Concrete and Materials Lab E - Group 2

Concrete and Materials Lab 1
Durability and Non-destructive Testing
Kingston University London
27 October 2023
Concrete and Materials Lab 1 Kingston University London
Quality information
Introduction Introduction Compiling Equipment Literature Reviews, Theoretical
and Objective Objective and and Discussions and background,
Theoretical presenting Experimental Conclusions Discussion
background results Procedures Conclusion
Literature
Review
Alpha Diallo Anmol Gill George Joshua Pelham Oliver Jeffery Kwaku Boakye
Worsfold
K1942624 K2007358 K2165553 K2166788 K2167039 K2165547
Prepared for:
Kingston University London
Compiled by:
George Worsfold
Apprentice Civil Engineer
T: D +44-7467702532
E: k2165553@kingston.ac.uk
Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Table of Contents
1. Prelude ............................................................................................................ 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Theoretical Information .................................................................................... 2
E1 (A) Half-cell Survey ............................................................................................................................................ 2
E1 (B) Resistivity of Concrete ................................................................................................................................. 3
E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test .................................................................................................................. 4
E2 (B) Ultra-sonic pulse Velocity testing ................................................................................................................. 5
3. Literature Review............................................................................................. 7
Half-cell survey and resistivity of concrete .............................................................................................................. 7
Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test ............................................................................................................................. 8
Ultra-Sonic Pulse Velocity Test................................................................................................................................ 9
4. Equipment & Procedures ............................................................................... 10
Equipment ............................................................................................................................................................. 10
Experimental Procedure........................................................................................................................................ 12
Lab E1 (A): Half Cell Survey of a Concrete Slab ................................................................................................... 12
Lab E1 (B): Resistivity of Concrete ....................................................................................................................... 13
Lab E2 (A): Surface Hardness Testing .................................................................................................................. 14
Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing........................................................................................................ 16
5. Results and Discussion ................................................................................. 17
Lab E1 (A): Half Cell Survey of a Concrete Slab ................................................................................................... 17
Lab E1 (B): Resistivity of Concrete ....................................................................................................................... 18
Lab E2 (A): Surface Hardness Testing .................................................................................................................. 19
Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing........................................................................................................ 19
6. Discussion & Conclusion ............................................................................... 20
E1 (A) Half-cell Survey .......................................................................................................................................... 20
Discussion – E1 (A) Half-cell Survey..................................................................................................................... 20
Conclusion – E1 (A) Half-cell Survey .................................................................................................................... 20
E1 (B) Resistivity of Concrete ............................................................................................................................... 21
Discussion – E1 (B) Resistivity of Concrete .......................................................................................................... 21
Conclusion – E1 (B) Resistivity of Concrete .......................................................................................................... 21
E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test ................................................................................................................ 21
Discussion - E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test ............................................................................................ 21
Conclusion - E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test ........................................................................................... 22
E2 (B) Ultra-sonic pulse Velocity testing ............................................................................................................... 22
Discussion - E2 (B) Ultra-sonic pulse Velocity testing ........................................................................................... 22
Conclusion - E2 (B) Ultra-sonic pulse Velocity testing........................................................................................... 22
7. References .................................................................................................... 23
8. Individual Element ......................................................................................... 25
Q1 - Factors that could potentially cause corrosion of reinforced steel in the concrete structure and their
prevention ............................................................................................................................................................. 25
Alpha Diallo - K1942624 ....................................................................................................................................... 25
Carbonation in Concrete ....................................................................................................................................... 25
Methods to Counteract Carbonation in Reinforced Concrete ................................................................................ 26
Chloride induced failure. ....................................................................................................................................... 27
References: ........................................................................................................................................................... 27
George Worsfold – K2165553 ............................................................................................................................... 28
Q2 - Purposes of undertaking non-destructive testing .......................................................................................... 30
Josh Pelham – K2166788 ..................................................................................................................................... 30

Why is NDT used? ................................................................................................................................................ 30

Benefits of using NDT ........................................................................................................................................... 30
Applications of NDT .............................................................................................................................................. 30
Quality Control ...................................................................................................................................................... 30
Characterising old/existing structures or assets .................................................................................................... 31
Identifying defects and implement maintenance plans. ......................................................................................... 32
Monitor changes to manage associated risks. ...................................................................................................... 32
References ............................................................................................................................................................ 32
Q3 - The specific need to assess the strength of in-situ concrete has led to the development of arrange of
tests in which surface zone is penetrated or fractured .......................................................................................... 33
Oliver Jeffery – K2167039 ..................................................................................................................................... 33
Q4 - Discuss selected different types of non-destructive and durability testing, other than those already
been used in the laboratory and its purposes, significant and limitation. ............................................................... 37
Anmol Gill – K2007358 ......................................................................................................................................... 37
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 37
Maturity Concept ................................................................................................................................................... 37
Radiographic Method ............................................................................................................................................ 38
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................ 40
References ............................................................................................................................................................ 40
Q5 - Briefly explain what cause concrete to degradation? Provide an example where there are evidences
of concrete structure showing signs of degradation. Suggest and describe ways to improve the durability of
concrete. ............................................................................................................................................................... 41
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 41
Plastic Shrinkage .................................................................................................................................................. 41
Thermal Cracking .................................................................................................................................................. 41
Sulphate Dissolution ............................................................................................................................................. 42
Leaching ............................................................................................................................................................... 42
Example of Degradation........................................................................................................................................ 42
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................ 43
References ............................................................................................................................................................ 43
Appendix A Peer Assessment Form ......................................................................... 44
Figures
Figure 1- Corrosion and the need for additional studies or repairs (METHOD, no date ). ..................................... 2
Figure 2. A schematic diagram of four-point Wenner probe current flow (Cheytani & Chan, 2021)........................ 3
Figure 3 - Rebound Hammer used on a concrete surface with labelled components (Illston, 2010) ....................... 4
Figure 4: “Calculation of v” (Kingston University, 2023) ......................................................................................... 5
Figure 5: “PUNDIT Test Apparatus” (Kingston University, 2023) ............................................................................ 5
Figure 6: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity test arrangements (Loan Ngo, 2018) ............................................................... 6
Figure 7. Contour plot of potential Ecorr. (Sadowski, 2013) ..................................................................................... 7
Figure 8. Contour plot of concrete resistivity P. (Sadowski, 2013) ......................................................................... 7
Figure 9. Relationship between strength of concrete and rebound test results UCL data (Illston, 2010) ............... 8
Figure 10. Relationship between strength and ultrasonic pulse velocity of concrete, UCL data (Illston, 2010). ... 9
Figure 11. Labelle d photograph of equipment used in Lab E1 (A) ....................................................................... 10
Figure 12. Labelled Photograph of some of the materials used in Lab E2 (A) ...................................................... 11
Figure 13. Labelled Photograph of some of the materials used in Lab E2 (B) ...................................................... 11
Figure 14 – Flow Chart of Experimental Procedure for Lab E1 (A): Half Cell Survey of a Concrete Slab ............. 12
Figure 15. Labelled Photograph showing Resipod Wenner resistance meter being used .................................... 13
Figure 16 -Flow chart with diagrams of Lab E2 (A) Procedure ............................................................................. 15
Figure 17 - Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing Procedure Diagram ..................................................... 16

Figure 18. Half-cell Survey Contour Results ........................................................................................................ 17

Figure 19: "Criteria for corrosion of reniforced concrete (al, 2022) ........................................................................ 20
Figure 20. Anon, (n.d.). Cathodic Protection of Steel in Concrete - Metallisation Ltd. [online] Available at:
https://www.metallisation.com/applications/cathodic-protection-of-steel-in-concrete/. .......................................... 25
Figure 21. Happho. (2017). Corrosion of Steel Reinforcement: Causes, Effects and Remedies - Happho. [online]
Available at: https://happho.com/corrosion-steel-reinforcement-causes-effects-remedies/. .................................. 26
Figure 22 https://www.worldhighways.com/wh6/products/concrete-protection-chloride-attack ............................. 27
Figure 23. Carbonation assisted by water and CO2 adsorption (Šavija, 2016) .................................................... 28
Figure 24. Examples of Pundit ultrasonic testing array output for different levels of voiding, Figure A1.12
(McKibbins, L, et al, 2022) .................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 25 - Change of performance of structures with time: Figure 1 (P.A. Muhammed Basheer et al, 2009) ...... 31
Figure 26. Coloured equipotential contour map for helping interpret risk of active corrosion, Figure A1.9
(McKibbins, L, et al, 2022) .................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 27. Radiographic image of strands in PT ducts (Collins, J, Ashurst, D, Webb J, Sparkes, P and Ghose,
2017) ..................................................................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 28. The main types of near-to-surface testing for concrete (BS1881-207, 1992) ....................................... 35
Figure 29. An example of a strength-maturity curve (The Constructor, 2020a) .................................................... 38
Figure 30. The equipment used for the radiographic testing of concrete (The Constructor, 2020b) ..................... 39
Figure 31. A depiction of how defects in a concrete sample are reflected on a radiographic film (The Constructor,
2020b) ................................................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 32. “Initiation of plastic shrinkage racks resulting from the evaporation of water from fresh concrete
surface” (Dyer, 2014) ............................................................................................................................................ 41
Figure 33. “Common sulphur-bearing minerals and their solubilities” (Dyer, 2014) .............................................. 42
Figure 34: Collapsed bridge: downstream side (R.J. Woodward, 2023) ............................................................... 43
Tables
Table 1. Comparison of between the Cube compressive strength and the estimate of cube strength (Kazemi,
2019) ....................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Table 2. Experimental Results of Concrete Hardened Properties (Ataria, 2002) ................................................... 9
Table 3. Half-cell Survey results. All values are in mV. ......................................................................................... 17
Table 4. Surface Hardness Testing Results .......................................................................................................... 18
Table 5. Surface Hardness Testing Results .......................................................................................................... 19
Table 6. Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing Results ............................................................................................... 19
Table 7. Table A.4 Concrete mix requirements – BS 850 ..................................................................................... 26
Table 8. Summary of near-to-surface testing for concrete (BS1881-207, 1992) .................................................. 35

1. Prelude
Introduction
This laboratory experiment and report is based on the Non-destructive testing of concrete to establish further
characteristics of the concrete itself following pour completion, after it has cured sufficiently.
NDT methods are common in the construction industry as they are used to help evaluate concrete properties and
identify potential defects that may need rectifying to ensure the structural integrity is maintained. Defects such as
corrosion of reinforcement, permeability, cracking and voids can be identified via certain non-intrusive testing,
and this can be on both freshly poured concrete or old.
In addition to finding defects within the concrete, it can also prove that the concrete is of high quality and that
there are no potential issues that may arise from that structure, providing additional assurance and technical data
to support that it is indeed durable and structurally strong.
In older buildings that may need to be preserved or with buildings where there is potential discussion about
demolishing and re-building, NDT testing may help determine what is the most feasible and cost-effective option
and therefore can be of significant commercial gain.
A key benefit of non-destructive testing is that, as it says in its name, it does not impose any damage or defects
on the concrete and this is a key advantage as it is able to provide the required information without inflicting
further defects on the structure, like for example taking core samples.
For this experiment, the three types of Non-destructive testing that was used are:
▪ Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity – This was carried out on 4 concrete cubes with different aggregates as
shown below.
▪ Resistivity of Concrete - This was carried out on a reinforced concrete slab.
▪ Half-cell survey – This was carried out on a reinforced concrete slab.
▪ Surface Hardness – Schmidt Hammer – This was carried out on 4 concrete cubes with different
aggregates as shown below.
The 4 cube types were as below:

▪ Made with 100% natural aggregate.
▪ Made with 100% recycled aggregate.
▪ Made with 25% rubber.
▪ Made with 50% rubber.
Objectives
The objective of these tests was to determine how different aggregates and concrete constituents impact the
surface hardness and quality of the concrete, and how and where there is the greatest risk of corrosion within a
concrete slab.

1
2. Theoretical Information
E1 (A) Half-cell Survey
Corrosion of steel bars is an electrochemical process, and the behaviour of the steel can be determined by
measuring its half-cell potential. The higher the potential, the greater the potential for corrosion. One side of
the battery is made up of electrodes, while the other side is made up of steel bars. Although copper/copper
sulphate electrodes are still commonly used, the reference electrode of choice for field use is silver/silver
chloride in potassium chloride solution.
The first step in measurement is to identify the steel and estimate the rebar spacing using a cover gauge. Use
suitable beams to remove the covering concrete and establish electrical connections to the steel. It is important to
ensure the electrical continuity of the steel by measuring resistance. Connect the steel bars to the half cells using
a digital voltmeter between two different points. An electric potential map of the area is created by collecting
electric potential values in half-cells of a regularly positioned grid (approximately 500 mm apart). To show which
areas are most susceptible to corrosion, contour lines can be drawn between equipotential locations. Exposure
and assessment of steel reinforcement at locations with high and low corrosion risk can be used to roughly
calibrate the expected readings of the structure based on current.
Figure 1- Corrosion and the need for additional studies or repairs (METHOD, no date ).

2
E1 (B) Resistivity of Concrete

Measuring the surface resistivity of a reinforced concrete sample provides useful information about its structural
integrity. Resistivity is a material property of concrete which enables us to determine the likelihood of corrosion
and rate of corrosion of the steel reinforcements within a concrete slab. This is due to recent studies which
conclude that there is a direct correlation between resistivity and the chloride diffusion rate (PCTE, 2023).
In concrete, the electrical current is carried by the dissolved charged ions flowing through the pore solution. For
the steel reinforcement to corrode, there is a requirement of free flow of ions between cathodic and anodic
locations on the reinforcement. The resistivity controls the rate of flow of these ions and hence controls the rate of
concrete corrosion (PCTE, 2023). Overall, the electrical resistivity of concrete can be described as the ability of
concrete to withstand the transfer of ions subjected to an electrical field (Layssi, et al., 2015).
The measurement of electrical resistivity (p) is a ratio between impressed voltage (V) and measured current
(I) multiplied by a cell constant. The following equation is used as a basis to calculate resistivity:
𝑉
𝑝=𝑘 ×𝑅 =𝑘 ×
𝐼
where (p) is the electrical resistivity, (k) is the geometrical factor and (R) is the concrete resistance
(Cheytani & Chan, 2021).
The Wenner probe method is an established, non-destructive method for the measurement of concrete resistivity
(see Figure 1). The probe consists of four equally spaced electrodes, with the external electrodes applying low
frequency alternating current (AC) on a moist concrete surface, while the inner probes measure the electrical
resistance. Aggregate particles within the concrete are often non-conductive compared to the concrete mix, so
probe spacing must exceed the size of the largest particle. On the other hand, the highly conductive reinforcing
steel also has a significant impact on results, so the optimum spacing should be less than the known distance
between rebars (Gilson Company Inc., 2023).
Figure 2. A schematic diagram of four-point Wenner probe current flow (Cheytani & Chan, 2021)

3
E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test

The Rebound hammer test or Schmidt Hammer test is commonly used to provide an appropriate and fast
indication of the compressive strength of concrete and determines the ‘rebound number’ by testing the surface
hardness of concrete. The code used for guidance for this type of testing is BS EN 12504, 2021 – Testing
concrete structures. Within this code it states that this type of testing should not be a substitute for alternative
entrenched tests such as the compressive strength determination of concrete (EN 12390-3). To conduct the test
a rebound/Schmidt hammer is used which consists of a spring-loaded mass as shown in Figure 2 and is applied
to a concrete specimen with an identified strength or classified volume. The hammer is held and pushed against
surface of a concrete cube face which preferably has a surface area of 300mm2 due to any local changes in the
concrete such as voids which can alter the results. The hammer then releases, striking a plunger which then
measures the rebound distance of the hammer mass from the plunger. The readings are expressed as a number
in terms of the rebound distance of a mass. The code states that a minimum of 9 readings are taken and the
average is taken. This test only provides data on the condition of the surface layer at 30mm deep. A grid should
also be drawn of lines 25mm to 50mm apart which should result in the rebound number to be accurate within:
15
% (BS EN 12504, 2021). The are several factors that have an influence on the measured hardness of concrete
√𝑛
surface. These include:
1. Type of cement
2. Cement content – the higher the cement content, the lower the rebound readings
3. Types of aggregate
4. Age and curing type.
5. The concrete should be fully compacted to provide a reliable estimate.
6. If the surface is smooth or rough- tests should be carried out on smooth surfaces
7. Moisture conditions – if the surface is wet then rebound numbers will be lower (BS EN 12504, 2021)
Figure 3 - Rebound Hammer used on a concrete surface with labelled components

(Illston, 2010)

4
E2 (B) Ultra-sonic pulse Velocity testing

Another method for non-destructive testing for concrete is also the use of the ultrasonic pulse velocity test. This
test is used more in general, as it is “economic and very simple in operation” (Loan Ngo, 2018) compared to the
other methods of non-destructive concrete testing.
The main purpose of the test is to calculate the speed at which the ultrasonic waves go through the concrete
based on the time it takes for it to travel through the concrete (Loan Ngo, 2018). The value of speed calculated
would then determine the UCS (unconfined compressive strength) (Loan Ngo, 2018).
To calculate “the velocity of sound in an elastic solid in accordance with BE EN 12504-4:2004”, the following
formula is used:
Figure 4: “Calculation of v” (Kingston University, 2023)
Figure 5: “PUNDIT Test Apparatus” (Kingston University, 2023)
For ultrasonic pulse velocity testing, there are three ways of doing the transmission. The three methods are
“direct transmission”, “semi-direct direct transmission” and “indirect or surface transmission” (Loan Ngo, 2018).
For “direct transmission”, the transmitter and receiver are put on parallel sides of the concrete and made to match
up to be in line (this was the method used during the experiment done by the group), with “semi direct
transmission” having the transmitter and receiver being on parallel sides of concrete, but not in line and on
opposing sides, and “indirect or surface transmission” having the transmitter and receiver on the same side (Loan
Ngo, 2018).

5
Figure 6: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity test arrangements (Loan Ngo, 2018)
The speed of the velocity of the ultrasonic pulse also determines the quality of the concrete, with a higher velocity
equating to a higher quality of concrete. There are varying levels for the results from the ultrasonic pulse velocity
with any result below 3.0 kms-1 being “doubtful, poor and loss of integrity”, 3.0 – 3.5 kms-1 being “satisfactory but
loss of integrity is suspended”, 3.5 – 4.0 kms-1 being “good to very good, slight porosity may exist” and lastly,
anything above 4.0 kms-1 being “very good to excellent” (Mustaqqim Abdul Rahim, 2020).

6
3. Literature Review
Half-cell survey and resistivity of concrete
Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the results of similar experiments conducted by Lukasz Sadowski in 2013. In his
experiment, Sadowski uses a 9x9 survey grid of 75mm2 cells and a copper sulphate electrode to take the below
readings, which were displayed on a high-impedance voltmeter.
Figure 7. Contour plot of potential Ecorr. (Sadowski, 2013) Figure 8. Contour plot of concrete resistivity P. (Sadowski, 2013)
The results of the half-cell survey were plotted and shown in Figure 7. It is evident that potential is low
(<−350 mV) in the area around measuring points 7 to 9 from E to I, which indicates a 95% probability of
corrosion. In the other measuring points, potential is high (−350 mV ≤Ecorr ≤ −200 mV), which indicates a 10% or
uncertain probability of corrosion. (Sadowski, 2013)
The results of the concrete resistivity test were shown in Figure 8. The It is evident that concrete resistivity ρ is
low (<5 kΩcm) in the area around measuring points 5 to 9 from A to I, which indicates a very high probability of
corrosion. In the other measuring points, concrete resistivity ρ is high (>5 kΩcm), indicating a high or moderate
probability of corrosion. (Sadowski, 2013)
The engineer's motivation for this study stems from the necessity to enhance the accuracy of the corrosion
probability assessment. This involves integrating the half-cell potential mapping technique with concrete
resistivity measurements. These combined techniques are applicable in both field and laboratory settings,
offering automation possibilities and seamless integration into monitoring systems for reinforced concrete
structures, whether new or existing. Nevertheless, it is advisable to conduct supplementary tests encompassing
various rebar diameters, diverse aggregate grading, and a broader range of cover scenarios. (Sadowski, 2013)
The reliability of the presented results is reasonably assured, as they stem from the execution of an experienced
engineer who is well-versed in material engineering. The experiment adopted an illustrative approach to its
execution. Conclusively, it anticipated a correlation where an increase in values obtained from the half-cell survey
would inversely correspond with the resistivity of the concrete.

7
Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test

Figure 9 showed the relationship between the rebound
number and strength obtained by students at University
College London (UCL) in laboratory classes over several
years (Illston, 2010). The data showed a positive
correlation between compressive strength (Y-axis) and
the rebound number (X-axis). Due to the large sample
size and the duration of which the results were collected
they are reliable and accurate. Therefore, these results
were compared to the results obtained by group 2 on the
27th of October 2023.
The errors that occurred in the experiment conducted by
students at UCL are due to inexperience of the operatives
with the testing equipment and the test itself (Illston,
2010). Choosing the correctly location on the surface of
the concrete is very difficult even with the most skilful
operatives, strength cannot be predicted with great
certainty (Illston, 2010). These were errors that were
Figure 9. Relationship between strength of concrete and rebound taken into when the experiment was conducted to tighten
test results UCL data (Illston, 2010) the scatter of data seen within Figure 9.
Factors that affect the compressive strength from being accurately measured with the rebound/ Schmidt test is
the following: Aggregate Type, Moisture Condition of the surface of the in-situ concrete, the angle of the hammer
on which it is placed on to the surface of the in-situ concrete.
To conclude the data within the Figure 9 from the Students at University College London (UCL), demonstrated a
positive correlation, where both the Rebound number and the Compressive cube strength in MPa are directly
proportional to one another. Furthermore, the rebound hammer test only measures the properties of the surface
zone of the concrete, to a depth a depth about 25 – 30mm (Illston, 2010). Therefore, results obtained in further
experiments mean there is a certain percentage of results that could not represent the actual compressive
strength of the concrete, and this must be considered.
Table 1. Comparison of between the Cube compressive strength and the estimate of cube strength
(Kazemi, 2019)
Table 1 showed that 1 days after the in-situ concrete had set Mix A, 100% recycled aggregate had much higher
compressive strength compared to that off Mix B which contained rubber. The Concrete cubes with rubber are
likely to have the same result.
An Alternative arrogated like rubber is critical to have in concrete as an aggregate to meet the United Nations
Sustainability Goals. Recycled tires are used instead as well as re-cycled aggregates. These are linked to goals 9
and 11 because tested cubes with rubber is a sustainable option to suitable city’s as they provide an alternative
solution to new aggregate and recycled (UN, 2015).

8
Ultra-Sonic Pulse Velocity Test

Figure 10 on the left-hand side shows the relationship
between Ultrasonic pulse velocity in Km/second on the X-
axis and Compressive strength on concrete cubes
measured in MPa on the Y-Axi (Illston, 2010). The
relationship demonstrated by graph clearly shows a non-
linear connection between the ultrasonic plus velocity and
the compressive strength of the concrete (Illston, 2010).
The results obtained by were expected where expected by
the students at university college London because the
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity is related to the dynamic
modulus (Illston, 2010).
Students at UCL found two factors that affected the
results, these where:
• The Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity requires skilful
operatives to conduct the experiment, such as ensuring
the good acoustic coupling between transducer and the
concrete (Illston, 2010).
• The results were obtained by using 100mm

Figure 10. Relationship between strength and ultrasonic pulse cubes, therefore a smaller and inherently more variable
velocity of concrete, UCL data (Illston, 2010). volume of concrete was being tested (Illston, 2010).
To conclude the results showcased in Figure 10 can be

reasonably assumed to be reliable, given the large sample size collected by students at University College
London collected. However, UCL did use 100mm cubes where the standard cube size for testing compressive
strength off concrete is 150mm. Therefore, the results obtained for UCL could differ from the results obtained by
the Kingston University Group 2, due to the aggregate, concrete being increased within each concrete cube.
Finally, overall, the data will follow the data collected by UCL as even with a non-linear relationship seen in the
graph, the data from Group 2 will somewhat generate the same trend between the Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity and
the Compressive Strength of the concrete cubes.
Table 2. Experimental Results of Concrete Hardened Properties (Ataria, 2002)
The results from Table 2, are likely to be the same results that are obtained from group 2. The concrete cubes
that contain rubber are alternatives to natural stone aggregate as this is a sustainable solution to help achieve the
UN Sustainability Goals, which are Goals 9 and 11 (UN, 2015). As technology improves and more tests are
completed on alternative solutions to natural stone aggregated, NAC still have the highest compressive strength
compared to alternative aggregates like rubber. These results are likely to be the same as group 2 results.

9
4. Equipment & Procedures

Equipment
Lab E1:
The following equipment was used Lab E1 (A): Half Cell Survey of a Concrete Slab:
• Prepared C40 concrete slab
• Millivolt meter
• Rebar locator
• Chalk
• Damp sponge
• Water
• Half cell
Figure 11. Labelle d photograph of equipment used in Lab E1 (A)
The following equipment was used in Lab E1 (B): Resistivity of Concrete

• Prepared C40 concrete slab
• Resipod Wenner four electrodes resistance meter
• Chalk
Lab E2:
The following equipment was used Lab E2 (A): Surface Hardnes Testing:
• Concrete cube sample with 100% natural aggregates
• Concrete cube sample with 100% recycled aggregates
• Concrete cube with 25% recycled rubber
• Schmidt hammer
• Filing stone
• Clamp
• Chalk

10
Figure 12. Labelled Photograph of some of the materials used in Lab E2 (A)
The following equipment was used in Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing
• Concrete cube with 100% natural aggregates
• Concrete cube with 100% recycled aggregates
• Portable Ultrasonic Non-destructive Digital Indicating Tester (PUNDIT)
Figure 13. Labelled Photograph of some of the materials used in Lab E2 (B)

11
Experimental Procedure
Lab E1 (A): Half Cell Survey of a Concrete Slab
Figure 14 – Flow Chart of Experimental Procedure for Lab E1 (A): Half Cell Survey of a Concrete Slab

12
Lab E1 (B): Resistivity of Concrete

The same prepared C40 slab as the half cell survey was used for this experiment.
1. 5 locations were marked using chalk from top to bottom of the slab
2. Electrodes from the Resipod Wenner resistance meter were positioned perpendicular to the
reinforcement at each marked location as shown in Figure ??
Figure 15. Labelled Photograph showing Resipod Wenner resistance meter being used
3. Readings could then be recorded at each location via the electrical resistivity being measured from the
two inner electrodes.

13
Lab E2 (A): Surface Hardness Testing

Lab E2 (A): Surface Hardness Testing procedure is illustrated below:
1. 2.

14
Figure 16 -Flow chart with diagrams of Lab E2 (A) Procedure

15
Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing

Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing procedure is illustrated below:
Figure 17 - Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing Procedure Diagram

16
5. Results and Discussion

Lab E1 (A): Half Cell Survey of a Concrete Slab
Table 3. Half-cell Survey results. All values are in mV.
-65 -90 -60 -46 -41 -27 -71

-89 -49 -78 -80 -34 -27 -47
-88 -64 -51 -57 -40 -71 -80
-84 -51 -54 -70 -65 -46 -69
-85 -54 -55 -54 -76 -65 -113
-90 -80 -84 -74 -65 -67 -84
-75 -84 -75 -69 -49 -84 -109
-65 -90 -72 -82 -68 -68 -77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
G
D
A
-115--100 -100--85 -85--70 -70--55 -55--40 -40--25 -25--10 -10-0
Figure 18. Half-cell Survey Contour Results

17
Lab E1 (B): Resistivity of Concrete

Table 4. Surface Hardness Testing Results
Estimation of the likelihood of corrosion Position 1 Position 2 Position 3 Position 4 Position 5 Average
When resistivity is: There is a: 150.0 120.1 129.5 186.9 75.5 132.4
≥100 kΩcm Negligible risk of corrosion x x x x x x
>50 but <100 kΩcm Low risk of corrosion
>10 but <50 kΩcm Moderate risk of corrosion
≤10 kΩcm High risk of corrosion
There is a negligible risk of corrosion
Estimation of the likely corrosion rate Position 1 Position 2 Position 3 Position 4 Position 5 Average
When resistivity is: There is a: 150.0 120.1 129.5 186.9 75.5 132.4
>20 kΩcm Low corrosion rate x x x x x x
≥10 but ≤20 kΩcm Low to moderate corrosion rate
≥5 but <10 kΩcm High corrosion rate
<5 kΩcm Very high corrosion rate
If there is corrosion, it is at a very low rate

18
Lab E2 (A): Surface Hardness Testing

Table 5. Surface Hardness Testing Results
Cube sample made with 100% natural aggregate
59.0 62.0 61.5
62.5 75.5 61.0
55.5 57.5 60.0
Average of the 9 readings, R = 61.6
Correspondence cube compressive strength = 53.5N/mm2
Cube sample made with 25% recycled rubber
58.0 49.5 42.5
68.0 61.0 36.0
56.5 35.0 33.3
Cube sample made with 100% recycled aggregate
63.0 64.0 62.0
62.0 75.5 65.5
65.0 61.0 60.5
Cube sample made with 50% recycled rubber
28.5 25.5 46.5
42.5 40.0 53.0
34.0 59.0 24.0
Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing

Table 6. Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing Results
Sample Reading Transit time Average Transit Time Path Length Pulse Velocity
(μs) (μs) (mm) (km/s)
100% natural aggregate 1 33.0 34.7 150 4.323
2 36.4
100% recycled aggregate 1 38.5 38.1 150 3.937
2 37.7
25% recycled rubber 1 38.0 38.4 150 3.906
2 38.8
50% recycled rubber 1 44.9 44.1 150 3.401
2 43.3

19
6. Discussion & Conclusion

Non-destructive testing (NDT) in civil engineering was considered essential due to its ability to assess the
integrity of structures without causing harm. This method played a crucial role in identifying concealed
flaws, defects, or material deterioration, ensuring the safety and reliability of buildings, bridges, and other
infrastructure. NDT techniques, such as ultrasound and radiography, provided valuable insights into
structural health, facilitating proactive maintenance, and averting potential disasters. Moreover, tested
concrete structures make infrastructure more resilient to failure and allow engineers to meet the UN
Sustainability Goals (Nations, 2015), tested concrete allows for:
i. Quality Assurance - helps ensure that the concrete meets the required specifications and
standards. This is crucial for structural safety and durability.
ii. Design Verification: Engineers use the compressive strength data to verify if the concrete can
support the loads, it will be subjected to in a specific construction project.
iii. Material Selection: It aids in selecting the appropriate concrete mix design and materials for a
given application. Different projects may require different strength grades of concrete.
iv. Safety Assurance: Ensures that the concrete can withstand the loads and forces it will face in its
intended use, reducing the risk of structural failure.
v. Compliance with Codes and Standards: Many building codes and construction standards specify
minimum compressive strength requirements for different types of structures. Testing helps
ensure compliance with these regulations.
E1 (A) Half-cell Survey

Discussion – E1 (A) Half-cell Survey
The experiment of the half-cell survey was done with a C-40 slab of concrete. There was a mixture of values
gained when the test was done. Firstly, the results from the half-cell survey showed that the highest value was -
0.113 mV, which is less than the threshold of 0.2 mV, indicating that there is a 10% probability of corrosion (al,
2022).
Figure 19: "Criteria for corrosion of reniforced concrete (al, 2022)
However, there are limitations within the test, such as the external factors that could affect the results obtained
from the test, such as the concrete moisture or the chloride ion concentration which could all possibly cause the
values gained from the half-cell survey to be much higher and display values that correspond to a higher
probability of corrosion (al, 2022).
Conclusion – E1 (A) Half-cell Survey

The Half-cell Survey is a useful test in finding the likelihood that a tested reinforced concrete sample will corrode.
The test is important because if reinforced concrete corrodes, “the resulting rust occupies a greater volume than
the steel. This expansion creates tensile stresses in the concrete, which can eventually cause cracking,
delamination, and spalling” (America's Cement Manufacturers, 2023). The results showed that the C-40 sample
had a low/negligible risk to corrosion, which indicates that it is a very good sample.

20
E1 (B) Resistivity of Concrete

Discussion – E1 (B) Resistivity of Concrete
The experiment for the resistivity of concrete was done with a C-40 slab of concrete. There was a mixture of
values gained when the test was done. The values ranged for the resistivity of the reinforced concrete ranged
from 75.5 kΩcm to 186.9 kΩcm. The higher the resistivity reading, the decreased risk of corrosion within in the
reinforced concrete. Since the average reading of resistivity within the reinforced concrete was 132.4 kΩcm, it is
above the threshold of 100 kΩcm, meaning there is a “negligible risk of corrosion” (Kingston University, 2023).
However, there are external factors that could affect the results obtained. Such factors could be human error
when either calibrating the equipment needed for the experiment or the incorrect use of the equipment. Other
factors which could affect the results could include the effect of temperature as an increase in temperature
causes a decrease in resistivity, which would cause a display of incorrect results (Polder, 2001).
Conclusion – E1 (B) Resistivity of Concrete

Like the half-cell survey, the results show that the C-40 sample has a very low probability of corrosion occurring
and thus again suggests that this is a very good sample of concrete. But there are factors that could affect such
results, such as the human error or the example of the temperature used previously.
E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test

Discussion - E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test
The overall expected trends to see from the results the rebound hammer is that 100% Natural Aggregate had the
highest compressive strength compared to any of the other concrete samples. However, this was not achieved
within the rebound/Schmidt test that was conducted on the 26th of October 2023. This is a possible anomaly
within the results, which could have been caused by any other technical errors below. Moreover, Table 3 showed
that the concrete 100% Natural Aggregate had a higher compressive strength than 100% Recycled Aggregate.
This is expected as Natural Aggregate has a higher density than recycled aggregate. Therefore, Natural
Aggregate provided a better bound to the cement particle, which increased the compressive strength of the
concrete, whereas the recycled aggregate has been used the bound weaker as the aggregate may not have
been cleaned or processed correctly.
Nevertheless, the rest of the results were expected because the higher percentage of rubber within the concrete
the compressive strength decreased, this is due to the lack of bonds between the rubber crumbs and the
concrete particles. Therefore, this was what was expected from the results. See Table 1 and Table 5 for further
comparison.
Both Human and Technical Errors could have occurred during the experiment, such as:
• Human Error – Recoded or read the incorrect value and this value was used during the experiment
results. This error was mitigated by repetition of values before being written down.
• Human Error – Results were not taken directly over smooth concrete surfaces thus given false readings
of the compressive strength. This was mitigated by the using the Rebound Hammer over smooth
concrete faces. Averages were also found to minis this error.
• Technical Error – Possible error displayed by the rebound/ Schmidt Hammer. This was mitigated by
calibration of the equipment.
• Technical Error – Possible incorrect compressive strength reading found due to void spaces beneath the
surface zone concrete thus giving invalid results. This was mitigated by taking averages.

21
Conclusion - E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test

The Rebound/ Schmidt Hammer Test is a Non-destructive testing method of concrete which provided a
convenient and rapid indication of the compressive strength of concrete (Constructor, 2023). The Rebound/
Schmidt Hammer Test is covered by BS EN 12504-2 and is perhaps the simplest of the commonly available tests
that can be used on in-situ concrete and laboratory specimens (Illston, 2010).
The results that were obtained on the Thursday 26th October for the Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test are like
those found in Compressive strength assessment of recycled aggregate concrete using Schmidt rebound
hammer and core testing, despite the anomaly that occurred in the lab.
To conclude the Lab E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test was successful because the objectives were meet
as the Corresponding Cube Compressive strength was found for each cube sample type and these results were
compared successfully with research. Therefore, the results obtained can be considered reliable and accurate.
E2 (B) Ultra-sonic pulse Velocity testing

Discussion - E2 (B) Ultra-sonic pulse Velocity testing
The expected Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity trend that was expected to see was the higher percentage of rubber
within the concrete the slower the velocity and the 100% Natural aggregate would have the highest Pulse
Velocity (m/s) compared to the samples followed by 100% Recycled Aggregate. The results observed followed
this expected prediction closely. The results obtained in this lab are significantly close to the expected, therefore
the results are deemed too be reasonably reliable and accurate. As evidence in Table 2.
Both Human and Technical Errors could have occurred during the experiment, such as:
• Human Error – Recoded or read the incorrect value and this value was used during the experiment
results. This error was mitigated by repetition of values before being written down.
• Human Error – The Surface roughness, cracks, and exposures of the under-zone surface of the
concrete could have affected the results obtained in the experiment. This error was mitigated by
applying a gel to the equipment and only locations of a smooth surfaces was chosen.
• Technical Error – The equipment performance might have been poor due to technical faults with the
equipment thus giving wrong results. This error was mitigated by testing the equipment thoroughly and
looked at past results to make sure results were similar.
Conclusion - E2 (B) Ultra-sonic pulse Velocity testing

The Ultra-Sonic Pulse Velocity Test is an extremely versatile and popular test for both in-situ and laboratory use
and is covered by BS EN 12504-4 (Illston, 2010).
The results that were obtained on the Thursday 26th October for the Ultra-Sonic Pulse Velocity are like those
found in Mechanical Properties and Durability Performance of Recycled Aggregate Concrete Containing Crumb
Rubber for all four types of concrete tested.
To conclude the Lab E2 (B) Ultra-Sonic Pulse Velocity was successfully meet because for all the 4 samples an
Average Transit Time was found, which therefore meant that the Pulse Velocity could be found. As well as,
having similar results to others. Therefore, the results obtained can be considered reliable and accurate.

22
7. References
al, R. A. e., 2022. Case Studies in Construction Materials. s.l.:s.n.
America's Cement Manufacturers, 2023. Corrosion of Embedded Metals. [Online]
Available at: https://www.cement.org/learn/concrete-technology/durability/corrosion-of-embedded-
materials#:~:text=When%20steel%20corrodes%2C%20the%20resulting,cracking%2C%20delamination%2C%20
and%20spalling.
Ataria, R. B. &. W. Y. C., 2002. Mechanical Properties and Durability Performance of Recycled Aggregate
Concrete Containing Crumb Rubber. Materials, 15(5), p. 1776.
Bartojy, K. & Westin, J., 2012. Long-Term Properties of Hoover Dam Mass Concrete. [Online]
Available at:
https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/41141%28390%296#:~:text=Most%20of%20the%20concrete%20for,the%
203%2C500%20lb%2Fin2%20range.
[Accessed 15 December 2023].
BS EN 12504, 2021. BS EN 12504-2:2021: Testing concrete in structures. Non-destructive testing -
determination of rebound number. 2 ed. London: British Standards Institution.
Cheytani, M. & Chan, S., 2021. The applicability of the Wenner method for resistivity measurement of concrete in
atmospheric conditions. [Online]
Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214509521001789
[Accessed 13 Dec. 2023].
Collins, J, Ashurst, D, Webb J, Sparkes, P and Ghose, 2017. Hidden defects in bridges - guidances for detection
and management. A ed. London: CIRIA.
Construction Civil, 2020. Nondestructive Testing Of Concrete - Methods & Guidelines. [Online]
Available at: https://www.constructioncivil.com/nondestructive-testing-of-concrete/#google_vignette&gsc.tab=0
Constructor, T., 2023. Rebound Hammer Test on Concrete – Principle, Procedure, Advantages & Disadvantages.
[Online]
Available at: https://theconstructor.org/concrete/rebound-hammer-test-concrete-ndt/2837/
[Accessed 19 11 2023].
Çullu, M., 2014. Construction and Building Materials. s.l.:ELSELVIER.
Dyer, T., 2014. Concrete Durability. s.l.:Taylor & Francis Group.
Elsener, B. et al., 2003. Half-cell potential measurements—Potential mapping on reinforced concrete structures.
s.l.:s.n.
Fahad Al Fuhaid, A., 2022. Carbonation and Corrosion Problems in Reinforced Concrete Structures. s.l.:s.n.
Furuya, K., 1998. Corrosion protection for the main cables of. s.l.:s.n.
Giatec Scientific, 2020. Concrete Maturity vs. Concrete Cylinder Test: Which Method is More Effective?. [Online]
Available at: https://www.giatecscientific.com/education/concrete-maturity-vs-concrete-cylinder-test-which-
method-is-more-effective/
Gilson Company Inc., 2023. Concrete Resistivity: A Guide for Nondestructive Testing. [Online]
Available at: https://www.globalgilson.com/blog/concrete-electrical-
resistivity#:~:text=The%20Wenner%20array%20consists%20of%20four%20equally%20spaced,terms%20expres
s%20the%20electrical%20resistance%20to%20chloride-ion%20penetration.
Illston, P. D. &. J., 2010. Construction Materials Thier Nature and Behaviour. 4th ed. s.l.:Spon Press.
Kashima, S., 2018. Structural Engineering International. 2nd ed. s.l.:s.n.
Kazemi, M., 2019. Compressive strength assessment of recycled aggregate concrete using Schmidt rebound
hammer and core testing. Construction & building materials. Construction & building materials, Volume 224, pp.
630-638.
Kew, H. & Limbachiya, M., 2009. Excellence in Concrete Construction through Innovation. London: Taylor and
Francis Group.
Kingston University, 2023. Laboratory - Materials and Concrete. [Online]
Available at: https://canvas.kingston.ac.uk/courses/26173/pages/laboratory-materials-and-concrete
[Accessed November 2023].
Kingston University, 2023. Work Station E: Concrete – Durability/Non-Destructive Testing. [Online]
Available at: https://canvas.kingston.ac.uk/courses/26173/pages/laboratory-materials-and-concrete
Kralj, M., Pavković, K. & Stojanovic, I., 2019. Adhesion and anticorrosive properties of DTM coating as related to
primer coating. [Online]
Available at:

23
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333746490_Adhesion_and_anticorrosive_properties_of_DTM_coating_
as_related_to_primer_coating#pf2
Layssi, H., Ghods, P., Alizadeh, A. R. & Salehi, M., 2015. Electrical Resistivity of Concrete - Concepts,
applications, and measurement techniques. [Online]
Available at: https://www.giatecscientific.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Concrete_Electrical_Resistivity.pdf
Loan Ngo, T. Q. a. Y.-R. W., 2018. Using Support Vector Machine to Improve Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test.
Using Support Vector Machine to Improve Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test, p. 7.
McKibbins, L, et al, 2022. Non-destructive testing of civil structures. C798 ed. London: CIRIA.
METHOD, H.-C. E. P., no date . HALF-CELL ELECTRICAL POTENTIAL METHOD. [Online]
Available at: https://civil-online2010.blogspot.com/2010/09/half-cell-electrical-potential-method.html
[Accessed 20 12 2023].
Mustaqqim Abdul Rahim, L. C. O. A. N. A. A. S. S. S. S. M. Z. S. S. A. A. S. A. A. a. N. F. B., 2020. Relationship
between Ultrasonic-Pulse Velocity and Compression Test for Different Grade of Concrete. Relationship between
Ultrasonic-Pulse Velocity and Compression Test for Different Grade of Concrete, p. 8.
Nations, U., 2015. THE 17 GOALS. [Online]
Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/goals
[Accessed 11 11 2023].
NDT Group, 2023. Radiographic testing: advantages and disadvantages. [Online]
Available at: https://www.ndtgroup.co.uk/latest-news/radiographic-testing-adv-disadv/
P.A. Muhammed Basheer et al, 2009. Non-destructive testing of concrete structures. In: ICE Manual of
Construction Materials. London: Institution of Civil Engineers, pp. 185-202.
PCTE, 2023. Concrete Resistivity Meter. [Online]
Available at: https://www.pcte.com.au/resipod-resistivity-meter
Polder, R. B., 2001. Construction & building materials. s.l.:Elsevier Ltd.
R.J. Woodward, F. W., 2023. Collapse of Ynys-y-Gwas bridge. [Online]
Available at: https://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/pdf/10.1680/iicep.1988.179
[Accessed December 2023].
Sadowski, L., 2013. Methodology for Assessing the Probability of Corrosion in Concrete Structures on the Basis
of Half-Cell Potential and Concrete Resistivity Measurements. s.l.:s.n.
Salvador, M., 2021. Break tests or maturity method? - Maturix - concrete sensors. [Online]
Available at: https://maturix.com/knowledge-center/break-tests-vs-maturity-method/
Šavija, B. &. L. M., 2016. Carbonation of cement paste: Understanding, challenges, and opportunities. s.l.:s.n.
The Constructor, 2014. Non-Destructive Tests on Concrete - Methods, Uses. [Online]
Available at: https://theconstructor.org/practical-guide/non-destructive-testing-of-concrete/5553/#google_vignette
The Constructor, 2020a. How to Perform Maturity Test on Concrete? [PDF]. [Online]
Available at: https://theconstructor.org/practical-guide/how-to-perform-maturity-test-concrete-pdf/45125/
The Constructor, 2020b. Radiographic Evaluation of Concrete. [Online]
Available at: https://theconstructor.org/practical-guide/radiographic-evaluation-concrete/5738/
Toronto Star, 2012. Elliot Lake mall roof collapse: Two bodies recovered from debris. Toronto: s.n.
UN, 2015. The 17 Goals. [Online]
Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/goals
[Accessed 11 12 2023].
Webster, M., 2016. Impact of deterioration on the safety of concrete structures – what can designers do to
minimise risk?. [Online]
Available at: http://mpwrandr.co.uk/impact-of-deterioration-on-the-safety-of-concrete-structures-designers/
Wikipedia, n.d. Concrete. [Online]
Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete

24
8. Individual Element
Q1 - Factors that could potentially cause corrosion
of reinforced steel in the concrete structure
and their prevention
Alpha Diallo - K1942624
In the construction of reinforced concrete structures, tailoring the concrete mix and cover to each component is
crucial for safeguarding the steel reinforcement from corrosion, thus preserving the structure's integrity. For
instance, a seafront concrete retaining wall requires different specifications compared to a first-floor internal slab.
The reason is exposure; the seafront wall faces salt from seawater, while the internal slab does not. This
demonstrates the necessity of customising concrete structure designs based on their location and environmental
exposures to protect the reinforcement from the primary causes of steel corrosion: carbonation and chloride
attack. Given that reinforcement is typically made of iron, which is highly susceptible to corrosion, this protection
is vital. Corrosion is an electrochemical process involving positive charges (oxygen and water) moving through
the concrete and negative electrons through the steel. In this process, the cathode (the void or crack in the
concrete) remains uncorroded, whereas the anode (the steel) corrodes.
Figure 20. Anon, (n.d.). Cathodic Protection of Steel in Concrete - Metallisation Ltd. [online] Available at:
https://www.metallisation.com/applications/cathodic-protection-of-steel-in-concrete/.
Carbonation in Concrete
Carbonation in concrete occurs when atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) permeates the concrete's pores and
reacts with calcium hydroxide present in the cement paste. This reaction results in the formation of calcium
carbonate, which ultimately leads to the corrosion of the steel reinforcement.
On its own, carbon dioxide doesn't harm concrete. However, when combined with moisture, CO2 transforms into
a weak carbonic acid, attacking the concrete and lowering its pH value. Fresh cement has a pH of at least 12.5,
and it's this high alkalinity that creates a thin protective layer around the reinforcement, shielding it from oxygen
and water. As long as the environment is highly alkaline, corrosion is prevented.
Nevertheless, the presence of CO2 in concrete causes the previously mentioned reaction, reducing the pH and
alkalinity to around 9.0, and eventually dropping to about 8.3 when fully carbonated. At this significantly lower pH,
the protective layer around the reinforcement dissolves, leaving the steel bars susceptible to corrosion. The
accompanying illustration (Figure 2) displays this process. Similar to chloride attack, this leads to concrete
cracking and spalling, ultimately exposing the reinforcement to moisture and oxygen, which accelerates
corrosion.

25
Figure 21. Happho. (2017). Corrosion of Steel Reinforcement: Causes, Effects and Remedies - Happho.
[online] Available at: https://happho.com/corrosion-steel-reinforcement-causes-effects-remedies/.
Methods to Counteract Carbonation in Reinforced Concrete
Table 7. Table A.4 Concrete mix requirements – BS 850
The approaches to mitigating carbonation in reinforced concrete are quite similar to those used against chloride
attacks. One key strategy is ensuring sufficient cover over the reinforcement. Figure 3 above outlines the
necessary cover specifications for various strengths and cement content/water-cement (W/C) ratios within the XC
classes, as stipulated in BS 8500.
Another principal method of prevention involves applying an anti-carbonation coating to the concrete once it has
fully cured. This coating effectively shields the concrete from CO2, oxygen, and water, offering protection for up to
a decade. However, it is essential to reapply this coating periodically throughout the structure's life to sustain this
protection.

26
Chloride induced failure.

A lot of concrete structural failures are caused by chloride attack, which occurs when high concentrations of
chloride ions are present in the concrete. Chloride ions are formed when elemental chlorine gains electrons or
when compounds such as hydrogen dissolve in water. These ions dissolve the passivation layer of the steel bars.
This process produces hydrochloric acid, which causes steel to corrode and rust.
The main sources of chloride ions are 1 the components of the concrete mixture and 2 the environment. Most of
the material in a concrete mix consists of aggregate and sand, which may not be washed and therefore contain
chlorides. In some cases, seawater is used to produce concrete, which also contains chloride ions. The second
source comes from exposure to the marine environment, where factors such as sea salt spray and direct contact
with seawater can cause problems. There are other materials, such as de-icing salt used on roads and airport
runways, that can introduce chlorides into concrete. Of the two sources, external environmental exposure to
chloride is the most common. This is because in today’s concrete production, assurance processes virtually
eliminate the risk of using unwashed materials and seawater in the concrete we use.
A major way to reduce the risk of chloride attack in concrete is to increase the coverage of steel reinforcement.
Therefore, it can take centuries for chloride to penetrate concrete and steel. Of course, the further away the steel
is, the longer it will take. The second remedy is to use a lower water-cement ratio, as this will make the concrete
denser and less permeable.
Figure 22 https://www.worldhighways.com/wh6/products/concrete-protection-chloride-attack
When concrete structures are not constructed correctly, the risk of steel reinforcement being attacked by chloride
and carbonation is high. These attacks can cause severe damage to the concrete, possibly requiring extensive
repairs, or even worse, causing structural failure. Both involve significant financial costs and, in some cases, can
be fatal.
Designers must consider all factors including location, environment and end use when specifying concrete mixes
and coatings to ensure compliance with BS 8500. In this way, the life of the structure can be extended as much
as possible, and as already mentioned, carbonization and chloride attack will eventually occur at some point, but
they can be delayed so that they do not affect the structure during its service life.
References:
• Anon, (n.d.). Cathodic Protection of Steel in Concrete - Metallisation Ltd. [online] Available at:
https://www.metallisation.com/applications/cathodic-protection-of-steel-in-concrete/.
• Happho. (2017). Corrosion of Steel Reinforcement: Causes, Effects and Remedies - Happho. [online]
Available at: https://happho.com/corrosion-steel-reinforcement-causes-effects-remedies/.
• Table A.4 Concrete mix requirements – BS 850

• https://www.worldhighways.com/wh6/products/concrete-protection-chloride-attack

27
George Worsfold – K2165553

Corrosion of reinforced steel within concrete structures poses a pervasive and expensive challenge, threatening
the integrity and longevity of infrastructure. The robustness of reinforced concrete relies significantly on shielding
embedded steel reinforcement from corrosion. This piece delves into the diverse factors influencing the corrosion
of reinforced steel in concrete structures and explores preventive measures, drawing insights from case studies
and pertinent literature.
The arguably primary contributing factor to corrosion could be named as chemical attacks. This is when exposure
to harsh chemicals causes corrosional reactions within the sample. Such reactions include carbonation, chloride-
induced steel corrosion and sulphate attack, among others (Çullu, 2014). These substances infiltrate the
concrete, dismantling the galvanised layer on the steel surface and initiate corrosion. On the Akashi Kaikyō
Bridge in Japan, corrosion was found in investigative studies on the main cables of suspension bridges in
service. this method was shown to offer inadequate protection in 1988, when a survey of the literature on
suspension bridge cables in Japan and overseas, and visual checks of cables on Japanese bridges, was carried
out (Furuya, 1998). Corrosion inhibition substances, such as Electrokinetic nanoparticle treatment (Kew &
Limbachiya, 2009), dampen the effects of corrosion by creating a protective layer on the steel surface. To protect
the main cables from corrosion [on the Akashi Kaikyō Bridge], a dry-air injection system was newly developed
and found capable of keeping the relative humidity low enough in the cable bundles (Kashima, 2018), decreasing
the corrosion rate.
Carbonation is the ingress of carbon dioxide from

the atmosphere into the concrete reduces its
alkalinity, leading to the breakdown of the
passivating layer on the steel surface, rendering it
prone to corrosion. The estimated annual
maintenance cost associated with corrosion in
homes, commercial buildings, bridges, dams, ports,
and other physical infrastructure elements
worldwide exceeds $1.8 trillion (Fahad Al Fuhaid,
2022). On Saturday, June 23, 2012, part of a 12m x
24m RC segment of the parking deck collapsed at
the Algo Centre Mall, resulting in the deaths of two
people and injuring more than 20 people (Toronto
Star, 2012). An investigation revealed that the
structural collapse was primarily linked to the
Figure 23. Carbonation assisted by water and CO2
corrosion of the building components prompted by
adsorption (Šavija, 2016)
carbonation.
Galvanic corrosion, aka bimetallic corrosion, happens when two distinct metals touch and are exposed to an
electrolyte (like moisture or a corrosive solution), forming a galvanic cell. One metal corrodes (anode), while the
other stays relatively unscathed (cathode), propelled by the potential difference between them. This phenomenon
unfolds in settings with unlike metals, causing corrosion at the anodic site. The chains and rods in the Clifton
suspension bridge in Bristol are made of iron, whereas the other components are made of noble metals such as
steel. Contact between these two groups of metals inhibits galvanic corrosion in moist weather, needing constant
inspections and maintenance throughout its lifetime.
A preventative measure for the aforementioned is to use quality concreate at a suitable cover thickness. An ideal
combination of ingredients, integrating reduced water-cement ratios and additional cementitious materials, has
the potential to enhance the resilience of concrete. A proper thickness of covering provides an additional shield
against external factors. Most of the concrete for the hoover dam was mass concrete made with up to 9-inch
maximum size aggregate (MSA) to account for the high loads that it faces (Bartojy & Westin, 2012).
Another method is that of corrosion inhibitors. Cathodic protection is a form of this which entails administering an
electric current to the steel to counteract the corrosion process, demonstrating notable efficacy in alleviating
continuous corrosion. The golden gate bridge, San Fransisco, is continuously being coated with the recognisable
"International Orange" paint. As the bridge is heavily exposed to atmospheric corrosion (high salinity levels, fog),
a maintenance crew performs appropriate activities each day in order to slow down deterioration of structural
elements, and to provide for a long service life of the bridge (Kralj, et al., 2019)
Conclusively, corrosion within RC structures requires a vast understanding of the contributing factors to it, as well
as an abundance of knowledge on both proactive and preventative measures. The aforementioned examples

28
highlight the importance of material selection, construction methodology and maintenance plans to guarantee the
longevity of concrete structures.
References:
• Çullu, M., 2014. Construction and Building Materials. s.l.:ELSELVIER.
• Furuya, K., 1998. Corrosion protection for the main cables of. s.l.:s.n.
• Kew, H. & Limbachiya, M., 2009. Excellence in Concrete Construction through Innovation. London: Taylor
and Francis Group.
• Kashima, S., 2018. Structural Engineering International. 2nd ed. s.l.:s.n.
• Fahad Al Fuhaid, A., 2022. Carbonation and Corrosion Problems in Reinforced Concrete Structures. s.l.:s.n.
• Toronto Star, 2012. Elliot Lake mall roof collapse: Two bodies recovered from debris. Toronto: s.n.
• Bartojy, K. & Westin, J., 2012. Long-Term Properties of Hoover Dam Mass Concrete. [Online]
Available at:
https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/41141%28390%296#:~:text=Most%20of%20the%20concrete%20for,
the%203%2C500%20lb%2Fin2%20range.
• Kralj, M., Pavković, K. & Stojanovic, I., 2019. Adhesion and anticorrosive properties of DTM coating as
related to primer coating. [Online]
Available at:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333746490_Adhesion_and_anticorrosive_properties_of_DTM_coa
ting_as_related_to_primer_coating#pf2

29
Q2 - Purposes of undertaking non-destructive

testing
Josh Pelham – K2166788
Non-destructive testing (NDT) has a variety of purposes and is used in numerous industries. In civil engineering it
plays a crucial part in ensuring structures and systems perform to their relevant function, are reliable and safe for
occupants or users. This type of testing has proven to be a trustworthy, cost effective and safe way to test
structures throughout the whole lifecycle, from planning through to construction, refurbishments, and demolition.
NDTs are carried out “in a manner that does not damage or affect the future usefulness of the subject in any way”
(McKibbins, L, et al, 2022).
Why is NDT used?

Previously in this report, the NDTs that were conducted and discussed were for concrete only, however non-
destructive tests can be carried out on a wide range of materials such as timber and steel. Additionally, NDTs can
be done on various structures and assets. A consideration for the selection of NDT techniques is required to
evaluate the suitability to achieve a specific outcome These can be established from:
• Proven characteristics of materials
• What information is required i.e., are there any defects and if there is a deterioration in physical
properties.
• Depth of interest in a material
• Precision of data
• Where is the survey/test being conducted?
• If there are any cost, resource, time, access and health and safety constraints.
NDT has a wide range tools and techniques used in construction and civil engineering. There are vast amounts
of situations NDT can be used to achieve a particular outcome without damaging any assets.
Benefits of using NDT

NDT can be a particularly beneficial tool in the following scenarios:
• Limited or unsafe access
• Rapid and efficient preliminary investigation required.
• Alternative option to intrusive test if no damage can be caused in a building.
• To minimise disruption of an operating asset
• To identify, monitor or analyse defects that may be hidden.
Applications of NDT
The primary purpose of NDT is to use it throughout the whole life cycle of civil engineering structures and assets.
This can be split up into four categories; quality control, characterising old/existing structures or assets,
identifying defects, and implementing maintenance plans and monitor any changes to manage associated risks
(McKibbins, L, et al, 2022).
Quality Control
Ensuring quality is essential for long term engineering efficiency. It is particularly important to ensure safe
structures and assets. NDT allows for fast and reliable data that can show whether elements have been
produced or constructed correctly.

30
Using NDT allows a range of properties in concrete to be assessed along with workmanship and structural
reliability by detecting cracks, voids and delamination. In one instance voids in fibre reinforcement could be
identified in a fibre reinforced slab. PUNDIT ultrasonic testing was used to identify if voids were present.
Figure 24. Examples of Pundit ultrasonic testing array output for different levels of voiding, Figure A1.12
(McKibbins, L, et al, 2022)
Figure 24 illustrates three different conditions of the concrete tested ranging from good quality to significantly
voided and proved to be an important tool to ensure quality.
Characterising old/existing structures or assets

All structures and assets are designed to a service life duration and over time the performance progressively
declines. Figure 25 shows performance vs duration and how each curve has different types of deterioration.
This demonstrates the importance of checking a structures integrity before any catastrophic failure. NDT can be
used to minimise the requirement to break out or re-install structures, thus eradicating any damage or weakening
of structures and assets. This saves time and money.
James Fisher Testing Services Ltd carried out a NDT on a concrete bridge deck on the M62 motorway (an old
structure) to determine if there were any unnoticed defects present and if and remedial works were required to
increase the service life of the bridge. A half-cell test was carried out to identify corrosion. Figure 26 highlights the
severity the risks across the whole deck. without conducting this test, parts of the bridge could have collapsed
and emphasises the requirement for regular maintenance program for all old structures without damaging them in
the process.
Figure 25 - Change of performance of structures with time: Figure 26. Coloured equipotential contour map for helping
Figure 1 (P.A. Muhammed Basheer et al, 2009) interpret risk of active corrosion, Figure A1.9 (McKibbins, L,
et al, 2022)

31
Identifying defects and implement maintenance plans.

Ensuring safety is essential in civil engineering. Traditionally, identifying defects is done visually. Today, with the
abundance of technology available, NDT can be used to identify defects and can provide information on location
and severity without damaging or disrupting any services. A maintenance plan can be implemented efficiently
ranging from enhancements to increase life expectancy or eradicate the need to decommission the asset.
A post tensioned special inspection void detection was operated on the A1 Brent Cross flyover. This was used to
identify tendon ducts and determine the condition. This work allowed an organised approach maintaining and
enabled efficient planning of any intrusive works to grout affected tendons whilst also minimising an unnecessary
damage, reducing disruption, cost, and time (McKibbins, L, et al, 2022).
Monitor changes to manage associated risks.

NDT can be used to support structural assessments by assessing actual structural behaviour and can also
validate complex analytical models, assess, and manage operational risks, estimate deterioration and service life
and deliver data to implement improvements.
For years, the Hammersmith flyover has been changing due to stress on the post tension structure. Over time,
numerous monitoring systems (NDTs) have been implemented to monitor these changes and assess the risk.
Figure 27. Radiographic image of strands in PT ducts (Collins, J, Ashurst, D, Webb J, Sparkes, P and
Ghose, 2017)
The above figure shows data of an acoustic monitoring system implemented on the bridge which records wire
breaks. This was used for several years to log all breaks in wires. This type of output was used in conjunction
with monitoring systems to develop a model of deterioration that was used to monitor the rate of the deterioration
and risks could ultimately be managed using this data.
To conclude, the purpose of NDT is to measure and evaluate characteristics of materials, which can also include
defects which thus affects serviceability without causing damage using numerous techniques and methods
saving time and money whilst also ensuring safety.
References
Collins, J, Ashurst, D, Webb J, Sparkes, P and Ghose, 2017. Hidden defects in bridges - guidance for detection
and management. A ed. London: CIRIA.
McKibbins, L, et al, 2022. Non-destructive testing of civil structures. C798 ed. London: CIRIA.
P.A. Muhammed Basheer et al, 2009. Non-destructive testing of concrete structures. In: ICE Manual of
Construction Materials. London: Institution of Civil Engineers, pp. 185-202.

32
Q3 - The specific need to assess the strength of in-

situ concrete has led to the development of
arrange of tests in which surface zone is
penetrated or fractured.
Oliver Jeffery – K2167039
Near Surface Strength Tests
A wide range of near-to-surface tests were developed to assess the strength of in-situ concrete. Assessing
concrete's compressive and tensile strength is essential in the construction industry because these tests help
engineers ensure the structure's safety and durability, significantly reducing the risk of structural failure
(Converge, 2023). The five main near-to-surface test methods are Pull-out, Pull-off, Break-off, Penetration
Resistance, and Internal Fracture, as described in BS 1881-207:1992 (Society, no date).
Penetration Resistance Test

The Penetration Resistance Test (Windsor probe) measures how far a hardened pointed metal rod penetrates a
concrete surface when fired by a handheld device that is like a gun (Society, no date). This test aims to determine
the uniformity of concrete, specify the poor quality or deteriorated concrete zones, and evaluate the in-place
compressive strength of concrete (Constructor, no date). The preparation requirements needed for the test are
minimal, as no complex power supply is needed. However, safety precautions are necessary, such as a risk
assessment, due to the high velocity of the metal rod that is fired out of the device (BS1881-207, 1992).
The depth of penetration of a probe can be empirically related to the compressive strength of the concrete.
However, this relationship between the compressive strength and depth of penetration is significantly influenced
by properties and proportions of the coarse and fine aggregate within the concrete (BS1881-207, 1992).
Therefore, a large sample size must be taken to get a reasonable estimate of the actual compressive strength of
the in-situ concrete. However, even though a large sample is needed to get an idea of the compressive strength
of the whole concrete structure, only three localised tests are needed to find the surface zone compression
strength within one specific area of the concrete to a high degree of accuracy. See Table 8.
The significance of the Penetration Resistance is:

• The results are relatively quick and achieved immediately, provided an appropriate correlation curve is
available (AGENCY, 2002).
• The probe is simple to operate and requires little maintenance except cleaning the barrel after each test.
• (AGENCY, 2002).
The limitations of the Penetration Resistance are:

• The test is limited to <40 MPa, and if two different powder levels are used in an investigation to
accommodate a more extensive range of concrete strengths, the correlation procedure becomes
complicated (AGENCY, 2002).
• The test leaves an 8 mm hole in the concrete where the probe penetrated; in older concrete, the area
around the penetration point is heavily fractured (AGENCY, 2002).
Break Off Test

The Break Off Test is involves partial drilling of a core and then applying a transverse force to cause fracture
(Illston, 2010). The significance of the break-off is that the test break-off test measures the transverse force
required to break off a core drilled 70 mm into the concrete surface (Society, no date). The results from the
Break-off tests have been shown to have a reasonable correlation with the modulus of rupture strength (Illston,
2010). However, the limitations of the Break of Tests are that the difference of mass between the samples will
affect the compressive strength of core specimen because of the variation of the aggregates and voids within the
concrete (Maturix, 2021).
Internal Fracture Test

The Internal Fracture Near-to-Surface test is utilized to assess the compressive strength of in-situ concrete
because it is based on the concept that a measurement of the tensile force required for a wedge anchor bolt to
cause failure of the concrete. The failure of the concrete can be related to the concrete compressive strength of
the concrete. The relationship between the internal fracture force and the strength of concrete is generally directly
proportional. As the internal fracture force increases, so does the compressive strength of the concrete (BS1881-
207, 1992). However, there are many limitations to this test such as (BS1881-207, 1992):
• Drilling into the concrete will need to be made good again after in-situ concrete has been drilled.
• Operatives will have to be trained to use equipment.
• Risk Assessment and safety precautions will be needed.
• 6 valid tests required at a location with a ±30% at 95% confidence level. See Table 8.

33
Pull Out Tests

The fundamental principle behind Pull-out testing is that the test equipment designed to a specific geometry will
produce results (pull-out forces) that closely correlate to the compressive strength of concrete (Constructor,
2023). This correlation is vital to the structural engineer's on-site testing of in-situ concrete, which is required by
BS EN 13791. It allows for the in-place strength of concrete to be measured quickly and will predict the
compressive strength of the in-situ concrete (AGENCY, 2002). There are two types of Pull-Out Tests:
I. LOK test
II. CAPO Test (Cut and Pull-out test).
The LOK test is conducted on-site to obtain a reliable estimate of the in-place strength of concrete in newly cast
structures, and this method of testing in-situ concrete can be found in BS 1881:207, or EN 12504-3 and requires
preinstalled inserts into the concrete, which requires planning (Constructor, 2023). Whereas the CAPO does not
need preinstalled inserts into the concrete structure, which is a preferred method by contractors, as they save
time and money on not having to preinstall equipment (Constructor, 2023)
Limitations of the Pull-out test are that the device must be preplanned and inserted during the construction stage
or inserted in a hole drilled in the hardened concrete (AGENCY, 2002). Therefore, this limitation will cause extra
planning for the designer and the contractor to arrange for when and how these tests should be conducted, and
drilling may cause minor structural damage to the concrete, which must be repaired.
Additionally, the Pull-out test has limited testing capacity when accessing reinforced concrete. The concrete cover
quality can only be measured because of the rebar stopping the drill, and other methods like the Penetration
Resistance Test may be more appropriate (AGENCY, 2002).
Pull Off Test

The pull-off test is based on the concept that the force required to pull a metal block, together with a layer of
concrete or mortar, from the surface to which it has been attached is related to the strength of the concrete
(BS1881-207, 1992). Therefore, the failure at rupture is essentially tensile (Illston, 2010). Two types of Pull Off
Tests can be conducted on in-situ concrete:
Option 1 - The block can be attached directly to the surface, then the stressed volume of concrete lies close to
the face of the block and the results may be less related to the strength of the body of the concrete than with
some other near-to-surface tests (BS1881-207, 1992).
Option 2 - Alternatively, the test may be carried out by partially coring the concrete and bonding a block of the
same nominal diameter to the top of the cylinder of concrete thus isolated. This allows the fracture surface to
occur deeper into the concrete (BS1881-207, 1992).
The benefit of these tests is that no planning is needed, thus saving the contractor money and time. The ability to
have two options for testing gave further flexibility as one test might be better suited in different situations on site.
However, the limitations of the pull-off test to estimate the compressive strength of in-situ concrete are
inconsistent, as the test is influenced by the aggregate type, block material, and thickness (BS1881-207, 1992).
Thames Tideway Tunnel London

The mammoth Thames Tideway Tunnel is a 25km, 7.2m-diameter addition to London’s Victorian sewage network
to make it fit for the 21st century. Due to be completed in 2025, it will intercept and divert wastewater and
stormwater to prevent the release of untreated sewage into the river Thames (Thames Tideway Tunnel London,
2023).
The project team also developed an ultra-low carbon mix for reducing the carbon associated with C30/37 to
C40/50 mixes, to meet a higher strength requirement of 35-40MPa. In testing across various sites, it has reached
50MPa at 28 days and more than 57MPa at 56 days and represents a saving of at least
100kgCO2e/m3compared to conventional mixes (Thames Tideway Tunnel London, 2023).
During the construction of the concrete tunnel lining, the contractor would have carried out near-to-surface tests
on the in-situ concrete. These tests were done to measure the compressive strength of the concrete and to
ensure that the designed strength was achieved in the tunnels. This was important to ensure that the tunnels
could withstand the forces of the surrounding soil. The tests most likely used were the penetration resistance test
and the pull-off test (Option 1).

34
Conclusion
To conclude there are several commercial versions of each test that engineers use on a day-to-day basis when
testing in-situ concrete (Illston, 2010). These Semi-Destructive or Near to Surface Tests approximate the
compressive strength on site the by collecting the mean result from several tests to estimate the average quality
of the surface zone for compressive strength of the in-situ concrete (BS1881-207, 1992). However, prior
collaboration in the laboratory is necessary to obtain more accurate results before determining if the in-situ
concrete is providing the correct compressive strength that is required to stop failure of the concrete, so that the
concrete can perform its intended function within the structure (Illston, 2010).
Table 8. Summary of near-to-surface testing for concrete (BS1881-207, 1992)
Figure 28. The main types of near-to-surface testing for concrete (BS1881-207, 1992)

35
References
AGENCY, I. A. E., 2002. Guidebook on non-destructive testing of concrete structures. p. 231.
BS 1881-207: 1992, Testing Concrete - Part 207 Recommendations for the assessment of concrete strength by
near-to-surface tests. s.l.:BSI.
Collum, B., 2017. In-Situ Concrete. [Online]

Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/situ-
concrete#:~:text=Unlike%20precast%20units%2C%20in%20situ,poured%20into%20whatever%20space%20rem
ains
[Accessed 04 11 2023].
Constructor, T., 2023. Pullout Test On Hardened Concrete. [Online]

Available at: https://theconstructor.org/concrete/pullout-lok-capo-test-hardened-concrete/2861/
[Accessed 15 11 2023].
Constructor, T., no date. Penetration Resistance Test on Hardened Concrete – Purpose and Application. [Online]
Available at: https://theconstructor.org/concrete/penetration-resistance-test-
concrete/2853/#:~:text=The%20purpose%20of%20the%20penetration,in%2Dplace%20strength%20of%20concr
ete.
[Accessed 13 11 2023].
Converge, 2023. Concrete testing: Cube test vs Cylinder test. [Online]

Available at: https://www.converge.io/blog/cube-test-vs-cylinder-
test#:~:text=Compressive%20strength%20tests%20are%20essential,the%20risk%20of%20structural%20failure.
[Accessed 11 11 2023].
Illston, P. D. &. J., 2010. Construction Materials Thier Nature and Behaviour. 4th ed. s.l.:Spon Press.
Maturix, 2021. Break tests vs. maturity method. [Online]

Available at: https://maturix.com/knowledge-center/break-tests-vs-maturity-
method/#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20main%20limitations,affects%20the%20strength%20development%20spe
ed.
[Accessed 16 11 2023].
Society, T. C., no date. Near surface strength tests. [Online]

Available at: https://www.concrete.org.uk/fingertips-nuggets.asp?cmd=display&id=462
[Accessed 11 11 2023].
Thames Tideway Tunnel London (2023) The Concrete Centre.

36
Q4 - Discuss selected different types of non-

destructive and durability testing, other than
those already been used in the laboratory and
its purposes, significant and limitation.
Anmol Gill – K2007358
Introduction
Non-destructive testing of concrete (NDT) is a testing method used by engineers to determine the compressive
strength, defects among other properties of a sample of concrete without causing damage to the sample as an
individual entity or as part of an existing structure (Construction Civil, 2020). This test provides immediate
strength values and results related to the quality of the concrete. Non-destructive methods of testing may be
categorised as penetration tests, rebound tests, pull-out techniques, dynamic tests, radioactive tests and maturity
concepts (The Constructor, 2014).
Having already covered the Half-Cell Potentiometer Test, penetration testing (Wenner Probe Test), rebound
testing (Schmidt Hammer Test) and dynamic testing (Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test) in the laboratory experiments
referenced in this report, the following discussion focuses on various other types of non-destructive concrete
testing methods.
Maturity Concept
The maturity concept in concrete testing uses the principle that concrete strength is directly related to both its age
and temperature history. This provides an effective approach to estimating early age (14 days or less) concrete
during the construction process. At the construction site, using the time/temperature history of concrete allows for
the development of a maturity-strength curve that is specific to a mix (The Constructor, 2020a).
The curve helps estimate the in-place early-age compressive and flexural strength of concrete during
construction. The measured value of temperature and maturity age provides a maturity index. The datum
temperature is defined as the temperature below which there is no hydration process, or there is no strength
developing through hydration (The Constructor, 2020a). The Nurse-Saul formula can be used to determine the
maturity index:
𝑀(𝑡) = ∑[𝑇(𝑎) − 𝑇(𝑑)] ∙ ∆𝑡
where M(t) is the maturity index at age t (in ⁰C), T(a) is the maturity at age t (in ⁰C), T(d) is the datum temperature
(in ⁰C), and ∆t is the time interval (in hours).
The maturity index value is then used to estimate the concrete's strength by using a strength-maturity curve (The
Constructor, 2020a). An example of this can be observed below:

37
Figure 29. An example of a strength-maturity curve (The Constructor, 2020a)
The use of testing facilities and personnel is greatly decreased as the information is mainly gathered by
temperature sensors embedded into the concrete formwork, such as the technology produced by SmartRock®.
This results in time and cost savings and has the benefits of providing real-time temperature and strength
readings. The relevant data is uploaded to a smart device where the concrete’s pressure value (in psi/MPa) is
displayed and updated every 15 minutes (Giatec Scientific, 2020). As well as this, the maturity concept can
monitor the actual conditions of concrete samples within a structure, including the temperature and strength
development at critical zones, which allows for a much more accurate estimation of in-place concrete strength
assessment (Salvador, 2021).
In regards to limitations of the maturity concept, it is a requirement to perform a maturity calibration for each
concrete mix to estimate the strength which may be time consuming or require more technical expertise on site.
Also, an increase in variance in the concrete batch being tested can affect the accuracy of the strength
estimation, as the make-up of the concrete mix during construction may have been different. Furthermore, many
countries have a requirement for 28-day compressive strength tests, which the maturity method cannot
accomplish and so to meet the criteria other concrete tests will have to be adopted (Salvador, 2021).
Radiographic Method
The radiographic method of concrete testing examines the internal condition of a concrete sample using the
ability of X-rays (or gamma rays) to pass through the sample and determining the location of reinforcing steels
reinforcing bars and potential voids in concrete. The voids absorb different quantities of X-rays which help
determine their size and effect on the integrity of the concrete. Radiographic film is used to catch images of the
steel reinforcing bars, voids, and any other potential defects which enables the observer to detect and specify
their location accurately (The Constructor, 2020b). An illustration of the equipment used can be seen below:

38
Figure 30. The equipment used for the radiographic testing of concrete (The Constructor, 2020b)
Reinforcing bars absorb more energy than the surrounding concrete and show up as light areas on the film,
whereas voids and cracks absorb less radiation and show up as dark zones on the film (The Constructor, 2020b).
An illustration of the equipment used can be seen below:
Figure 31. A depiction of how defects in a concrete sample are reflected on a radiographic film (The Constructor,
2020b)
Radiographic testing allows the detection of internal defects which may not be visible from the surface, and this is
particularly useful when the concrete is part of a larger structure where the structural integrity is essential to
ensure the safety of the client and/or the general public. Also, this method of testing provides quantitative data,
allowing for accurate measurements of the defects that are found so that engineers are able assess the severity
of the flaws and ensure the concrete structure is fit-for-use. As well as versatility of radiographic testing makes it
a valuable since it can be applied to a wide range of materials, including metals, plastics, composites, and
ceramics (NDT Group, 2023).
There are however drawbacks to using this method of testing which is largely entail the lack of portability and a
time-consuming set-up process. This is because the equipment used tends to be bulky and once it is transported
to the site, the setup, exposure, and development of radiographic films or digital images require meticulous
attention to detail (NDT Group, 2023). Additionally, the use of X-rays or gamma rays in radiographic testing poses
potential hazards to the personnel involved, therefore appropriate safety measures, such as the use of shielding,
must be put in place to minimise health risks (NDT Group, 2023).

39
Conclusion
In conclusion, the two types of concrete testing discussed have their respective advantages at different periods
from when the concrete is first mixed and utilised as part of a structure. The maturity concept can be an effective
method for measuring the compressive and flexural strength of in-place early-age concrete during construction
and is shown to be effective up to 14 days after the concrete has set. On the other hand, the radiographic method
of testing can be used any point in time to assess the structural integrity of concrete which makes it more
effective as a long-term option.
References
Construction Civil, 2020. Nondestructive Testing Of Concrete - Methods & Guidelines. [Online]
Available at: https://www.constructioncivil.com/nondestructive-testing-of-concrete/#google_vignette&gsc.tab=0
Giatec Scientific, 2020. Concrete Maturity vs. Concrete Cylinder Test: Which Method is More Effective?. [Online]
Available at: https://www.giatecscientific.com/education/concrete-maturity-vs-concrete-cylinder-test-which-
method-is-more-effective/
NDT Group, 2023. Radiographic testing: advantages and disadvantages. [Online]

Available at: https://www.ndtgroup.co.uk/latest-news/radiographic-testing-adv-disadv/
Salvador, M., 2021. Break tests or maturity method? - Maturix - concrete sensors. [Online]
Available at: https://maturix.com/knowledge-center/break-tests-vs-maturity-method/
The Constructor, 2014. Non-Destructive Tests on Concrete - Methods, Uses. [Online]

Available at: https://theconstructor.org/practical-guide/non-destructive-testing-of-concrete/5553/#google_vignette
The Constructor, 2020a. How to Perform Maturity Test on Concrete? [PDF]. [Online]
Available at: https://theconstructor.org/practical-guide/how-to-perform-maturity-test-concrete-pdf/45125/
The Constructor, 2020b. Radiographic Evaluation of Concrete. [Online]

Available at: https://theconstructor.org/practical-guide/radiographic-evaluation-concrete/5738/

40
Q5 - Briefly explain what cause concrete to

degradation? Provide an example where there
are evidences of concrete structure showing
signs of degradation. Suggest and describe
ways to improve the durability of concrete.
Introduction
The degradation of concrete is a detrimental problem to the civil engineering world. The degradation of concrete
can lead to the weakening of infrastructure which puts into jeopardy the lives of those you are using the
infrastructure, such as bridges and buildings. Therefore, it is important to find out the causes of concrete
degradation and to make continuous efforts to reduce or possibly exterminate possible causes for concrete
degradation.
Plastic Shrinkage
There are many causes for concrete degradation, which come are physical and chemical. One cause for
concrete degradation, which is a physical cause, is plastic shrinkage. Plastic shrinkage comes in a two-step
process whereby initially, the “solid constituents” will settle, which will lead to a top layer of water, “bleeding” and
then there is an evaporation of the water as it is the top layer (Dyer, 2014). The reason plastic shrinkage is a
cause of degradation is because the plastic shrinkage causes cracks in the concrete, which over long period of
time, will cause “further stresses” and causes cracks above the surface level of the concrete, causing it to
weaken (Dyer, 2014). However, to combat this, the concrete would have to “cure [the] concrete”, as this would
reduce the “rate of evaporation” (Dyer, 2014).
Figure 32. “Initiation of plastic shrinkage racks resulting from the evaporation of water from fresh concrete
surface” (Dyer, 2014)
Thermal Cracking
Another physical cause for concrete degradation is thermal cracking. During the initial period of the concrete
being wet, “the cement undergoes a dormant period during which little heat is evolved” (Dyer, 2014). However,
when the “rate of heat evolution” exceeds the heat loss, it causes the concrete to contract, leading to tensile
stresses and cracking. The cracking occurs this way due to the low tensile strength of concrete and the modulus
of elasticity of concrete being much lower during expansion compared to mature concrete contracting, thus the
stress for the same amount of strain would be much greater during the contraction rather than the expansion

41
(Dyer, 2014). Additionally, cracks resulting from the cooling of concrete are also known as “early-age thermal
contraction cracks”, but the formation of these cracks will determine their attributes (Dyer, 2014). To help prevent
this, the use of aggregate with a lower coefficient for thermal expansion would help as it would then reduce the
“magnitude” of thermal contraction which takes place, thus reducing the amount of cracking and degradation that
occurs within the concrete (Dyer, 2014).
Sulphate Dissolution
Another cause for concrete degradation is the dissolution of sulphate into concrete, which is a chemical form of
concrete degradation. The two main places which sulphate can occur from are soil and groundwater, and the
sulphate minerals within the soil and groundwater, once exposed to air perhaps during construction, causes the
sulphur to oxidise and become sulphuric acid. Once this occurs, the sulphuric acid encounters the concrete and
causes corrosion within the concrete, which then leads to the concrete overall weakening and thus posing a
threat to people’s safety and lives (Dyer, 2014). However, there are multiple ways of reducing this, such as
reducing the sulphur concentration in the soil and groundwater by making the groundwater “static” or by changing
the cement composition (Dyer, 2014).
Figure 33. “Common sulphur-bearing minerals and their solubilities” (Dyer, 2014)
Leaching
A final cause for concrete degradation, which is chemical, is leaching. When concrete is exposed to “mobile
water” over a long time, it will cause the concrete to lose its strength and thus degrade (Dyer, 2014). Through
testing, it was discovered that the leaching of “portlandite” was the main cause for a decrease in compressive
strength of the tested concrete. However, to combat this, the concrete needs to be imbued with acid resistance,
such as changing up the mix design of the concrete. By including “appropriate proportions of pozolanic and latent
hydraulic materials”, it will cause an increase in acid resistance (Dyer, 2014).
Example of Degradation
An example of a structure which fell due to concrete degradation was the Ynys-y-Gwas bridge. This bridge was
built in 1953 and did not show any “signs of distress”, however it collapsed in 1985. This way due to a constant
and “severe” corrosion of the tendons at the longitudinal and the travel joints. This caused “90% of the tendon
cross-section” to be lost and therefore caused a complete collapse of the bridge (Webster, 2016). This shows the
dangers of degradation as it may not be apparent initially, but may take some time to form, so it is something
engineers must look at carefully.

42
Figure 34: Collapsed bridge: downstream side (R.J. Woodward, 2023)
Conclusion
There is a range of things that can cause concrete to degrade. They can be two types of causes, which are
chemical and physical, and both can be very damaging to the concrete in the long term. Thus, it is important to
combat these causes, such as changing the mix design of the concrete in use, or even having to cure the
concrete.
References
• Dyer, Thomas D. Concrete Durability. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2014. Print.
• Webster, M., 2016. Impact of deterioration on the safety of concrete structures – what can designers do to
minimise risk?. [Online]
Available at: http://mpwrandr.co.uk/impact-of-deterioration-on-the-safety-of-concrete-structures-designers/
• R.J. Woodward, F. W., 2023. Collapse of Ynys-y-Gwas bridge. [Online]

Available at: https://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/pdf/10.1680/iicep.1988.179
[Accessed December 2023].

43
Appendix A Peer Assessment Form
Faculty of Science, Engineering & Computing
CE5013: Structural Engineering 1 and Construction Materials

PEER ASSESSMENT FORM
Group: 2
Each members of the group should complete the table and sign against his/her
name. It is in your interests both to provide relevant information and to be realistic.
The agreed contributions will be taken into account in awarding grades to individual
members of the group.

44
Name and Signature Agreed input Main components of work to be Hours spent
(%) contributed on this c/w
• Compilation 20
George Worsfold • Literature review
Name 16.6% • Results
……………………... • Graphs
Signature • Q1
• Introduction 20
Anmol Gill 16.6% • Theoretical Background
Name • Q4
……………………...
Signature
• Theoretical Background 20
Kwaku Boakye 16.6% • Discussion and Conclusion
Name • Q5
……………………...
Signature
• Introduction 20
Alpha Diallo 16.6% • Theoretical Background
Name • Q1
……………………...
Signature
• Literature Review 20
Oliver Jeffery 16.6% • Discussion and Conclusion
Name • Q3
……………………...
Signature
8. Theoretical Background 20
Josh Pelham 16.6% 9. Equipment and procedures
Name 10. Q2
Signature

45
46

Concrete and Materials Lab E - Group 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Concrete and Materials Lab E - Group 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Concrete and Materials Lab 1

Durability and Non-destructive Testing

Kingston University London

K1942624 K2007358 K2165553 K2166788 K2167039 K2165547

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Why is NDT used? ................................................................................................................................................ 30

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Figure 18. Half-cell Survey Contour Results ........................................................................................................ 17

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

▪ Resistivity of Concrete - This was carried out on a reinforced concrete slab.

▪ Half-cell survey – This was carried out on a reinforced concrete slab.

The 4 cube types were as below:

▪ Made with 100% recycled aggregate.

▪ Made with 25% rubber.

▪ Made with 50% rubber.

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

E1 (B) Resistivity of Concrete

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

E2 (A) Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test

Figure 3 - Rebound Hammer used on a concrete surface with labelled components

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

E2 (B) Ultra-sonic pulse Velocity testing

Figure 4: “Calculation of v” (Kingston University, 2023)

Figure 5: “PUNDIT Test Apparatus” (Kingston University, 2023)

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Figure 6: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity test arrangements (Loan Ngo, 2018)

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Rebound/Schmidt Hammer Test

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Ultra-Sonic Pulse Velocity Test

• The results were obtained by using 100mm

To conclude the results showcased in Figure 10 can be

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

4. Equipment & Procedures

Figure 11. Labelle d photograph of equipment used in Lab E1 (A)

The following equipment was used in Lab E1 (B): Resistivity of Concrete

• Resipod Wenner four electrodes resistance meter

• Concrete cube sample with 100% recycled aggregates

• Concrete cube with 25% recycled rubber

• Concrete cube with 50% recycled rubber

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

• Concrete cube with 100% recycled aggregates

• Concrete cube with 25% recycled rubber

• Concrete cube with 50% recycled rubber

• Portable Ultrasonic Non-destructive Digital Indicating Tester (PUNDIT)

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Lab E1 (B): Resistivity of Concrete

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Lab E2 (A): Surface Hardness Testing

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Figure 16 -Flow chart with diagrams of Lab E2 (A) Procedure

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing

Figure 17 - Lab E2 (B): Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Testing Procedure Diagram

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553

5. Results and Discussion

-65 -90 -60 -46 -41 -27 -71

-115--100 -100--85 -85--70 -70--55 -55--40 -40--25 -25--10 -10-0

Figure 18. Half-cell Survey Contour Results

Prepared for: Kingston University London K2165553