Journal of Testing and Evaluation
doi:10.1520/JTE20130088
Manuscript received April 10, 2013;
accepted for publication September 2,
2014; published online October 15, 2014.
1
Ph.D. Candidate, Southeast Univ.,
Nanjing 210096, China, e-mail:
835100403@qq.com
2
Professor, Jiangsu Research Institute of
Building Science CO., LTD, Nanjing
210008, China, e-mail:
yshjdrs@gmail.com
3
Professor, Southeast Univ., Nanjing
210096, China (Corresponding author),
e-mail: 101000873@seu.edu.cn
Copyright V C 2014 by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
/ Vol. 44 / No. 1 / January 2016 / available online at www.astm.org
Suhang Yang,1 Ruinan Gu,2 and Shuangyin Cao3
New Local Compression Test to Estimate
In Situ Compressive Strength
of Masonry Mortar
Reference
Yang, S., Gu, R., and Cao, S., “New Local Compression Test to Estimate In Situ Compressive Strength
of Masonry Mortar,” Journal of Testing and Evaluation, Vol. 44, No. 1, 2016, pp. 67–76, doi:10.1520/
JTE20130088. ISSN 0090-3973
ABSTRACT
A new partially destructive test (PDT) method called local compression test method (LCTM)
is proposed to estimate the in situ compressive strength of masonry mortar. In this method,
the mortar pieces are taken out from horizontal masonry mortar joints and compressed
mutually by means of two flat head round bars, the compressive force crushing the mortar
piece is measured. The compressive test for the mortar pieces can be interpreted as the
compressive strength test for the radially constrained mortar cylinder. The correction
coefficient formula is first established through the tests for the local compressive strength of
mortar pieces in the standard thickness (10 mm) and other thickness. The empirical
correlation relationships between the local compressive strength of mortar pieces and the
compressive strength of mortar cubes are presented for the masonry mortar with
compressive strength ranging from M2.5 to M15.0. A good correlation between the cube
compressive and local compressive strength has been found. The in situ verification tests are
undertaken on a number of mortar structures to determine the accuracy of the LCTM. The
experimental and analytical results show that this method is accurate and applicable to in
situ tests of the masonry mortar compressive strength.
Keywords
mortar piece, local compression test method (LCTM), in situ test, compressive strength of masonry mor-
tar, mortar joint thickness
67
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG
68 Journal of Testing and Evaluation
Introduction
Masonry structures are constructed with the bricks bonded by
masonry mortar to form an integral block. Therefore, an impor-
tant topic in the investigation of the load capacity of masonry
structures is to determine the in situ compressive strength of
masonry mortar. The brick samples are taken out easily from
the block for tests with the laboratory method. However, stand-
ard mortar samples are difficult to obtain for their mechanical
property tests.
Over the past years, a range of in situ, non-destructive or
partially destructive test methods have been proposed for esti-
mating the masonry mortar compressive strength. For new
structures, the fundamental applicability of strength estimation
should be made to meet the design requirements. Also, the
actual mortar strength of existing structures should be usually
estimated to assess the safety or taken as the basis for strength-
ening design.
Ideally, such tests should be performed without damage to
masonry structures, and a large number of results obtained
from a single member with non-destructive test methods
(NDT), such as rebound hammer [1], penetration testing [2],
and pendulum rebound hardness [3,4]. The principle of NDT
methods is to establish the correlation between test physical
parameters, such as density, elastic modulus, surface hardness,
and mortar strength. However, the problem posed is that the
test values and the mortar strength are not physically but only
empirically related. The test values are also insensitive to the
changes of mortar compressive strength, and dimensions
between the test values and compressive strength are different.
Also, the relationship can be affected by many factors such as
poor mortar surface state, replacement of operators, and actual
environmental condition of the in situ test, which is different
from that of the laboratory test. These highly indirect natures of
the NDT make it difficult to estimate the mortar strength
accurately.
According to the above analysis, partially destructive tests
(PDT), such as the point load test [1], compression test in cylin-
der [1], small sample test [5], and drill cavity test [6] are natu-
rally introduced. Some strength parameters measured are
regarded to be more reliable than that obtained with NDT
methods. The calibration relationship is employed in all of those
test methods to estimate the compressive strength. Those tests
involve only small-scale damage, and repair work is superficial.
The point load test method [1] is originally used to estimate the
strength of stone in the geology field (see Fig. 1). Although the
mortar specimen subjected to the applied point pattern load
action is destroyed as a result of the splitting tension action; it is
insensitive to the compressive strength of mortar. Also, the
method is complex for relationship formulas by rule of thumb,
lack of physical significances, and difficulty of mastering by
operators. Those limit the use of the method.
&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
FIG. 1 Schematic diagram of point load test.
The local compression test method (LCTM) introduced in
this paper is classified as a PDT method, similar to point load
test method. It can be easily used either in the laboratory or on
site and can be standardized for operation. As shown in Fig. 2,
the mortar pieces for the local compression test are taken out
from the masonry mortar horizontal joint, and compressed
mutually with two flat head round bars of 10 mm diameter to
obtain the peak load value of the mortar pieces at crush failure.
According to the relationship between the peak values of com-
pressive force crushing the mortar pieces and that of the mortar
cubes cured under the same condition, the equivalent cube
compressive strength of the masonry mortar can be estimated
to provide more accurate results. Accordingly, much investiga-
tion is needed to present the applicability, accuracy, and reliabil-
ity of this method to give the necessary correlation between the
local compression values of mortar pieces in non-standard
thickness and that of those of standard thickness (10 mm), and
to provide the relationship between the local compressive
strength and compressive strength of mortar cubes. Significant
research is still needed on the rationality of the local compres-
sion test.
Theory of Local Compression
Test Method
TEST PRINCIPLE OF LCTM
The theory of the LCTM is based on the core-drilling test in
reinforced concrete structures. Core drilling is the most com-
mon test performed in existing reinforced concrete structures
and provides reliable and accurate strength estimation, as the
concrete compressive strength of the core is estimated by means
of laboratory standard compression specimens. Therefore, if
mortar pieces from a horizontal mortar joint can be made into
right cylinders for the standard axial compression test, the test
compressive strength would be more accurate. However, mortar
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG

FIG. 2
Schematic diagram of local compression test.
pieces with low strength can hardly be extracted or the brittle
mortar would be severely disturbed during the core-drilling
process. It is infeasible to obtain the compressive strength of
masonry mortar using the core-drilling method.
By using the LCTM, the compressed local area of the mor-
tar pieces is compressed directly by means of flat head round
bars. If the radially constrained effect around the mortar in the
compressed area is not considered, such area would be equiva-
lent to that of the cylinder for the compression test (Fig. 2). Nor-
mally, the thickness of the horizontal mortar joint of the
masonry is about 10 mm; if the diameter of the flat head round
bars is also 10 mm, the mortar in the compressed area could be
equivalent to the right cylinder with the ratio of height to diam-
eter of 1:1. The particle sizes of sand in the mortar are 1–2 mm;
the internal uniformity of the mortar right cylinder is better
than that of the concrete right cylinder. By reference to the rele-
vant research on the concrete core drilling method, the physical
quantity tested by use of the LCTM is found to be the mortar
piece compressive strength, which is more rational and nearly
close to the compressive strength of the mortar cube [7,8].
FIG. 3 Distribution of maximum principal stress of mortar piece.
&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
YANG ET AL. ON NEW LOCAL COMPRESSION TEST 69
Fig. 3shows the results of finite element analysis (FEA)
when testing with the LCTM to analyze the internal failure pro-
cess of the mortar piece. After loading, the principal tensile
stress areas are found at both sides of the mortar equivalent cyl-
inder; the stress areas in the middle of the sides are larger than
that on the surface (Fig. 3(b)). The stress areas are linked
together gradually with loading, and the principal stress in the
equivalent cylinder is always the compressive stress (Fig. 3(c)).
The destruction occurs because of the large lateral plastic tensile
strain in the mortar cylinder at failure (Fig. 3(d)). The equiva-
lent cylinder expands laterally and is constrained by the outside
mortar of the compressed mortar pieces, so the tensile stress
appears first in the outside mortar cylinder. Because the mortar
is a brittle material, the cracks under tensile extend through the
mortar pieces, then the outside mortar collapses, the constraint
is eliminated, and the mortar equivalent right cylinder is
crushed immediately. This is very similar to the failure process
of the standard cylinder concrete with axial load tested in the
laboratory. It can be used to interpret the results observed from
FIG. 4 Normal and typical failure modes (mm).
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG
70 Journal of Testing and Evaluation
FIG. 5 Abnormal and typical failure modes (mm).
the tests and indicates that the mortar-equivalent cylinder is
destroyed under compression as shown in Fig. 4. The typical
failure process of a mortar piece is shown in Figs. 5 and 6.
FAILURE MODE OF MORTAR PIECES
Fig. 4 presents typical failure modes observed on mortar
pieces tested using the LCTM. When the size of the mortar
piece is less than 30  30 mm, the failure of the mortar pieces is
changed into cracking from the edge, then penetrating through
the mortar piece, as shown in Fig. 5. When the size of the mor-
tar piece is larger than 30  30 mm, the failure is accounted as
the brittle crushing failure in the area compressed mutually by
means of two flat head round bars, as shown in Fig. 4(a)–4(c);
when the size of the mortar piece is greater than 60  60 mm,
the piece is also crushed in the compressed area and the failure
loads are significantly higher than that of the samples ranging
from 30  30 to 60  60–mm, as shown in Fig. 4(d). The test
results are sensitive to the changes of sample size. When the
size of the mortar piece is not within the range from 30  30 to
60  60 mm, the failure state is unstable and the area of the
mortar piece compressed by flat head round bars is not crushed.
For the samples within the range from 30  30 to 60  60 mm,
the failure compressive values are close to that of mortar pieces
having the same thickness and strength. Therefore, mortar
pieces within the range from 30  30 to 60  60 mm are chosen
for the best samples, and those out of the dimensions are
voided. The thickness of the mortar pieces taken out from
actual horizontal masonry mortar joints of masonry structure
ranges from 8 mm to 16 mm, and it is found during the test that
FIG. 6
Typical failure process of mortar piece.
&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
the compressed area is crushed for such samples The test posi-
tion should be located as close to the middle area of the mortar
piece as possible to ensure that the area acted on by the bars is
at least 10 mm away from the edge, so as to bring the uniform
constraint in the edge of the compressed area acted on by the
flat head round bars.
As discussed above, the mortar pieces can be taken as the
equivalent right cylinder constrained by the radial force for the
axial load compressive tests. The compressive load in the local
area of the mortar flat head bars is defined as the mortar local
compressive strength, x, calculated by Eq 1 after various thick-
nesses of the samples from 30  30 to 60  60 mm are corrected
by the thickness correction factor:
Nu
x ¼n (1)
A
where:
x ¼ local compressive strength of mortar piece, in MPa;
Nu ¼ compressive load at the time mortar piece damaged,
in N;
A ¼ compressed area of the mortar piece, 78.54 mm2; and
n ¼ thickness correction coefficient of mortar pieces.
Experimental Work
EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS
The test apparatus of the LCTM is a local compression instru-
ment used to apply and measure the local compressive force on
the mortar piece. The apparatus consists of several components
as shown in Fig. 7(a). The diameter of the flat head bar is
10 mm; one bar is fixed and the other is movable by turning the
loading handle, with a travel distance of 30 mm. The counter
force frame with very high stiffness does not deform during test.
The pressure sensor is in the dynamometric system, with an
accuracy of 60.1 N. The force values can be acquired isochro-
nously. The peak load at failure can be acquired and saved with
the digital display measuring and reading system. The effect of
the loading rate on the accuracy of the local compression instru-
ment was checked by changing operators during testing of sev-
eral samples with different strengths. It was found that the
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG
 YANG ET AL. ON NEW LOCAL COMPRESSION TEST 71

FIG. 7 Sketch of local compression instrument.

different loading rate and consequently operators had no signif- Masonry block: common sintered clay brick size is
icant effect on the accuracy of the method. 240 mm  115 mm  53 mm and sintered porous clay brick is
240 mm  115 mm  90 mm, fired common brick, code GB
Specimen Preparation and Test 5101 [13] and fired hollow brick, code GB 13545 [14], respec-
tively, equivalent to ASTM C62 [15] and ASTM C652 [16].
Procedure
MATERIALS TEST SPECIMENS
Cement: ordinary Portland cement with strength grade of The test specimens are divided into two series. The first series
R32.5, ordinary Portland cement, code GB 175 [9], equivalent contains 16 prepared masonry members, which are divided into
to ASTM C150 [10] (see Table 1). two groups of cement mortar and mixed mortar masonry as
Sand: natural silica sand, standard sand for building, code shown in Fig. 8(a). All mortar members were prepared within
GB/T 14684 [11], equivalent to ASTM C778 [12]; 8 h in 1 day. The members were placed in the open air, pro-
tected from the sunshine and rain and kept dry. The accompa-
nying mortar cubes for each member, using the same mortar as
TABLE 1 Test members. the member, were prepared in accordance with the People’s
Republic of China National Standard JGJ/T70. The size of the
Design Size
Group No. strength (MPa) (mm  mm  mm) Materials mortar cubes is 70.7  70.7  70.7 mm, cubes are formed in the
steel molds and the bricks at the bottom of the mold are the
1 M11 M2.5 370  490  1313 NB,CM
same as that of the member (Fig. 8(b)). The cubes are cured
M12 M5.0 NB,CM
under the same environmental condition of the masonry mem-
M13 M10.0 NB,CM
M14 M15.0 NB,CM ber. For each member, mortar pieces were extracted from these
M15 M2.5 370  490  1990 DB,CM members when each masonry member was cured at the specific
M16 M5.0 DB,CM time (28 days, 60 days, 90 days, 120 days, and 180 days) (Fig.
M17 M10.0 DB,CM 8(c)). Ten valid pieces of data of local compressive strength
M18 M15.0 DB,CM were acquired by using LCTM and six accompanying mortar
cubes for each masonry member tested to obtain the compres-
2 M21 M2.5 370  490  1313 NB,MM
M22 M5.0 NB,MM sive strength of the mortar in accordance with the People’s
M23 M10.0 NB,MM Republic of China National Standard JGJ/T 70 [17–20].
M24 M15.0 NB,MM The second series contains nine groups of mortar pieces
M25 M2.5 370  490  1990 DB,MM with the thickness range from 8 mm to 16 mm, one thickness
M26 M5.0 DB,MM (integral) is arranged for each group, which consists of 50
M27 M10.0 DB,MM pieces, and the design strength is M5.0. The tests were carried
M28 M15.0 DB,MM out with the LCTM after 28-day standard curing. The non-
Note: NB, ordinary sintered clay brick; DB, sintered porous brick; CM, standard thickness of the mortar pieces can be converted into
cement mortar; MM, mixed mortar. standard thickness 10 mm; the mortar thickness conversion

&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG
72 Journal of Testing and Evaluation
FIG. 8 Photos of test members.
coefficient n was adopted according to the empirical formula
established after tests.
TEST PROCEDURE
The test procedure can be summarized as follows:
Step 1: drill the masonry core specimen containing two
pieces of bricks and integrated mortar piece from the horizontal
masonry mortar joint of the masonry member (Fig. 9(a)). Peel
off the mortar piece from the sides of the bricks with a chisel.
The diameter of the drilling core is 30–60 mm (Fig. 9(b)).
Drilling bits are not cooled with cooling water when sampling.
Step 2: select the mortar pieces with parallel and smooth
surfaces. The samples should be intact without cracks. Take off
the redundant parts of mortar pieces and make them into
approximate squares of 30  30–60  60 mm for testing. Mea-
sure the thickness of the compressed area of mortar pieces by
means of vernire caliper to 60.01 mm (Fig. 9(c)).
FIG. 9 Test procedure.
&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
Step 3: obtain the compressive load value, Nu, at failure of
the mortar piece with the local compression instrument
(Fig. 9(d)). The data obtained at the crushing failure of the mor-
tar piece is effective data, accurate to 61 N. The mortar local
compressive strength, x, is calculated using Eq 1.
Results and Discussion
TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS OF THICKNESS CHANGES
OF MORTAR PIECES
The frequency distribution histogram of the LCTM compressive
load, Nu, results in the mortar piece with a thickness of 11 mm
as depicted in Fig. 10. The data is plotted to illustrate the scatter
and to access their closeness to a normal distribution curve;
there is a good approximation, which indicates that the test data
obtained by using this LCTM is very stable, with good results
repeatability.
The average value of load Nu of each mortar piece group is
obtained from the tests and the thicknesses are used to establish
the relationship between the compressive load and thickness as
shown in Fig. 11. This indicates that a linear equation can be
FIG. 10 Frequency distribution histogram (11 mm).
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG
 YANG ET AL. ON NEW LOCAL COMPRESSION TEST 73

local compressive strength and the compressive strength of

FIG. 11 Correlation of specimen thickness versus compressive load.
used to calculate the compressive load and mortar thickness;
the correlation coefficient (R2) is 0.9998. The compressive load
of the mortar pieces of different thickness can be multiplied by
the thickness correction coefficient, which is given by Eq 2,
n¼ 0:09t þ 1:9
where:
n ¼ mortar thickness conversion coefficient; and
t ¼ thickness of the mortar piece on which the load applied
for testing with LCTM, mm.
mortar cubes.
The correlation curve of the local compressive strength in
the case of the masonry mortar used as the mixed mortar and
the compressive strength of the mortar cubes is depicted in
2
Fig. 12(a). The correlation coefficient (R ) of the power function
2
equation is 0.8183, and (R ) of the linear equation is 0.7880, the
difference between them being small. The relationship between
the local compressive strength, in the case of the masonry mor-
tar used as the cement mortar, and the compressive strength of
mortar cubes is shown in Fig. 12(b). For this case, the correlation
coefficient (R2) of the power function equation is 0.8058 and
that of the linear equation is 0.7603, the power function equa-
tion being slightly better than that of linear equation.
It also can be seen from Fig. 12 that the slope of the linear
equation is almost close to 1. It is significant that the local com-
pressive strength is well correlated with the cube compressive
strength and becomes very sensitive to the changes of the cube
compressive strength. The ratio of the concrete core compres-
(2) sive strength obtained by the core drilling method to the cube
compressive strength is about 1, and the ratio of the local
FIG. 12 Relationship between mortar local compressive strength and cube
compressive strength.

STRENGTH CURVE TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

USING LCTM
As mentioned above, the tested mortar pieces are crushed com-
pletely in the compressed area and the compressive strength of
the mortar cubes are well correlated. Therefore, the empirical
formula of the local compressive strength, “x,” and the com-
pressive strength of mortar cubes can be obtained as the
strength testing curve to estimate the corresponding cube com-
pressive strength of the masonry mortar.
A linear or power function equation is typically adopted by
scholars to make regression analysis and obtain the relationship
between the test values and compressive strength values [17,18].
It seems reasonable to choose the linear equation for its simplic-
ity, but there may be the problem that the linear equation does
not pass through the origin and largely deviates from test results
in some areas. By using the regression curve of the power func-
tion equation, it is convenient to expand the strength range ap-
plicable to the extrapolation curve after test. Besides, the mortar
strength presumed in terms of the linear at low strength is on
the low side, whereas the mortar strength presumed in terms of
the linear at high strength is on the high side; both of them tend
to be unsafe. Additionally, when the local compressive value is
0, the power function of the masonry cube compressive strength
is 0 as well. Therefore, after comparison of the power function
with the linear equation and their analysis, the power function
equation is adapted to determine the relationship between the

&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG
74 Journal of Testing and Evaluation

FIG. 13
Verification test on site.

compressive strength to the mortar cube compressive strength

where:
(x/y) is greater than 1, which shows that the equivalent com-
x ¼ local compressive strength of mortar piece, in MPa, and
pressive strength of the mortar right cylinder increased because
y ¼ compressive strength of masonry cube, in MPa.
of the constraint action of the mortar.
The conversion value of the compressive strength of mixed
mortar is calculated by Eq 3,
Verification and Accuracy of LCTM
y ¼ 0:511x1:267 (3)
To verify the applicability, accuracy, and reliability of the
LCTM, the LCTM in situ results were compared with relevant
The conversion value of the compressive strength of cement results of other test methods including the rebound method,
mortar is calculated by Eq 4, penetration method, and point load, as shown in Fig. 13. The
test results were compared with the compressive strength of
y ¼ 0:635x1:112 (4)
mortar cubes cured under the same condition. A comparison of

TABLE 2 Comparison of the compressive strength of masonry mortar tests with five test methods.

Rebound methoda Penetration methodb Point load methodc LCTM

Tested Relative Tested Relative Tested Relative Tested Relative Cube compressive
strength deviatione strength deviatione strength deviatione strength deviatione strengthd
(MPa) (%) (MPa) (%) (MPa) (%) (MPa) (%) (MPa)

28 days M10 cement mortar 21.8 17.11 6.1 76.81 22.5 14.45 25.6 2.66 26.3
ordinary brick
M10 mixed mortar 17.6 31.25 10.1 60.55 19.7 23.04 22.3 12.89 25.6
porous brick
60 days M2.5 mixed mortar 10.91 35.82 7.3 57.06 16.1 5.29 16.2 4.71 17.0
ordinary brick
M2.5 cement mortar 9.17 46.06 6.9 59.41 15.7 7.65 15.4 9.41 17.0
porous brick
90 days M5.0 cement mortar 16.62 51.82 8.8 74.49 28.1 18.55 30.1 12.75 34.5
ordinary brick
M5.0 mixed mortar 23.18 31.01 9.3 72.32 26.6 20.83 31.5 6.25 33.6
porous brick
a
Code GB/T50315 [1] correlates the mortar compressive strength and rebound value R as follows: When d  1.0 mm, f2ij ¼ 13.97  105 R3.57, when 1.0
mm < d < 3.0 mm, f2ij ¼ 4.85  104 R3.04, when d  3.0 mm, f2ij ¼ 6.34  105 R3.60. Where f2ij ¼ mortar compressive strength; R ¼ average mortar rebound
value; and d ¼ average depth of carbonation.
b
Code JGJ/T136 [19] determines the mortar compressive strength by the comparison of the penetration depth with the empirical equation.
c
Code GB/T50315 [1] correlates the mortar compressive strength and point load Nij as follows: f2ij ¼ (33.30n4ijn5ijNij  1.10)1.09; n4ij ¼ ð1=ð0:05rij þ 1ÞÞ;
n5ij ¼ ð1=ð0:03tij ð0:10tij þ 1Þ þ 0:40ÞÞ where Nij ¼ point load, kN; n4ij ¼ load radius correction coefficient; n5ij ¼ load radius correction coefficient; rij ¼ load ra-
dius, in mm; and tij ¼ specimen thickness, mm.
d
Code JGJ/T70 [20] adopts the mortar cube with compressive strength of 70.7  70.7  70.7 mm (equivalent to ASTM C109/C109M [21] adopts the mortar
cubes with compressive strength of 50  50  50 mm), or an equivalent national standard and the specimens are cured as specified [22].
e
The relative deviation: RD ¼ 100  (test values from the rebound, penetration, point load methods, or LCTM minus the compressive strength of mortar cube)/
the compressive strength of mortar cubes.

&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG
 YANG ET AL. ON NEW LOCAL COMPRESSION TEST 75

the estimated cube compressive strength obtained using the Construction Group of Jiangsu Province. The writers take this
four methods are presented in Table 2 [21,22]. opportunity to express their sincere appreciation.
Table 2 shows that the average error of the compressive
strength of masonry mortar and the cubes tested with the References
rebound method is 35.51 %, and the average error from the
[1] GB/T 50315, 2000, “Technical Standard for Site Testing of
penetration method even reaches 66.77 %; both errors are Masonry Engineering,” National Standard of the People’s
larger. The average error from the point load method is Republic of China, Beijing, pp. 9–12 (in Chinese).
14.97 %, and 8.11 % from the LCTM. The in situ tests show [2] Felicetti, R. and Gattesco, N., “A Penetration Test to Study
that the accuracy from the partially destructive test method is the Mechanical Response of Mortar in Ancient Masonry
Buildings,” Mater. Struct., Vol. 1, 1998, pp. 350–356.
higher than that from the non-destructive test method; the aver-
[3] Transue, D., Schuller, M., and Rens, K., “Use of the Pendu-
age error from the LCTM is less than 10 %. It also indicates that lum Hammer Test for Mortar Evaluation,” Proceedings of
the LCTM results can be converted into the equivalent cube the 8th North American Masonry Conference, Austin, TX,
compressive strength with reasonable accuracy. Compared with 1999, pp. 6B21-12 (on CD).
other partially destructive test methods, the sampling procedure [4] Vander Klugt, L. J. A. R., “The Pointing Hardness Tester—
of the mortar pieces taken from the masonry mortar joint are An Instrument to Meet a Need,” Mater. Struct., Vol. 24,
1991, pp. 471–476.
identical to that used for the LCTM. The apparatus mentioned
[5] Drdacky, M., “Identification of Historic Materials Using Tests
in this paper and correlation equations obtained through tests on Small Samples,” 2nd International Conference on Hazards
are easily used to calculate the mortar compressive strength of and Modern Heritage, Kos, Greece, 2005, pp. 29–37.
the mortar cubes from the in situ masonry mortar. [6] RILEM TC MDT. D.1, “Indirect Determination of the Sur-
face Strength of Unweathered Hydraulic Cement Mortar
by the Drill Energy Method,” Mater. Struct., Vol. 37, 2004,
pp. 485–487.
Conclusions [7] BS, EN 12504-1, 2000, “Testing Concrete in Structures:
Part 1. “Cored Specimens—Taking, Examining and Test-
On the basis of the laboratory and in situ tests and the associ- ing in Compression,” British Standard, London, p. 6.
ated analysis, it was found that the LCTM is a suitable one to [8] CECS 03, 2007, “Technical Specification for Testing Con-
crete Strength with Drilled Core,” National Standard of the
estimate the equivalent cube compressive strength of masonry
People’s Republic of China, Beijing (in Chinese).
mortar. The following conclusions have been reached: [9] GB 175, 2007, “Common Portland Cement,” National
1. The test result using the LCTM is the compressive Standard of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, pp.
strength of the mortar piece. The test principle offers a 2–3 (in Chinese).
[10] ASTM C150: Specification for Portland Cement, Annual
physical significance that the compression test of mortar
Book of ASTM Standards, ASTM International, West
pieces is equivalent to that of the mortar right cylinder
Conshohocken, PA, 2012.
under the radial constraint. [11] GB/T 14684, 2011, “Sand for Construction,” National
2. The operation procedure of the LCTM can be standar- Standard of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, pp.
dized and skillful operators are not needed. The compres- 2–3 (in Chinese).
sive strength of the mortar cubes is well correlated with [12] ASTM C778: Standard Specification for Standard Sand,
that obtained using the LCTM, the regression equation in Annual Book of ASTM Standards, ASTM International,
power form is adopted to provide a good correlation of West Conshohocken, PA, 2012.
the local compressive strength of the mortar and the com- [13] GB 5101, 2003, “Fired Common Brick,” National Standard
pressive strength of cubes. The correlation coefficient (R2) of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, pp. 3–4 (in
is 0.8058 for the cement mortar and 0.8183 for the mixed Chinese).
[14] GB 13545, 2003, “Fired Hollow Brick,” National Standard
mortar. The equations in this article can easily be used for
of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, pp. 3–4 (in
calculation of the compressive strength of masonry mor-
Chinese).
tar in situ. [15] ASTM C62: Specification for Building Brick (Solid
3. The in situ tests show that the test results with the LCTM Masonry Units Made from Clay or Shale), Annual Book of
are accurate, with the error less than 10 %. The LCTM ASTM Standards, ASTM International, West Consho-
can provide a reliable estimation of the compressive hocken, PA, 2012.
strength of the masonry mortar used in the masonry [16] ASTM C652: Specification for Hollow Brick (Hollow
structures. Masonry Units Made from Clay or Shale), Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, ASTM International, West Consho-
hocken, PA, 2012.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
[17] ACI Committee 228, “In-Place Methods for Determina-
This work is financially supported by the Ministry of Housing tion of Strength of Concrete,” ACI 228.1R-03, Ameri-
and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of can Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2003,
China, Jiangsu Nantong No. 3 Construction Group, and Jinling p. 22.

&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG
76 Journal of Testing and Evaluation

[18] Malhotra, V. M. and Carino, N. J., Handbook on Nondestruc- [21] ASTM C109/C109M: Standard Test Method for
tive Testing of Concrete, CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2004, Chap. 3. Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars
[19] JGJ/T 136, 2001, “Technical Specification for Testing Com- (Using 2-in. or [50-mm] Cube Specimens),” Annual Book
pressive Strength of Masonry Mortar by Penetration of ASTM Standards, ASTM International, West Consho-
Resistance Method,” National Standard of the People’s hocken, PA, 2012.
Republic of China, Beijing (in Chinese). [22] EN 1015-11, 2006, “Methods of Test for Mortar for
[20] JGJ/T 70, 2009, “Standard for Test Method of Basic Prop- Masonry: Part 11. Determination of Flexural and Com-
erties of Construction Mortar,” National Standard of the pressive Strength of Hardened Mortar (Includes Amend-
People’s Republic of China, Beijing, pp. 9–12 (in Chinese). ment A1:2006),” British Standard, London.

&RS\ULJKWE\$670,QW
ODOOULJKWVUHVHUYHG7XH)HE*07
'RZQORDGHGSULQWHGE\
8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQD8QLYHUVLGDG3RQWLILFLD%ROLYDULDQDSXUVXDQWWR/LFHQVH$JUHHPHQW1RIXUWKHUUHSURGXFWLRQVDXWKRUL]HG