ACI 364.

7T-02(11)
TechNote

Evaluation and Minimization of Bruising

(Microcracking) in Concrete Repair
Keywords: bond strength; bruising; microcracking; pull-off test; repair, surface preparation.

Introduction
Bruising (microcracking) induced in a concrete substrate during the concrete removal or surface preparation
process prior to repair is detrimental to the bond between the repair material and the substrate. Preventing or
minimizing bruising and its effect on bond is an important requirement for a successful repair.

Questions
What is “bruising,” how is it evaluated, and how can it be minimized?

Answer
Concrete repair projects commonly involve the removal of unsound concrete and replacement with new material.
The concrete removal process can damage the substrate surface, resulting in varying degrees of microcracks
and fractures, commonly referred to as “bruising” (Fig. 1). A bruised surface is a surface layer weakened by
interconnected microcracks.
Concrete can be removed using a variety of methods such as chipping hammers, milling, abrasive blasting,
and hydrodemolition. Removal of unsound and sound concrete subjects the concrete substrate to a wide range
of impact and dynamic loads, and the resulting bruising will depend on the method used and the quality of the
concrete. The depth of the bruised layer varies, but is usually superficial (typical depth of the order of 1/8 in.
[3 mm]). There are no criteria yet for the degree of bruising that reduces service life.
Pull-off testing of the repair system (surface repair and substrate) can be conducted to determine the bond
strength.1-4 Bruising translates into a weakened concrete surface layer and will result in lower recorded pull-
off strengths,5,6 with failures occurring predominantly in the substrate. The incidence, severity, and depth of
bruising can be identified by microscopic examination (such as petrographic examination using ASTM C8567
methods) of the concrete. Microscopic examination can further be used to assess remedial actions taken to
eliminate bruising of the concrete. To identify bruising, a polished surface needs to be magnified 20 to 100 times,
depending on the width of the cracks (Fig. 1).
Bruising can be minimized by selecting the appropriate concrete removal equipment and techniques for the
given repair application,8 and avoiding whenever possible those that are known to induce significant micro-

Fig. 1—Optical microscope images of concrete core cross sections exhibiting bruising below
the surface.6

1
2 EVALUATION AND MINIMIZATION OF BRUISING (MICROCRACKING) IN CONCRETE REPAIR (ACI 364.7T-02)

cracking. The latter techniques include scabblers, scarifiers, bush hammers, or pneumatic hammers, especially
those equipped with wide chisel tools. Bruising problems can be prevented by using methods such as abrasive
shotblasting, water-blasting, or hydrodemolition.
Where the use of more damaging methods is required to increase production rate or reduce costs, the damage
can be mitigated somewhat by abrasive shot- or water-blasting as a final preparation step. If bruising is detected,
the depth and extent of the damage to the substrate should be assessed and mitigated. In some cases, the
damage may go beyond surface bruising and can extend into the concrete. Replacing the commonly used sand
in abrasive blasting with alternative materials such as sintered slag, flint silicon carbide, or aluminum oxide can
reduce damage. The use of lightweight pneumatic-chipping hammers equipped with sharp, pointed tools can
also limit the extent of bruising, but may make concrete removal more time consuming.

References
1. ACI Committee 503, “Use of Epoxy Compounds with Concrete (ACI 503R-93),” American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, MI, 1993, 28 pp.
2. ICRI, “Guide for Using In-Situ Tensile Pull-Off Tests to Evaluate Bond of Concrete Surface Materials (ICRI
210.3-2004) [formerly No. 03739],” International Concrete Repair Institute, Rosemont, IL, 2004, 12 pp.
3. ASTM C1583-04, “Standard Test Method for Tensile Strength of Concrete Surfaces and the Bond Strength or
Tensile Strength of Concrete Repair and Overlay Materials by Direct Tension (Pull-off Method),” ASTM Interna-
tional, West Conshohocken, PA, 2004, 5 pp.
4. ICRI, “Guide for Selecting and Specifying Materials for Repair of Concrete Surfaces (ICRI 320.2R-2009)
[formerly No. 03733],” International Concrete Repair Institute, Rosemont, IL, 2009, 36 pp.
5. Sprinkel, M. M., “Preparing Bridge Decks for Overlays,” Concrete Repair Digest, V. 8, No. 5, 1997, pp. 242-247.
6. Bissonnette, B.; Courard, L.; Vaysburd, A. M.; and Bélair, N., “Concrete Removal Techniques: Influence on
Residual Cracking and Bond Strength,” Concrete International, V. 28, No. 12, Dec. 2006, pp. 49-55.
7. ASTM C856-11, “Standard Practice for Petrographic Examination of Hardened Concrete,” ASTM Interna-
tional, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011, 17 pp.
8. Warner, J.; Bhuyan, S.; Smoak, W. G.; Hindo, K.; and Sprinkel, M., “Surface Preparation for Overlays,” Concrete
International, V. 20, No. 5, May 1998, pp. 43-46.

Referenced Standards and Reports

ACI Committee 546, 2004, “Concrete Repair Guide (ACI 546R-04),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington
Hills, MI, 53 pp.
Hindo, K. R., 1990, “In-Place Bond Testing and Surface Preparation of Concrete,” Concrete International, V. 12,
No. 4, Apr., pp. 46-48.
ICRI, 1997, “Guide for Selecting and Specifying Concrete Surface Preparation for Sealers, Coatings, and Polymer
Overlays (ICRI 310.2-1997) [formerly No. 03732],” International Concrete Repair Institute, Rosemont, IL, 41 pp.
Silfwerbrand, J., 1990, “Improving Concrete Bond in Repaired Bridge Decks,” Concrete International, V. 12,
No. 9, Sept., pp. 61-66.

American Concrete Institute Copyrighted Material—www.concrete.org

 EVALUATION AND MINIMIZATION OF BRUISING (MICROCRACKING) IN CONCRETE REPAIR (ACI 364.7T-02) 3

Reported by ACI Committee 364

Fred R. Goodwin Majorie M. Lynch

Chair Secretary

Randall M. Beard John L. Hausfeld James E. McDonald

Benoit Bissonnette Ron Heffron William R. Nash
Christopher D. Brown Robert L. Henry Jay H. Paul
Douglas Burke Kal R. Hindo K. Nam Shiu
Ryan Alexander Carris Charles J. Hookham Thomas E. Spencer
Bruce A. Collins Ashok M. Kakade John A. Tanner
Brian Lee Cope James M. Kasper Valery Tokar
Boris Dragunsky Emory L. Kemp David A. VanOcker
Peter H. Emmons Keith E. Kesner Alexander M. Vaysburd
Paul E. Gaudette Erick N. Larson Kurt F. von Fay
Timothy R. W. Gillespie John S. Lund James Warner
Zareh B. Gregorian Pritpal S. Mangat David W. Whitmore
Pawan R. Gupta Surendra K. Manjrekar

Consulting members
Robert V. Gevecker Dela Tharmabala
Stephen A. Johanson Robert Tracy
Howard H. Newlon Jr. William F. Wescott
Weilan Song

ACI TechNotes are intended for reference for the design and construction of concrete structures. This document is intended for the
use of individuals who are competent to evaluate the significance and limitations of its content and who will accept responsibility
for the application of the information it contains. The American Concrete Institute disclaims any and all responsibility for the
accuracy of the content and shall not be liable for any loss or damage arising therefrom. Reference to this document shall not be
made in contract documents.

ACI 364.7T-02 was adopted and published April 2002.

Copyright © 2002, American Concrete Institute.

All rights reserved including the rights of reproduction and use in any form or by any means, including the making of copies by any photo
process, or by electronic or mechanical device, printed, written, or oral, or recording for sound or visual reproduction or for use in any
knowledge or retrieval system or device, unless permission in writing is obtained from the copyright proprietors.

For additional copies, please contact:

American Concrete Institute, 38800 Country Club Drive, Farmington Hills, MI 48331
Phone: 248-848-3700, Fax: 348-848-3701,
www.concrete.org

American Concrete Institute Copyrighted Material—www.concrete.org