See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301455523

Load Testing Techniques for the Strength Evaluation of Existing Reinforced

Concrete Structures

Conference Paper · November 2015

DOI: 10.1061/9780784479711.004

CITATION READS
1 4,429

4 authors, including:

Mohamed K. ElBatanouny Paul Ziehl

Wiss Janney Elstner Associates Inc. University of South Carolina
47 PUBLICATIONS   414 CITATIONS    138 PUBLICATIONS   1,317 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Antonio Nanni
University of Miami
521 PUBLICATIONS   11,234 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Thin Laminated Cement-Based Composites for Rehabilitation and Strengthening Existing Structures View project

GFRP REBAR USE IN TEXAS INFRASTRUCTURE View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Antonio Nanni on 22 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Forensic Engineering 7th Congress
Performance of the Built Environment
November 15 – 18, 2015
Hilton Miami Downtown Hotel
Miami, FL

Load Testing Techniques for Strength Evaluation of Existing Reinforced

Concrete Structures

Mohamed ElBatanouny1, Paul Ziehl2, Carl (Chuck) Larosche3, and Antonio Nanni4
1Wiss Janney Elstner Associates Inc., 330 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062;
PH (847) 753-6395; Fax (847) 291-5189; email: melbatanouny@wje.com
2Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of South Carolina,
300 Main Street, Columbia, SC, USA, 29208; PH (803) 467-4030; FAX (803) 777-
0670; email: ziehl@cec.sc.edu
3Wiss Janney Elstner Associates Inc., 9511 N. Lake Creek Parkway, Austin, TX 78717;
PH (512) 257-4811; Fax (512) 219-9883; email: clarosche@wje.com
4Dept. of Civil, Arch. & Environ. Engineering, University of Miami, 1251 Memorial
Drive, McArthur Engineering Building, Rm. 325, Coral Gables, FL 33146-0630;
PH (305) 284-3461; FAX (305) 284-3492; e-mail: nanni@miami.edu

ABSTRACT

Evaluating the condition of existing reinforced concrete structures is generally

undertaken if the integrity of a structure is in question or if there is concern regarding
the structure meeting the safety requirements. Strength evaluation may be undertaken,
for example, after extreme events (such as earthquakes) or if the structure will be used
for a new function. In-situ load testing may play a role in the evaluation process.
Currently, the American Concrete Institute (ACI) covers in-situ load testing in two
separate standards: a) ACI 318 “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete”,
and b) ACI 437 “Code Requirements for Load Testing of Existing Concrete
Structures”. The latter is referenced by ACI 562 “Code Requirements for Evaluation,
Repair, and Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings”. In-situ load testing methods include
the application of a pre-determined load in combination with response measurements
of the structure. The main response measurement is deflection, but rotation, strain,
crack width, acoustic emission, and other measurements may be included. In this paper,
the two aforementioned load testing approaches are compared and evaluated in terms
of load test procedure, load magnitude, loading criteria, and acceptance criteria.

Keywords: strength evaluation, reinforced concrete, monotonic load test, cyclic load
test

INTRODUCTION

In-situ load testing is a widely used approach for strength evaluation of existing
structures. This approach may be undertaken: a) when the integrity of a structure is in
question; b) after extreme loads; c) if the structure will be used for a new function; and,
d) to evaluate strengthening and retrofitting of a structure.
The behavior and strength of a structure during a load test can be assessed by different
means; therefore, standardization of load testing protocols and acceptance limits is
crucial to guide engineers in strength evaluation and ensure the structure is safe for the
intended use.

The American Concrete Institute (ACI) addresses in-situ load testing in two standards:
a) ACI 318 “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete” [ACI 318 2014]
adopting a monotonic (24-hour) load test, and b) ACI 437 “Code Requirements for
Load Testing of Existing Concrete Structures” [ACI 437.2 2013] adopting both the
cyclic load test (CLT) and a modified version of the monotonic (24-hour) load test.
ACI 437.2-13 is referenced by ACI 562 “Code Requirements for Evaluation, Repair,
and Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings” [ACI 562 2013].

As we are presently in a transition period, the existence of two separate ACI standards
for in-situ load testing creates an unusual situation for the licensed professional
engineer. In the near future, it is envisioned that ACI 318, adopted by reference in the
general building code (International Building Code or IBC), will only address new
construction and buildings without an occupancy permit. Similarly, ACI 562, once
adopted by the general building code for existing structures (International Existing
Building Code or IEBC), will regulate existing construction evaluation and repair.

This paper summarizes and compares both methods for in-situ load testing of existing
reinforced concrete structures. The objective of the paper is to highlight the key
features of both methods in terms of test load magnitude and acceptance criteria.

LOAD TESTING METHODS

Monotonic load test per ACI 318

The monotonic load test was the first test to be included in an ACI standard and has
been used for several decades. The roots of this method were reflected in the 1920
edition of ACI [1920] “Regulations for the Use of Reinforced Concrete” where a test
load magnitude of 2.0L+1.0D was used [Nehil et al. 2007]. As suggested by the test
load magnitude, load tests during this era were generally applied as proof load tests
rather than for strength evaluation. Although several modifications to the load test have
been adopted, the principles remain unchanged.

The method is described in Chapter 27 “Strength Evaluation of Existing Structures” in

the 2014 version of ACI 318-14 [2014]. In this test, the structure is loaded with a test
load magnitude (TLM) defined as follows:

𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.3𝐷 (Eq. 1.a)

𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.15𝐷 + 1.5𝐿 + 0.4(𝐿𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝑆 𝑜𝑟 𝑅) (Eq. 1.b)
𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.15𝐷 + 1.5(𝐿𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝑆 𝑜𝑟 𝑅) + 0.9𝐿 (Eq. 1.c)

Where D is the dead load due to self-weight of the concrete structural system and any
superimposed dead loads, L is the live load due to use and occupancy of the building,
Lr is the roof live load produced during maintenance by workers, equipment, and
materials or during the life of the structure by moveable objects such as planters and
people, S is the snow load, and R is the rain load.

The applied test load (ATL, load applied to the structure, in addition to dead load
already in place, to produce test load magnitude) is applied in not less than four
increments and held for 24 hours. The structure is then unloaded for another 24 hours.
The response of the structure (deflection) during the test is monitored and recorded
continuously or intermittently. The structure passes the test if the measured deflections
satisfy one of the following equations:

∆𝑙
∆𝑟 ≤ (Eq. 2.a)
4
𝑙𝑡2
∆𝑙 ≤ (Eq. 2.b)
20,000 ℎ

In Equation 2.a and 2.b, Δl (in.) is the maximum deflection recorded during the 24-hour
load hold, lt (in.) is the free span of the member under load test, h (in.) is the overall
height of the member, and Δr (in.) is the residual deflection measured following load
removal (Δr is the difference between initial deflections, measured not more than 1
hour before the test, and final deflections, measured 24 hours after load removal)
[ElBatanouny et al. 2015]. If neither Equation 2.a nor Equation 2.b is satisfied, the load
test may be repeated after a period of 72 hours. The repeated load test is passed if
Equation 2.c is satisfied where Δr2 (in.) and Δ2 (in.) are the residual deflection and
maximum deflection measured during the repeated test.

∆2
∆𝑟2 ≤ (Eq. 2.c)
5

Monotonic load test per ACI 437.2-13

The monotonic load test method is also adopted by ACI Code 437.2-13 as shown in
Figure 1, with notable differences in the load magnitude and acceptance criteria. The
TLM stated in ACI 437.12-13 is as follows:

If only part of the structure in question is to be evaluated and these members are
statically indeterminate, TLM shall be determined using Equation 3 as:

𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.3(𝐷𝑤 +𝐷𝑠 ) (Eq. 3.a)

𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.0𝐷𝑤 + 1.1𝐷𝑠 + 1.6𝐿 + 0.5(𝐿𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝑆 𝑜𝑟 𝑅) (Eq. 3.b)
𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.0𝐷𝑤 + 1.1𝐷𝑠 + 1.6(𝐿𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝑆 𝑜𝑟 𝑅) + 1.0𝐿 (Eq. 3.c)

Where Dw is the load due to self-weight of the concrete structural system and Ds is the
superimposed dead load.

If all of the structure in question is to be evaluated and these members are statically
determinate, and the failure is controlled by flexural tension, TLM shall be determined
using Equation 4 as:
 𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.2(𝐷𝑤 +𝐷𝑠 ) (Eq. 4.a)
𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.0𝐷𝑤 + 1.1𝐷𝑠 + 1.4𝐿 + 0.4(𝐿𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝑆 𝑜𝑟 𝑅) (Eq. 4.b)
𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.0𝐷𝑤 + 1.1𝐷𝑠 + 1.4(𝐿𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝑆 𝑜𝑟 𝑅) + 0.9𝐿 (Eq. 4.c)

ACI 437.2-13 offers an additional provision for structures where serviceability is a

criterion in the evaluation, as shown in Equation 5.

𝑇𝐿𝑀 = 1.0𝐷 + 1.0𝐿 + 1.0(𝐿𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝑆 𝑜𝑟 𝑅) (Eq. 5)

Figure 1. Loading protocol for monotonic load test procedure [taken from ACI
437.2-13].

The acceptance criteria for the test in ACI 437.2-13 are different than that of ACI 318-
14. For the structure to pass the load test, the residual deflection must meet the limit in
Equation 6.a, and the maximum deflection must meet the limit of Equation 6.b. The
residual deflection requirement is waived if the maximum deflection is less than 0.05
in. or less than lt/2000.

∆𝑙
∆𝑟 ≤ (Eq. 6.a)
4
lt
∆l ≤ (Eq. 6.b)
180

If either Equation 6.a or Equation 6.b is not satisfied, a repeat test may be conducted
using the same loads. The structure passes the repeated test if the residual deflection of
this test, Δrrt, is less than one-tenth of the maximum deflection, Δl2, as shown in
Equation 6.c.

∆𝑙2
∆𝑟𝑟𝑡 ≤ (Eq. 6.c)
10
Cyclic load test
The cyclic load test (CLT) method was developed as an alternative in-situ load test for
strength evaluation of existing structures. This method was first proposed by ACI
Committee 437 in a report-type document in 2007 [ACI 437 2007]. This section
summarizes the method as described in the latest ACI 437.2-13 Code [ACI 437.2
2013]. The TLM for this test is determined as described in the ‘Monotonic load test per
ACI 437’ section as shown in Equations 3, 4, and 5 above. The loading protocol,
however, is different.

The loading protocol includes at least three loadsets where each loadset includes two
identical load cycles, load cycle A and B, as illustrated in Figure 2. The maximum load
in each cycle is applied in five load steps during both loading and unloading. At each
load step, deflections are measured at equal time intervals until they stabilize
(difference between successive readings taken no less than two minutes apart is less
than 10 %). The minimum hold time at a given load step should be at least two minutes.

The maximum load during load cycles A and B (Loadset 1) should be equal to the
service load if serviceability is an evaluation criterion. Otherwise, the maximum load
in load cycles A and B should be equal to 50% of the ATL. Loading starts at a minimum
load level of 10% of ATL (the minimum load should be maintained during the test to
keep test devices engaged) and increases in equal load steps. The maximum load in
load cycles C and D is halfway between the load in cycle A and cycle E (100% of
ATL). The load is applied such that the first and second load steps in cycle C are equal
to the third and fifth load steps in cycle A, respectively. The load is then increased in
equal intervals until the maximum load for the cycle is achieved. The maximum load
in the last two cycles, E and F, should be equal to ATL. The load in the first and second
load steps in cycle E should be equal to the load in the third and fifth load step in cycle
C. The load is then increased in equal intervals until 100% ATL is achieved.

Figure 2. Loading protocol for cyclic load test (CLT) procedure [taken from ACI
437.2-13].

The evaluation criteria are based on three indices: a) deviation from linearity, b)
permanency ratio, and c) residual deflection. These indices are calculated using load
and deflection measurements. Other measurements, such as strain, rotation, crack
width, and acoustic emission, may also be included. Figure 3 shows a schematic for
calculating the CLT parameters.

a) Deviation from linearity: This parameter measures non-linear response and is

assessed in all load cycles. As shown in Equation 7, deviation from linearity (IDL) is
calculated as one minus the ratio between the secant line for the load versus deflection
plot of a particular cycle, tan(αi), and the slope of the reference point from the load
versus deflection plot (secant stiffness), tan(αref). The reference point is determined in
the first load cycle. The deviation from linearity criterion is met if the index does not
exceed 25% [ACI 437.2 2013, ElBatanouny et al. 2015].

tan(α )
Deviation from Linearity (IDL ) = (1 - i
tan(α )
) ×100 % (Eq. 7)
ref

b) Permanency ratio: The calculation of this parameter was modified in the recent ACI
437 Code [ACI 437.2 2013] and includes comparing the ratios of residual and
maximum deflections in two successive cycles. In Equation 8.a., the permanency ratio,
Ipr, is calculated for each loadset using the two load cycles included in the loadset,
where Ipi (Equation 8.b) and Ip(i+1) (Equation 8.c) are the permanency indices, Δir and
Δ(i+1)
r are the residual deflections, and Δimax and Δ(i+1)
max are the maximum deflections
during the ith and (i+1)th cycles, respectively (first and second load cycles of a particular
loadset). The permanency ratio criterion is met if the index does not exceed 50% [ACI
437.2 2013, ElBatanouny et al. 2015].
Ip(i+1)
Permanency ratio (Ipr ) = ×100 % (Eq. 8.a)
Ipi
Δir
Ipi = (Eq. 8.b)
Δimax
(i+1)
Δr
Ip(i+1) = (i+1) (Eq. 8.c)
Δmax

c) Residual deflection: The residual deflection should be measured after 24 hours of

load removal and the criterion is met if Equation 6.a is satisfied.

If any of the three criteria described above is not met, the structure is considered to
have failed the test. A retest is permitted in the event that the residual deflection
criterion is the only criterion not met. In this case, a retest may be conducted 24 hours
after the first test. The structure passes if the residual deflection during the retest
satisfies Equation 6.c.
 αref αi
Pmax
Pi
Load Envelope

Load
A B
Pref
Pmin

r r Deflection Deflection
max

max

Figure 3. Schematic of load versus deflection curve for: (left) two load cycles [similar
to ACI 437.2-13, Fig. 6.4.2]; and (right) three loadsets [similar to ACI 437.2-13, Fig.
6.4.1] [ElBatanouny et al. 2015]

COMPARISON BETWEEN LOAD TESTING METHODS

Load magnitude
The TLM described in ACI 318-14 is slightly different than that of ACI 437.2-13. The
main differences between the two documents is:

 ACI 318-14 uses slightly lower load factors for live load, roof load, snow load,
and rain load.
 ACI 437.2-13 treats dead loads from self-weight and superimposed dead load
separately.

The difference in TLM calculated from these two standards is generally less than 5%.
It is noted that both standards allow for lower TLM for structures that do not satisfy
minimum shear reinforcement requirements.

ACI 437.2-13 offers additional provisions for lower TLM for statically determinate
flexural members. ACI 437.2 also provides a service loading criteria (load factors equal
1.0) to be used when the focus of the evaluation is serviceability.

Loading protocol and duration

The ATL of the monotonic load test is applied in at least four increments and is similar
in both ACI 318-14 and ACI 437.2-13. The cyclic load test procedure is only described
in ACI 437.2-13 and includes a series of load cycles where the load is applied in five
increments in each loading and unloading phase.

The monotonic load test requires at least 48 hours of testing before rendering a decision
regarding the condition of the structure. This period can increase to 168 hours (48 first
test + 72 waiting period + 48 retest) if a retest is conducted.

The cyclic load test can be applied and completed in less than 6 hours (depending on
the loading rate, hold periods, etc.) plus a 24-hour period for measuring the residual
deflection. This period can increase to 36 hours (6 first test + 24 waiting period + 6
retest) in case of a retest.

Acceptance criteria
For the monotonic load test, the acceptance criteria in both codes for static load
application are based on a combination of deflection and deflection recovery. Both
standards employ the same deflection recovery requirements (Equations 2.a and 6.a),
but different deflection limits (Equation 2.b and 6.b).

It is noted that while ACI 318-14 requires a smaller maximum deflection, acceptance
criteria of ACI 437.2.-13 is stricter as both deflection limits must be satisfied. Section
27.4 in ACI 318-14, meanwhile, requires that one or the other of the deflection criteria
be satisfied.

For the cyclic load test, three indices are calculated to evaluate the condition of the
structure. In addition to simple residual and maximum deflection comparisons, the
cyclic nature of the test allows for a more detailed investigation of the structural
behavior by calculating the deviation from linearity. The load test is passed if all of the
criteria are met.

Both load tests allow for a retest if the acceptance criteria are not met. For the
monotonic load test, ACI 318-14 has a more stringent retest acceptance criterion than
that of ACI 437.2-13. For the cyclic load test, a retest is permitted only when the
residual deflection criterion is not met.

It is noted that both test methods allow for a lower load rating if the structure under
investigation does not meet the acceptance criteria.

DISCUSSION

The monotonic load test is included in two code level documents: ACI 318-14 and ACI
437.2-13. This method is simple, easy to apply, and has been widely used in the
construction field for decades. The application of the load does not require special
loading devices (hydraulic cylinders, actuators, or others) as the load can be applied
using sand bags, water containers, or other means. However, the structure remains
inaccessible for at least 48 hours during the application of the load test.

The cyclic load test of ACI 437.2-13 requires significantly less time to complete. In
addition, this load test method provides more detail regarding the load-deflection
behavior of the tested structure. However, application of load is more complex than
that of the monotonic load test method and requires the use of special loading devices,
such as hydraulic cylinders or actuators.

The purpose of in-situ load testing can be categorized as: a) proof loading to show the
ability of a structure to safely resist design loads, b) serviceability proof loading to
show the ability of a structure to resist design loads in a serviceable fashion in terms of
 deflection and cracking, and c) testing to determine the ultimate capacity of a structure.
While neither of the two standards (ACI 318-14 and ACI 437.2-13) allows for
determination of the ultimate capacity of the structure, ACI 437.2-13 offers additional
provisions to address the case where serviceability is a criterion. In addition, ACI
437.2-13 provides a more detailed commentary describing cracking effects during load
testing and discussion of damage criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

ACI offers two load testing methods for evaluation of existing structures in two
different standards, ACI 318-14 and ACI 437.2-13. This situation is transitory and it
should be resolved once ACI 562 is adopted by IEBC.

This paper provides a summary of both methods to aid the licensed professional
engineer responsible for a load test and to provide a better understanding of
implications and applicability of each test method.

REFERENCES

ACI 318-14 (2014). “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete”, American
Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 318, Farmington Hills, MI, 520 pp.
ACI 437.1R-07 (2007). “Test Load Magnitude, Protocol and Acceptance Criteria”,
American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 437, Farmington Hills, MI, 38
pp.
ACI 437.2-13 (2013). “Code Requirements for Load Testing of Existing Concrete
Structures”, American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 437, Farmington
Hills, MI, 21 pp.
ACI 562-13 (2013). “Code Requirements for Evaluation, Repair, and Rehabilitation of
Concrete Buildings”, American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 562,
Farmington Hills, MI, 59 pp.
Committee on Reinforced-Concrete and Building Laws (1920). “Standard
Specifications No. 23—Standard Building Regulations for the Use of
Reinforced Concrete,” Proceedings of the American Concrete Institute, V. 16,
pp. 283-302.
ElBatanouny, M., Nanni, A., Ziehl, P., and Matta, F. (2015). “Condition Assessment
of Prestressed Concrete Girders Using Cyclic and Monotonic Load Tests”, ACI
Structural Journal, V. 112, No. 1, pp.81-90.
Nehil, T., Nanni, A., and Masetti, F. (2007). “Strength Evaluation by Load Testing:
Recommendations for test load magnitude and acceptance criteria”, Concrete
International, March 2007, pp. 62-67.

View publication stats