing curve and the high pressure steam curing. That difference appears with increasing the pressure. This happens because of the development of cracks accompanied with increase in the particles size of hydration products with increasing the heat and pressure in the concrete (Ludwing and Pense, 1956) ,which affects the UPV greater than their effect on the compressive strength. Depending on that, the equation of the normal curing with the specimen cured with pressure steam can be used and that will be illustrated more later in the statistical analysis.
(62)
Discussion of Results
The goal of regression method is to fit a line through points (results) so that the squared deviations of the observed points from that line are minimized. Regression allows the researcher to obtain a set of coefficients for an equation. The principle of the analysis concept depends on that the similar the variability of the residual values around the regression line relative to the overall variability, the better is our prediction. For example, if there is no relationship between the X and Y variables, then the ratio of the residual variability of the Y variable to the original variance is equal to 1.0. If X and Y are perfectly related, then there is no residual variance and the ratio of variance will be 0. In most cases, the ratio will fall somewhere between these extremes, that is, between 0 and 1.0, 1.0 minus this ratio is referred to as Rsquare or the coefficient of determination. This value is interpretable in the following manner: If there is an R-square of 0.4 then the variability of the Y values around the regression line is 1-0.4 times the original variance, in other words 40% of the original variability is explained, and left with 60% residual variability. Ideally, the research explains most if not all of the original variability. The R-square value is an indicator
(63)
Chapter Four
of how well the model fits the data, e.g., an R-Square close to 1.0 indicates that almost all of the variability is counted with the variables specified in the model.
4-4-2 Statistical Modeling: In statistical modeling, the overall objective is to develop a predictive equation relating a criterion variable to one or more predictor variables. In this research the criterion variables include the compressive strength, the direct ultrasonic wave, the surface (indirect) waves, density, slump of the concrete mix, salt content in fine aggregate and pressure of steam curing.
(64)
Discussion of Results
Table (4-6) - Statistical summary for predictor and criteria variables Variable C D S WC DE A N
383 381 383 383 380 383
Range Min.
59.47 1.53 2.42 0.5 0.79 143 5.26 3.66 3 0.4 2.21 7
Max.
64.73 5.19 5.42 0.9 3 150
Sum
12248.1 1774.02 1830.51 228.01 910.27 18639
Mean
31.9793 4.6562 4.7794 0.5416 2.3954 48.6658
Std. dev.
12.32738 0.23538 0.3976 0.12261 0.068 39.65794
C
0.359 1 0.760 0.810 0.127 -0.702
D
0.372 0.760 1 0.880 0.181 -0.563
S
0.357 0.810 0.880 1 0.078 -0.558
DE
-0.063 0.127 0.181 0.078 1 -0.176
WC
-0.027 -0.702 -0.563 -0.558 -0.176 1
From the correlation matrices, it is evident that some variables have high intercorrelation and low correlation with the criterion variables. For an exponential model structure, this would suggest that those variables with high inter-correlation can be eliminated, although some interaction terms can be included as a product terms. As the correlation coefficient provides only a single-valued index of the degree of linear association between pairs of variables, it is used primarily as a data screening technique. Stepwise regression technique used for model development provides coefficients for a prediction equation and can also be used to assess the relative importance of the predictor variables.
(65)
Chapter Four
4-6-1 Goodness of Fit Measures: The measures of goodness of fit are aimed to quantify how well the proposed regression model obtained fits the date. The two measures that are usually presented are coefficients of multiple determinations (R2) and standard error of regression (SER) (Devore, 2000). The R2 value is the percent variation of the criterion variable explained by the suggested model and calculated according to following equation:
R 2 = 1 SSE SST
(4-2)
where SSE = the measure of how much variation in ( y ) is left unexplained by the proposed model. And it is equal to the error sum of squares= ( yi yi )2
yi = the actual value of criterion variable for the i th case
( )
( )
SST= the quantities measure of the total amount of variation in observed ( y ) and it is equal to the total sum of squares= ( yi y )2 .
y = the mean observed ( y ) . R 2 Is bounded between (0) and (1); the higher the value of ( R 2 ), the more
successful is the regression model in explaining ( y ) variation. If R 2 is small, and analyst will usually want to search for an alternative models (i.e., non-linear) that can more effectively explain ( y ) variation. Because R 2 always increases , a new variable is added to the set of the predictor variables and in order to balance the cost of using
(66)
Discussion of Results
more parameters against the gain in R 2 , many statisticians use the adjusted coefficient of multiple determinations .adj R 2 , which is calculated as follows:
2 adjR 2 = (n 1)R k n 1 k
(4-3)
Where:
n =the sample size.
Adjusted
R2
adjusts
the
proportion
of
unexplained
variation
upward
[since (n-1)/ (n-k-1)>1], which results in adjR 2 R 2 . The second measure, standard error of regression (SER) , is calculated according to the following equation:
SER =
SSE n (k + 1)
(4-4)
The divisor n (k + 1) in the above equation is the number of degrees of freedom (df) associated with the estimation of (SER). In general, the smaller the (SER) value, the better the proposed regression model.
(67)
Chapter Four
ei on the vertical scale versus yi on the horizontal scale. Histogram for the standardized residual versus the frequency. Standardizing residuals is made by subtracting the mean value of residuals (zero) from each residual and then dividing by the estimated standard deviation. If the first plot yields points close to the 45 line [slope=1 through (0, 0)], then the proposed regression function gives accurate prediction of the values that are actually observed. Thus the first plot provides a visual assessment of model effectiveness in making prediction. If the model is correct, the second plot of the residuals versus predicted
( y ) values should not exhibit distinct pattern. Also with the aid of the second plot,
one can determine the extreme value of the yi can be determined, i.e., outliers. If the residuals plots indicate a distinct pattern, then the function structure should be changed to fit the data (if the residuals exhibit curved pattern, then a non-linear, polynomial model can be fit). The histogram plot of the standardized residual should follow the normal distribution pattern if the underlying assumption for the proposed model is correct, with the mean value of zero. Any sequin in the distribution shape suggests further investigation in order to obtain the proper model. The first plot enables immediate check of proposed model structure whether it is rational or not. The rational model is that model which gives rational predicted values.
(68)
Discussion of Results
the linear regression for other parameters and specify the parameter and choose the stepwise from that. The SPSS program suggests five equations as shown in Table (48), where the correlation matrix for predictor and criteria variables are shown in Table (4-9) which represent goodness of fit measures, whereas the second approach is based on the graphical analysis of the residuals, also called diagnostic plots are shown in figures from (4-21) to (4-25) .
Table (4-8) - Models equations from several variables (using SPSS program) Model no. 1 2 Variables
S S WC S SO3 WC S SO3 A WC S SO3 A WC D
Equation
c = 0.26e S 0.83
c = 23.63 + 0.20e S 32.04 WC
Table (4-9) - Correlation matrix for predictor and criteria variables Model no. 1 2 3 4 5 Correlation
0.843852 0.884064 0.901656 0.916743 0.915536
R2
0.716 0.782 0.813 0.841 0.847
Std. Error
6.59817 5.78842 5.3697 4.96036 4.87009
(69)
Chapter Four
100 90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 00
-1.0 -2.0 -3.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Specimen Number
Frequency
50
40
30
20
10
Figure (4-21) -Diagnostic plot for the compressive strength (Model no. 1)
(70)
Discussion of Results
100 90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
-1.0 -2.0 -3.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Specimen Number Specimen Number Plot (b) Residuals percent from measured vs. Specimen Number
40 Mean = 0.0196 Std. Dev. = 5.7616 N = 383 30
Frequency q y
20
10
reseq2 Residual
Figure (4-22) Diagnostic plot for the compressive strength (Model no. 2)
(71)
Chapter Four
100 90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 00
-1.0 -2.0 -3.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Specimen Number
qFrequency y
40
30
20
10
Figure (4-23) Diagnostic plot for the compressive strength (Model no. 3)
(72)
Discussion of Results
100 90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 00
3.0
-1.0 -2.0 -3.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Specimen Number
qFrequency y
40
30
20
10
Figure (4-24) Diagnostic plot for the compressive strength (Model no. 4)
(73)
Chapter Four
100 90
Producted Compressive Strength (Mpa)
Standardize Residual
Stadardiz Residuals
-1.0 -2.0 -3.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Specimen Number
50
40
Frequency
y
30 20 10 0 -5.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00
Residual
Figure (4-25) Diagnostic plot for the compressive strength (Model no. 5)
(74)
Discussion of Results
From Table (4-9) it is clear that the model no. 5 represents the perfect one according to the R2 and the standard error but the diagnostic plot of these models prove that the model no. 4 is best compared to the model (no. 5). Besides that, the R2 value and the standard error are almost the same; therefore, the use of the equation of the model no. 4 will be suitable to compute the compressive strength.
C = 33.66 + 0.15 e S 40.30 WC 1.60 SO3 + 0.06 A
(4-5)
where: C= concrete compressive strength (Mpa) S= surface (indirect) ultrasonic wave velocity (km/s) WC=water cement ratio (W/C) SO3= (percentage of SO3 Salt Content in fine aggregate)* 100 A=age of concrete in (Days) From Table (4-7) which shows the correlation matrix for predictor and criteria variables, it seems that the (DUPV) is not suitable to represent the compressive strength where its correlation is equal to (0.76) whereas the (SUPV) correlation is equal to (0.81). Also, Table (4-9) comes to prove that the (DUPV) is separated from the models and does not appear till model no. 5 which is rejected. In spite of that, the proposed equation has a very good accuracy but it will not be suitable for practical use since the inspector does not know the condition of the inspected concrete, therefore it is important to find simple equation to apply it. The relation between compressive strength and the SUPV is variable according to the slump, therefore two equations are proposed. Testing data are separated according to the slump into two groups, group no.1 represents the data for slump (0-60) mm and the group no.2 includes the data for slump grater than 60 mm. These data inserted in the SPSS program and the following two equations are found. The correlation matrix for the predictor and criteria variables is show in Table (4-10).
(75)
Chapter Four
(4-6)
or
C = 0.22 e1.029 S For slump greater than (> 60) mm
(4-7)
Where: C= compressive strength (Mpa) S= surface (indirect) ultrasonic wave velocity (km/s)
C = 0.128 e1.127 S
(4-8)
But if the slump is unknown, then equation (4-8) which represents all the data can be used in spite of its little accuracy as shown in Table (4-10)
Table (4-10) -Correlation matrix for predictor and criteria variables Equation No. (4-6) (4-7) (4-8) Correlation
0.84935 0.88212 0.84726
R2
0.8140 0.8435 0.7883
(4-9)
Discussion of Results
By equaled Equation (4-8) with equation (4-9), the relation between (SUPV) with high salt and the one with little salt is found as shown in Equation (4-10).
S = 0.63 S + 1.72
(4-10)
where:
s = surface (indirect) ultrasonic wave velocity (km/s) (sand with no salt) s = surface ultrasonic wave velocity (km/s) (sand with salt)
4-7-3 Steam Pressure Curing
To study the influence of salt content on the relation between compressive strength and (SUPV), figure (4-26) is drawn for data of high pressure steam curing with low and high (SO3) and Table (4-11) shows the correlation matrix for predictor and criteria variables for different pressure. From figure (4-26) that for (2 and 4 bars) steam curing, the influence of (SO3) content is limited but with 8 bars steam curing the influence of (SO3) contain is obvious. But Table (4-11) show that the number of the samples for pressure 8 bar is limited therefore this relation for this pressure (8 bars) did not represent the real situation. Therefore the influence of (SO3) contain is neglected and one equation for each pressure is found.
Table (4-11) - Correlation matrix for predictor and criteria variables for different pressure
PRESSURE 2 bar 4 bar 8 bar
All samples
Low salt
All samples
Low salt
All samples
Low salt
R2
0.782
0.812
0.730
0.743
0.548
0.623
correlation N
0.865 111
0.858 78
0.845 96
0.750 67
0.806 37
0.807 24
(77)
Chapter Four
C m e iv strength Mpa o ps tr g P CompressiveeS en th(M a)
60 50
all s amples , 2 bar s team curing
40 30 20 10 0 0
Figure (4-26) - Relation between compressive strength and SUPV for different steam curing pressure (2, 4 and 8 bar) The capability of finding one equation represent all the pressure of steam curing is study by finding one equation for all high pressure steam curing data and checking up this proposed by finding one equation for each pressure and obtaining its correlation, and then, the correlation of the data of each pressure in the equation of the all pressure is found as shown in Table (4-12).
N
244 111
4 bar Correlation
0.844 0.845
N
244 96
8 bar Correlation
0.805 0.806
N
244 37
Table (4-12) shows that the correlation factor is not so different if all the samples steam curing pressure is combined and one equation is found for all pressure as shown in figure (4-27).
(78)
Discussion of Results
C pressive Strength (M om pa)
Figure (4-27) - Relation between compressive strength vs. SUPV for normal curing and different steam curing pressure (2, 4 and 8 bar and all pressures curing samples combined together) From above it is found that all the samples steam curing pressure represented by SPSS program in one equation are as below: ~ 0.564 S C = 2.306 e
(4-11)
By equaling equation (4-11) with equation (4-8), the relation between (SUPV) with steam curing pressure is found as shown in equation (4-12) to find the correction of SUPV value if the slump is not known. ~ S = 0.5 S + 2.56 If slump is not known
(4-12)
And by equaling equation(4-11) with equation(4-6), the relation between (SUPV) with steam curing pressure is found as shown in equation (4-13) to find the correction of SUPV value if the slump is between(0-60) mm . ~ For slump (0-60) mm S = 0.44 S + 2.8
(4-13)
Or by equaling equation (4-11) with equation (4-7), the relation between (SUPV) with steam curing pressure is found as shown in equation (4-14) to find the correction of SUPV value if the slump (> 60 ) mm . ~ S = 0.55 S + 2.25 For slump >60 mm where:
(4-14)
Chapter Five
5
5-1 Introduction
This chapter presents a review of the previous studies in this field and surveys the published equations and compare these equations with the proposed equations which are derived in the previous chapter. These comparisons are made on case study.
(5-1)
Where: C=concrete compressive strength in N/mm2 (Mpa) D= direct Ultrasonic velocity in km/sec
(80)
Chapter Five
A=2.016 B=0.61
5-2-2 Deshpande et al., Equation: Deshpande et al., (1996) have tested 200 concrete cube specimens and develop a non-linear equation to relate ultrasonic velocity and compressive strength as shown in equation (5-2)
C = 79.846 + 4.103 10 - 9 DE 3 + 0.00217 A3 + 4.842 10 -6 D 2
(5-2)
Where: C = concrete compressive strength in kg/sq. cm DE = density of concrete in kg/cu. m A= age of concrete in day D = ultrasonic velocity in m/sec 5-2-3 Jones R. Equation: In 1962, Jones has presented a non-linear equation to relate ultrasonic velocity and compressive strength as shown in equation (5-3)
C = 2.8 e0.53 D
(5-3)
Where: C= concrete compressive strength in N/mm2 (Mpa) D= direct Ultrasonic velocity in km/sec
5-2-4 Popovics et al. Equation: Klieger experimental results in 1957, have been used by Popovics for a mathematical comparison for use of direct ultrasonic velocity (DUPV) and
(81)
surface ultrasonic waves (SUPV), respectively, for strength estimation. The best fit formula for the relationship between concrete strength and direct ultrasonic velocity (DUPV) for the seventh day experimental results by Klieger is presented by equation (5-4), (Popovics, 1990).
C = 0.0028 e0.0021 D
(5-4)
Where: C= concrete compressive strength in N/mm2 D= direct Ultrasonic velocity in m/sec 5-2-5 Nash't et al. Equation: Nash't et al., (2005) research covers 161 test results taken from 161 concrete cubes with 150x150x150 mm. Some of these cubes are taken from mixtures designed for the purpose of this research using ordinary Portland cement compatible with the Iraqi standard (No. 5) with 15 and 25 N/mm2 designe strength and for different curing conditions. The other results are taken from M. Sc. Thesis test results in which ordinary portland cement is used except 6 cubes with sulphate resisting Portland cement, these cubes are cured by soaking them in water for 30 days before the test. The age of the cubes in the two groups ranged between 7 to 138 days. All the cubes produced using fine aggregate within Zone 1 and the maximum size of the coarse aggregate ranged between (5-19) mm. the following equation was derived by the researchers:
C = 1.19 e0.715 D
(5-5)
Where: C= concrete compressive strength in N/mm2 (Mpa) D= direct ultrasonic velocity in (km/sec)
(82)
Chapter Five
5-2-6 Elvery and lbrahim Equation: Elvery and lbrahim have described tests carried out to examine the relationship between ultrasonic pulse velocity and concrete cube strength for ages of about 3 h over a curing temperature range from 1 to 60 oC. The authors developed equation below for 28 day age with correlation equal to (0.74). (Elvery and lbrahim, 1976)
C = 0.0012 e 2.27 D 6 .4
(5-6)
Where: C= concrete compressive strength in N/mm2 (Mpa) D= direct Ultrasonic velocity in (km/sec)
5-3-1 Case study no. 1: The data adopted to be studied in this part are taken from Neville, (1995) as shown in Figure (5-1) for dry concrete curve points as shown in Table (5-1).
(83)
Figure (5-1) - Relation between compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity for hardened cement past, mortar, and concrete, in dry and a moist concrete, (Nevill, 1995) based on (Sturrup et al. 1984) Table (5-1) - Comprising data from Neville (1995), based on (Sturrup et al. 1984) results Compressive 17 20.5 21 28 31.5 31 42 51 52.5 Strength (Mpa) Ultrasonic Velocity (DUPV) (km/s) 3.75 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.7
Using the direct ultrasonic velocity illustrated in Table (5-1) the compressive strength estimated from some of the previous equations that are presented in the beginning of this chapter and also estimated from the proposed equation (4-8) which depends on the SUPV, by using the data for direct ultrasonic pulse velocity which are taken from table (5-1) and substitute in equation (5-7)( the equivalent SUPV which is adopted only for verification purpose from the research data) to obtain SUPV in order to find the compressive strength from equation (4-8) .
S = 1.405 D _ 1.406
... (5-7)
where:
(84)
Chapter Five
50
Real points from Neville
Proposed equation Elvery and Ibrahim equaton
40
30
pundit Manual
20
10
0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 Ultrasonic Velocity (km/s) 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0
Figure (5-2) - Relation between compressive strength and velocity for proposed and previous equations
ultrasonic pulse
In the beginning, there was no equation that satisfies all the points completely and as appears from figure (5-2), the proposed equation can be considerd the nearest one to the points taken from Nivelle (1995) and that agrees with the correlation factor that appears in Table (5-2) which is equal to (0.9611).
(85)
Table (5-2) - Correlation factor for proposed and previous equations Equation
Elvery and Ibrahim Roauf Jones Nash't et al., Pundit Manual Proposed
Correlation coefficient
0.9591 0.9469 0.9447 0.9495 0.9565 0.9611
5-3-2 Case study no. 2: The data adopted to be studied in this part is taken from Kileger, (1957) where the data of 7th days are used to make verification with the proposed equation and Popovics equation for 7th day as shown in table (5-3). Table (5-3) - Kliegers (Compressive strength and UPV) (1957) data
Compressive Strength (Mpa) Ultrasonic Velocity (km/s)
4.62 4.25 4.53 4.46 4.46 4.40 4.41 4.44 4.42 4.42 4.36 4.42 39.2 25.4 41.9 21.3 30 37 28.3 24.7 25.8 39.5 22.7 30.3
These data are drawn again and the ultrasonic pulse velocity is taken to calculate the compressive strength according to Popovics equation. Also, these data are used after calculating the equivalent surface velocity from equation (57) and the compressive strength is found by substituting the proposed equation (4-8) as shown in figure (5-3).
(86)
Chapter Five
80
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
4.4
4.6
4.8
5.2
5.4
Figure (5-3) - Relation between compressive strength and velocity for proposed and popovics equation.
ultrasonic pulse
Figure (5-3) shows that the proposed equation represents the suggested studied points more efficiently than Popovics equation and this is obvious also from the correlation coefficients where the proposed equation gives correlation coefficient equal to (0.72409) and the Popovics equation gives (0.72217). 5-3-3 Case study no. 3: The experimental data of this research shown in Table (4-1) have adopted for this case study. In this case study, the proposed Equation (4-5) is verified with Deshpande et al., equation (5-2) as shown in Figure (5-4). In Deshpande et al. equation as mention before the parameters are used (the density, age of concrete and direct ultrasonic pulse velocity) are prepared experimental data are not easy to be found ,therefore, the data are used from this research for make the verification.
(87)
For the same sample of (7th ) day normal curing, only the (DUPV) is substituted in Deshpande et al., equation, where the (SUPV) is substituted in the proposed equation for all the data.
50 45 Com pressive strength (M pa) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 Ultrasonic velocity (Km/s)
DUPV research points SUPV resuarch points Deshpande et al. eq. Proposed eq.
Figure (5-4) - Relation between compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity for proposed eq. and deshpande et al., equation As appear clearly that the proposed equation (4-5) which use the SUPV satisfy the experimental data more efficiently than Deshpande et al. equation with correlation coefficient equal to (0.9167) whereas the correlation coefficient for Deshpande et al., equation equal to (0.27343). Besides that, Deshpande et al., equation boundary include the age raised to power (3) and that means that this equation will give unreal value of compressive strength with ages greater than (14 days), for example if we take the data of sample no. (31) from table (4-1)-A which represent sample of age 150 (day) and substitute in Deshpande et al. equation the estimated compressive strength will be equal to 742 (Mpa) and the proposed equation give 46 (Mpa) where the real compressive strength equal to 42 (Mpa) . 5-3-4 Case study no. 4: The data adopted to be studies in this case are taken also from Kileger (1957). Klieger has made study about compressive strength, DUPV, slump of the mixes.
(88)
Chapter Five
These data are used to make verification with the proposed Equation (4-6) and Equation (4-7), Kileger's data are shown in Table (5-4). Table (5.4) - Kliegers (1957) data Slump (mm)
56 51 56 56 51 56 53 51 56 53 51 53 53 53 66 64 61 66 66 66 66 64 64 64 64 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 51
These data are drawn again beside the estimated compressive strength from the proposed equation (4-6) and equation (4-7) which depend on the SUPV, therefore, the equivalent surface UPV is taken from equation (5-8) and equation (5-9) which developed only for verification purpose from the research data.
(89)
Figure (5-5) - Relation between compressive strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity for proposed equation and kliegers data for the two proposed slumps Figure (5-5) shows that the proposed equations represent Kliegers experimental points in an acceptable way for the two slumps and this s evident from the correlation coefficient where the proposed equation (4-6) for the slump (0-60 mm) gives the coefficient equal to (0.958903235) and the proposed equation (4-7) for the slum ( >60 mm) gives a coefficient of (0.947797931).
(90)
Chapter Six
(91)
Chapter Six
4. If the material characteristics of the concrete are known. We can predict compressive strength more accurate with R2 is equal to (0.841) and the correlation coefficient equal to (0.916743) from general proposed equation. 5. Tests demonstrate that the relation between the SUPV and the compressive strength vary according to the pressure steam curing value .The high pressure steam curing, is different from that with normal curing. This difference is very little between 2 and 4 bar pressure where at 8 bar this difference is noticeable. 6. SO3 content in fine aggregate decreases compression strength while the SUPV reading does not affect at the same rate. For using the general proposed equation, the proposed correction equation of SUPV reading must be used. 7. For the same sample, the SUPV reading is greater than DUPV for velocity greater than (4.5 km/s), whereas at the velocity less than (4.5 km/s), the DUPV reading is greater.
(92)
Studying the effect of concrete admixture on the relation between the compressive strength and the pulse velocity. Increasing the prism length could be make to study the effect of the length on the SUPV reading and how that will affect the proposed equation when this length is changed from 30 to 60 cm. Studying the effect of steam curing on the relation between the compressive strength and the pulse velocity. Studying the effect of high pressure steam curing period and the rate of rising and decreasing the temperature on the relation between the compressive strength and the pulse velocity. Studying the effect of fire damage on the relation between the compressive strength and the pulse velocity.
(93)
References
ASTM (2003),"Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity through Concrete ", Des.10, 2002. Published February 2003.originally approved in 1967.last prvious edition approved in 1997 as C 597-97. ASTM (C116-68),"Standard Test Method for Compressive strength of concrete using portions of beams broken in flexure", Vol. 04.02, October.
ACI committee 516 (1965),"high pressure steam curing: modern practice and properties of autoclaved products", ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 62, no.8, Aug., pp. 870-908. ACI Committee 228(2003), In-Place Methods to Estimate Concrete Strength (ACI 228.1R-03), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 44 pp. BS 1881 (1986),"testing concrete: recommendations for measurement of velocity of ultrasonic pulses in concrete", Part 203.
Corneloup G., and Garnier V.,( 1995)." Etude d'une mthode ultrasonore adapte la mesure de l'endommagement des btons: tude bibliographique et analyse des solutions, Contrat IUT-EDF Deshpande P.M., Gokhale V. V., Abbi Rita D., and Sinha C. M. (1996). "Estimate Of Concrete Strength By Ultrasonic Velocity" Trends in NDE Science & Technology; Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on NonDestructive Testing, New Delhi, 8-13 December.Vol. 5, PP. 61 62.
Devore J. (2000). "Probability and Statistics for Engineering and the Sciences" 5th Edition, Duxbury/Thomson Learning, USA
(94)
References
Elvery,R.H., and Ibrahim,L.A.M. (1976). " Ultasonic assessment of concrete strength at early ages", Magazine of Concrete Research , Vol.28, no.97, pp.181- 190. Facaoaru I., (1970)." Phenomena during Hardening of Binders Determined By Nondestructive Method", Nondestructive Testing, Conference, RIIEM Feldman, (2003). "CBD-187. Non-Destructive Testing of Concrete". CANADIAN BUILDING DIGEST, Originally published May 1977. Garbacz, A. and Garboczi, E.J.( 2003). "Ultrasonic evaluation methods applicable to polymer concrete composites", National Institute of standards And Technology NIST, April 2003. Garnier V., Corneloup G., ( 2007)." Non-Destructive Evaluation of Concrete Damage by Ultrasonds", NDT international Indelicato F.(1997), Estimate of concrete cube strength by means of different diameter cores: A statistical approach , RILEM, Vol. 30, April. Jenkins R.S. (1985)." Non destructive testing: an evaluation tool, Concrete International: Design and Construction", Vol. 7, no. 2, Feb., pp. 22-26 . Jones, R. (1962)." Non destructive testing of concrete ", London, Cambridge University. Kalousek, G. L., Milton and Adams, (1951)." Hydration products formed in cement pastes at 25 to 175 C ", ACI Journal, Vol.48, no. 1, sep. pp. 77-92. Keating J.,Hannant D.J. and Hibbert A. P. (1989)." Correlation between Cube Strength, Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity and Volume Change for Oil Well
(95)
References
Cement Slurries", Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 715726. Keiller A. P. (1985)." Assessing the strength of the in situ concrete, Concrete International: Design and Construction ", Vol. 7, no. 2, Feb. pp. 15-21. Klieger, P. (1957), "Long-Time Study of Cement Performance in Concrete: Chapter 10, Progress Report on Strength and Elastic Properties of Concrete," ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 54, December, pp. 481-504.
Ludwing N.C. and Pense S.A., (1956), "Properties of Portland cement pastes cured at elevated temperature and pressures," ACI Journal, Vol. 52, No. 6 Feb. pp. 673-687. Menzel C.A., (1934)." Strength and Volume Change of Steam-Cured Portland Cement Mortar and Concrete", ACI Journal, V. 31, No.2, Nov-Dec, pp.125148. Nash't I. H., A'bour S.H. , Sadoon A.A.,(2005)," Finding an Unified
Relationship between Crushing Strength of Concrete and Non-destructive Tests", www.ndt.net - 3rd MENDT - Middle East Nondestructive Testing Conference & Exhibition - 27-30 Nov., Bahrain, Manama. Nivelle,A.M.,(1995)."Properties of Concrete", 4th Edition Longman Group Limited. Pessiki, S.P., Carino, N.J.,(1988), "Setting Time and Strength of Concrete Using The Impact-Echo Method", ACI Materials Journal ,vol.85 ,no. 5,pp. 389-399.
(96)
References
Popovics, S., Joseph, L. R., John, S. P. (1990). The Behavior of Ultrasonic Pulses in Concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 20, no. 2, pp.259270. Popovics S., komlos K., Popovics J., (1997). Comparison of DIN/ISO 8047 (Entwurf) to Several Standards on Determination of Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity in Concrete, NDTnet, Vol. 2, no. 4. Popovics, J.S., Song, W., Achenbach, J.D., Lee, J.H., Andre, R.F. (1998), "OneSided Wave Velocity Measurement in Concrete", Journal of Engineering Mechanics, vol.124, no.12, pp. 1346-1353.
Raouf Z. and Ali Z.M. (1983). " Assessment of Concrete Characteristics at an Early Age By Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity", Journal of Bulding Research , Vol.2, no.1, may, pp.31- 44.
Reinhardt H.W. and Grosse C.U., (1996)."Setting and Hardening of Concrete continuously monitored by Elastic Waves", NDTnet, July, Vol.1, No. 7.
Refai T.M., Lim M.K. (1992). "Review of NPP concrete degradation factors and assessment methods Non Destructive Testing of Concrete Elements and Structures, Proceedings of 'Structures Congress' in San-Antonio", Texas, April 13-15, Edited by Fahrad ANSARI and Stein STURE, pp 182-193. Sergey A. M., Malinina L.A. and Cheryachukina S., (1972)."Influnce of thermal deformations and pressure of steam-air environmenr on strength of autoclave-hardened concrete ", Menzel Symposium on High-Pressure Steam Curing, ACI, SP- 32,pp.35-75.
(97)
References
STS, (2004)." In-Situ Compressive Strength (fc) ", By STS Engineering Consultants Co., Ltd. Quality Assurance Division, Samsennai, Phayathai, Bangkok 10400. Sturrup V.R. , Vecchio F.J. and Caratin H, (1984)."Pulse velocity as a measure of concrete compressive strength, in situ/nondestructive testing of concrete", Ed.V.M. Malhotra,ACI SP-82,Detroit,Michigan,pp.201-227. Swamy R. N. (1984)." Aliamah Assessment of in situ concrete strength by various non-destructive tests", Non Destructive Testing international, Vol. 17 no.3, pp. 139-146. Teodoru, G., (1989)."Nondestructive Testing of Concrete", Beton-Verlag, Dusseldorf,pp. 158. Thomas B. and Redmond JR. (1972)." Shorter Autoclave Cycles for Concrete Masonry Units", Menzel symposium on high-pressure steam curing, American Concrete institution (ACI) SP Publican no.32, pp.57-98.
Thompson M.S., (1961)." The accelerated testing of concrete", Msc. Thesis UMIST, Manchester. Thompson M.S., (1962)." Discussion of Akroyds' paper on Accelerated Testing of Concrete", proceeding of the Inst. of Civil Eng., Vol 21, pp. 678. Vander W. and Brant, (1977)." Ultrasonic Testing For Fresh Mixes", Concrete, Des., pp. 25-28. Whitehurst E.A. (1951). "Use of the Soniscope for Measuring Stetting Time of Concrete" ASTM vol, 51, pp.1166-76.
(98)
. ) ) ((. )( . ) (SPSS . ) 626( ) (exponential . : . . . ) ( ) 2 4 8 ( .
)1991(-
8002
9241