REPORT ON STRENGTH EVALUATION

OF "RESIDENTIAL CUM COMMERCIAL BUILDING

(UNDER CONSTRUCTION)

AT
S. NO.115/1 & 116/4 (PT)
VILLAGE NARPOLI
TAL : BHIVANDI, DIST : THANE

FOR
M/s. PRIDE LIFE SPACES LLP
BHIVANDI

BY

PIONEER ENGINEERS
103, VIJAY TOWER, DR. LAZRES ROAD
CHARAI, THANE (W), PIN : 400601
FEBRUARY 2016
JOB NO. PN 322

Office : 103, Vijay Tower, Dr. Lazres Road,

Charai, Thane (W) 400601
Lab Address : Shop No. 4 A, Bhawani Chamber, Ground Floor
Dr. Lazres Road, Charai, Thane (W) - 400601
Phone : 022 25429834 Email : pe@pioneerengineers.co.in
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PIONEER ENGINEERS
SOIL TESTING

Job No: PE / 2015-16 / PN 322

NDT

LAND SURVEY

Date: 22. 02. 2016

REPORT ON STRENGTH EVALUATION

OF "RESIDENTIAL CUM COMMERCIAL BUILDING
(UNDER CONSTRUCTION) AT S. NO.115/1 & 116/4 (PT)
VILLAGE NARPOLI, TAL : BHIVANDI, DIST : THANE
1.0 GENERAL

M/s. Pride Life Spaces LLP, Bhivandi has planned to carry out structural quality audit of their
residential cum commercial building at Village Narpoli, Bhivandi, Dist: Thane and hence it is
became necessary to carry out the strength evaluation survey of said structure by NDT methods
(USPV + Rebound Hammer Test). The details of existing structure are given below. For this
purpose, the job of strength evaluation survey of said structure was awarded to M/s. Pioneer
Engineers, Thane vide work order dated 15 th February 2016.
Sr.
No.

Name & Location

of Structure

Proposed
Floor

Structure
Type

Residential cum Commercial Building,

Narpoli, Bhivandi

G + 7 Upper
Floors

RCC Framed
Structure

Status

Under Construction

2.0 DETAILS & SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION

The scope of the work stipulated for strength evaluation survey of existing structure is tabulated
below. The field work of NDT was carried out on 18 th February, 2016. The details of this
investigation are given below.
Sr.
No.

Name of test

Broad Purpose Of The Investigation

No. Of
Tests

USPV Test

To find the quality rating of concrete.

93

Rebound Hammer Test

To find the probable strength of concrete.

93

It may please be noted that the detailed structural design is not contemplated in the report. This
report is aimed at providing general information re garding the strength and existing status of RCC
members. The information presented in the report shall provide the necessary data from which the
detailed structural quality audit for the purpose for which it is intended can be worked out.
The work in general was carried out in accordance with the following Indian Standard
specifications.

IS - 13311 (Part 1): 1992 - Code of practice for NDT of concrete: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity.

IS - 13311 (Part 2): 1992 - Code of practice for NDT of concrete: Rebound Hammer Test.

IS 456: 2000 - Code of practice for plain & reinforced concrete.

IS 516 : 1959 - Code of practice for method of tests for strength of concrete.

Page 2

3.0

NON-DESTRUCTIVE ULTRASONIC TESTING

It was intended to assess the existing strength in the concrete. For this purpose ultrasonic
nondestructive concrete testing method was adopted. A brief description on the basic principles,
basis of analysis and methodology of this testing technique are given below. The ultrasonic
pulse velocities are deduced from the in-situ observation and an attempt has been made to
indicate the existing strength range.
3.1

BASIC PRINCIPLE

The velocity of sound propogation through any concrete member is a measure of its material
property. For assessing this velocity, the ultrasonic pulse emitted by a transducer are
transmitted through the concrete and received by another transducer, thus, the physical
parameters measured are the transit time and path length. Based on this, the pulse velocity
through concrete is computed.
For assessing the quality materials from ultrasonic pulse velocity measurement, the degree of
accuracy required is of highest order. In order to achieve this, suitable pulse is generated by
using the digital tester and the transmission time (i.e. path length) is also measured accurately.
From this, data the pulse velocity is evaluated as:
Path length
Pulse velocity = ----------------- m/sec
Transit time
3.2

METHODOLOGY

At the location where pulse velocity is to be assessed, the opposite surfaces of members are
checked for the smoothness. If the surface is rough or uneven it is first made level with wire
brush detaching loosely adhering materials and a layer of grease is applied. The transducer and
receiver probes are pressed hard against the prepar ed surface. The time for the first pulse to
arrive is recorded only after they become stable. From the recorded time and path length, the
pulse velocity is computed by three methods namely direct method, Semi Direct Method &
Indirect Method of Testing. Using the following relation concrete quality rating of various
structural members at various test locations is computed.
TABLE NO. 1 : VELOCITY CRITERION FOR CONCRETE QUALITY
GRADING AS PER IS 13311 (PART 1):1992
Sr.
No.

Velocity By Cross Probing

(m/sec)

Concrete Quality
Grading

Above 4500

Excellent

3500 To 4500

Good

3000 To 3500

Medium

Below 3000

Doubtful

Page 3

Further in addition to above mentioned velocity criterion Leslie and Cheesman have given the
pulse velocity rating for concrete (Ref book published by author Mr. V.M. Malhotra : Testing
Hardened Concrete : Nondestructive Methods : ACI Monograph No. 9)
Sr.
No.

Velocity By Cross Probing

(m/sec)

General Condition of Concrete

As Per Leslie & Cheesman

Above 4575

Excellent

3660 To 4575

Good

3050 To 3660

Questionable

2135 To 3050

Poor

Below 2135

Very poor

By combining these two different velocity rating criterion one combined elaborate acceptance
criterion of concrete may be established as follows.
Sr.
No.

Velocity By Cross Probing

( m/sec)

General Condition of Concrete

(IS 13311 (PART 1):1992 + Leslie & Cheesman)

Above 4500

Excellent

3500 To 4500

Good

3000 To 3500

Medium

3000 To 2150

Poor

Below 2150

Very poor

3.3

METHODS OF PROPAGATING ULTRASONIC PULSES

Tx

DIRECT TRANSMISSION

R.C.C. ELEMENT

Rx

R.C.C. ELEMENT

Tx

Rx

SEMI DIRECT TRANSMISSION

Page 4

Tx

3.4

Rx

INDIRECT TRANSMISSION

INFLUENCE OF TEST CONDITIONS

i) Influence of Surface Conditions & Moisture Content Of Concrete

Smoothness of contact surface under test affects the measurement of ultrasonic pulse velocity.
For the most concrete surface, the finish is usually sufficiently smooth to ensure good acoustical
contact by the use of a coupling medium and by pressing the transducer against the concrete
surface. When the concrete surface is rough and uneven, it is necessary to smoothen the
surface to make the pulse velocity measurement possible. In general, pulse velocity through
concrete increases with increased moisture content of concrete. This influence is more for low
strength concrete than high strength concrete. The pulse velocity of saturated concrete may be
up to 2 percent higher than that of similar dry concrete. In general, drying of concrete may
results in somewhat lower pulse velocity.
ii)

Influence of Path Length, Shape and Size of the Concrete Member

As concrete is inherently heterogeneous, it is essential that path lengths be sufficiently long so

as to avoid any error introduced due to its heterogeneity. In field work, this does not pose any
difficulty as the pulse velocity measurements are carried out on thick structural concrete
members. However in the laboratory where generally small specimens are used, the path length
can affect the pulse velocity readings. The shape and size of the concrete member do not
influence the pulse velocity unless the least lateral dimension is less than a certain minimum
value, for example the minimum lateral dimension of about 80mm for 50 khz natural frequency
of the transducer. Table gives the guidance on the choice of the transducer natural frequency
for the different path lengths and minimum transverse dimension of the concrete members.
iii)

Influence of Temperature of Concrete

Variations of the concrete temperature between 5 0C and 300 C do not significantly affect the
pulse velocity measurement to concrete. At temperatures between 30 0 to 600C, there can be
reduction in pulse velocity up to 5 percent. Below freezing temperature, the free water freezes
with in concrete, resulting in an increase in pulse velocity up to 7.5 percent.

Page 5

iv)

Influence of Stress

When concrete is subjected to a stress which is abnormally high for the quality of the concrete,
the pulse velocity may be reduced due to the development of micro-cracks. This influence is
likely to be greatest when the pulse path is normal to the predominant direction of the planes of
such micro cracks. This occurs when the pulse path is perpendicular to the direction of a
uniaxial compressive stress in a member. This influence is generally insignificant unless the
stress is greater than about 60 percent of the ultimate strength of the concrete
v) Effect of Reinforcing Bars

The pulse velocity measured in reinforced concrete in the vicinity of reinforcing bars is usually
higher than in plain concrete of the same composition. This is because of the pulse velocity in
steel is 1.2 to 1.9 times the velocity in plain concrete and under certain conditions. The first
pulse to arrive at the receiving transducer travels partly in concrete and partly in steel. The
apparent increase in pulse velocity depends upon the proximity of the measurements to the
reinforcing bar, the diameter and number of the bars and their orientation with respect to the
path of propagation.
4.0

SCHMIDT REBOUND HAMMER TEST

Silver Schmidt Rebound Hammer (Proceq) is another portable device that can be used to
estimate the compressive strength of concrete. This is also a non destructive in-situ testing
method. The Schmidt rebound hammer operates on the principle that the measured rebound of
a steel hammer mass when propelled with 0.075 kgm of energy against the concrete or rock
surface will be proportional to the hardness of the material which may be correlated in turn with
the compressive strength.
4.1

METHODOLOGY

Before test the surface is scrapped and cleaned. The hammer is unlocked by pressuring once.
The rod of the hammer then comes out. The hammer is held perpendicular to the surface and
the rod is pressed against the surface. After the hammering sound the hammer is locked and
the Schmidt hammer value is read from the scale. The estimated compressive strength is
computed from the graph given on the hammer.
4.2

INFLUENCE OF TEST CONDITIONS

The rebound numbers are influenced by a number of factors like type of cement and aggregate,
surface condition and moisture content, age of concrete and extent of carbonation of concrete.
i) Influence of Type of Cement

Concretes made with high alumina cement can give strengths 100 percent higher than that with
ordinary Portland cement. Concrete made with super sulphated cement can give 50 percent
lower strength than that with Ordinary Portland Cement.

Page 6

ii) Influence of Type Aggregate

Different types of aggregate used in concrete give different correlations between compressive
strength and rebound numbers. Normal aggregates suc h as gravels and crushed rock
aggregates give similar correlations, but concrete made with lightweight aggregates require
special calibration.
iii) Influence of Surface Condition and Moisture Content of Concrete

The rebound hammer method is suitable only for close texture concrete. Open texture concrete
typical of masonry blocks, honeycombed concrete or no-fines concrete is unsuitable for this test.
All correlations assume full compaction, as strength of partially compacted concrete bears no
unique relationship to the rebound numbers. Trowell ed and floated surfaces are harder thane
moulded surfaces, and tend to overestimate the strength of concrete. A wet surface will give rise
to underestimation of the strength of concrete calibrated under dry conditions. In structural
concrete, this can be about 20 percent lower than in an equivalent dry concrete.
iv) Influence of Curing and Age of Concrete

The relationship between hardness and strength varies as a function of time. Variations in initial
rate of hardening, subsequent curing and conditions of exposure also influence the relationship.
Separate calibration curves are required for different curing regimes but effect of age can
generally be ignored for concrete between 3 days and 3 months old.
v) Influence of Carbonation of concrete surface

The Influence of carbonation of concrete surface on the rebound number is very significant.
Carbonated concrete gives an overestimate of strength which in extreme cases can be up to 50
percent. It is possible to establish correction factors by removing the carbonated layer and
testing the concrete with the rebound hammer on the uncarbonated concrete.
5.0

REFERENCE CLAUSES

As per IS 13311 (Part 2): 1992: If the quality of concrete is assessed to be Excellent or Good
by pulse velocity method, only then the compressive strength is assessed from rebound
hammer indices, When the quality assessed is medium the estimation of concrete strength by
rebound indices is extended to entire mass only on the basis of other collateral measurement
like core testing. When the quality of concrete is Doubtful (Poor/Very Poor) no assessment is
made from rebound indices.
As per IS 13311(Part 1): 1992: The estimation of strength of concrete by rebound hammer
method cannot held to be very accurate and probable accuracy of prediction of concrete
strength in structure is +/-25%.

Page 7

6.0

CONCLUSION

The overall floor wise cumulative observations of NDT results are given below.
a) GROUND FLOOR
Sr.
No.

Item Description

Very
Poor
Quality
Rating
-

Poor
Quality
Rating

Medium
Quality
Rating

Good
Quality
Rating

Excellent
Quality
Rating

Total
Elements

17.00

4.00

21.00

33%

19%

100%

R. C. C. Locations

Percentage (%)

Lowest USPV (m/sec)

Highest USPV (m/sec)

<2150

2150 to
3000

3500 to
4500

4
5

6
7
8

Velocity By Cross Probing

(m/sec) as per IS 13311(Part 1): 1992
Deviation with respective
to Good Quality Rating
velocity 3500 m/sec
Average USPV (m/sec)
Acceptance Criteria For
USPV
as
per
IS
13311(Part 1): 1992
Average concrete strength
by Rebound Hammer
2
method (Kg/cm )

3000 to
3500

3404 (Medium Quality Rating)

Minimum USPV 3500 m/sec

263 Kg/cm

b) FIRST FLOOR
Sr.
No.

Item Description

Very
Poor
Quality
Rating
-

Poor
Quality
Rating

Medium
Quality
Rating

Good
Quality
Rating

Excellent
Quality
Rating

Total
Elements

3.00

6.00

1.00

10.00

30%

60%

10%

100%

R. C. C. Locations

Percentage (%)

Lowest USPV (m/sec)

Highest USPV (m/sec)

Velocity By Cross Probing

(m/sec) as per IS 13311(Part 1): 1992

3500 to
4500

Deviation with respective

to Good Quality Rating
velocity 3500 m/sec

Average USPV (m/sec)

Acceptance Criteria For

USPV
as
per
IS
13311(Part 1): 1992

Average concrete strength

by Rebound Hammer
2
method (Kg/cm )

<2150

2150 to
3000

3000 to
3500

3090 (Medium Quality Rating)

Minimum USPV 3500m/sec

212 Kg/cm

Page 8

c) SECOND FLOOR
Sr.
No.

Item Description

Very
Poor
Quality
Rating

Poor
Quality
Rating

Medium
Quality
Rating

Good
Quality
Rating

Excellent
Quality
Rating

Total
Elements

R. C. C. Locations

4.00

6.00

10.00

Percentage (%)

40%

60%

100%

Lowest USPV (m/sec)

Highest USPV (m/sec)

Velocity By Cross Probing

(m/sec) as per IS 13311(Part 1): 1992

3500 to
4500

Deviation with respective

to Good Quality Rating
velocity 3500 m/sec

Average USPV (m/sec)

Acceptance Criteria For

USPV
as
per
IS
13311(Part 1): 1992

Average concrete strength

by Rebound Hammer
2
method (kg/cm )

7.0

<2150

2150 to
3000

3000 to
3500

3055 (Medium Quality Rating)

Minimum USPV 3500m/sec

150 kg/cm

CONCLUSION

Overall findings of both the test with respective to IS norms are tabulated in the following table.
a) USPV Test
Sr.
No.

Name of structure

Residential cum Commercial

Building, Narpoli, Bhivandi

Floor
Description

Average
in situ
USPV in
m/sec

Required
USPV as
per
acceptance
criteria
m/sec

Remark

Ground
Floor

3404

3500

Concrete does
not
qualifies
acceptance
criteria as per IS norms

First Floor

3090

3500

Concrete does
not
qualifies
acceptance
criteria as per IS norms

Second
Floor

3055

3500

Concrete does
not
qualifies
acceptance
criteria as per IS norms

Page 9

b) Concrete Strength (By Rebound Hammer Method)

Sr.
No.

Name of structure

1
2

Residential cum Commercial

Building, Narpoli, Bhivandi

Floor Description

Estimated Concrete Strength as

per IS 13311 (Part II) : 1992 by
Rebound Hammer Test
(Kg/cm2)

Ground Floor

263 Kg/cm

First Floor

212 Kg/cm

Second Floor

150 Kg/cm

8.0 RECOMMENDATION

i) We here by propose to share this report with concern Structural Engineer for structural audit of
Residential cum Commercial Building for the purpose for which it is intended.
ii) The Consultant/client are requested to use their judgment, knowledge, experience, result of
NDT and any other relevant site information available with them to assess the stability as well as
to confirm the fitness for the purpose for which it is intended.

R. D. PANDIT

M. I. PANDIT

D.C.E & R.E.

CHARTERED ENGINEER
B. E. (Civil), M. I. E., M. I. G. S.
(M-132609-5)

USPV TEST RESULT

PIONEER ENGINEERS

Job No: PN 322 / 2015-16

Tempreture: 270C

Date of Testing : 18th February 2016

Grade of Concrete : M20

NON DESTRUCTIVE CONCRETE TEST RESULTS

Sr.
No.

1
2
3

Location

Element

GROUND COLUMN C17

FLOOR
(Age : 10
Months)
LIFT WALL LW1

Thickness
of Element
mm

230

Ultrasonic Ultrasonic Average

Pulse
Pulse
Ultrasonic
Reading
Velocity
Pulse
microsec
m/sec
Velocity
m/sec

62

3710

Rebound
No.

32
3446

840

264

3182

160

49

3265

Est.concrete
strength by
Rebound
Hammer
Method
2
Kg/cm

Method Of
Testing

280

300

Direct

240

260

Direct

240

260

Direct

Medium
30
30

3142
4

Concrete
Quality
Grading As
Per IS 13311
(PART I) 1992
plus Leisle &
Cheesman

Medium

160

53

3019

28

210

230

Direct

840

282

2979

30

240

260

Direct

230

62

3710

280

300

Direct

840

273

3077

280

300

Direct

240

88

2727

240

260

Direct

310

330

Direct

310

330

Direct

310

330

Direct

240

260

Direct

310

330

Direct

240

260

Direct

280

300

Direct

COLUMN C13

COLUMN C12

3255

32
32
30

3030
9
10

COLUMN C21

240

72

3333

230

69

3333

Medium
34
34

3409
11
12

COLUMN C20

230

66

3485

230

73

3151

Medium
34
30

3372
13
14

COLUMN C25

230

64

3594

230

71

3239

Medium
34
30
Medium

3389
15

230

65

3538

Medium

32

PIONEER ENGINEERS

Job No: PN 322 / 2015-16

0

Date of Testing : 18th February 2016

Grade of Concrete : M20

Tempreture: 27 C
NON DESTRUCTIVE CONCRETE TEST RESULTS

Sr.
No.

Location

16

GROUND COLUMN C28

FLOOR
(Age : 10
Months)

17
18
19

Thickness
of Element
mm

Element

COLUMN C33

Ultrasonic Ultrasonic Average

Pulse
Pulse
Ultrasonic
Reading
Velocity
Pulse
microsec
m/sec
Velocity
m/sec

230

61

3770

230

61

3770

850

358

2374

840

239

3515

Rebound
No.

32
3305

32

21

COLUMN C42

240

63

3810

240

59

4068

32

23

COLUMN C37

240

60

4000

230

67

3433

32
34

25

COLUMN C34

230

69

3333

240

63

3810

34
32

27

LIFT WALL LW4

240

58

4138

160

44

3636

34
32

29

COLUMN C54

160

47

3404

230

78

2949

34
30

230

64

3594

Direct

280

300

Direct
Direct

280

300

Direct

280

300

Direct

310

330

Direct

310

330

Direct

280

300

Direct

310

330

Direct

280

300

Direct

310

330

Direct

240

260

Direct

210

230

Direct

180

200

Direct

210

230

Direct

Good
28
26
Medium

3271
30

300

Good

3520
28

Medium

3974
26

280

Good

3383
24

Method Of
Testing

Good

4034
22

Medium

Est.concrete
strength by
Rebound
Hammer
Method
2
Kg/cm

3662

20

Concrete
Quality
Grading As
Per IS 13311
(PART I) 1992
plus Leisle &
Cheesman

28

PIONEER ENGINEERS

Job No: PN 322 / 2015-16

0

Date of Testing : 18th February 2016

Grade of Concrete : M20

Tempreture: 27 C
NON DESTRUCTIVE CONCRETE TEST RESULTS

Sr.
No.

Location

31

GROUND COLUMN C55

FLOOR
(Age : 10
Months)
COLUMN C51

32
33

Thickness
of Element
mm

Element

230

Ultrasonic Ultrasonic Average

Pulse
Pulse
Ultrasonic
Reading
Velocity
Pulse
microsec
m/sec
Velocity
m/sec

71

3239

Rebound
No.

30

230

65

3538

230

71

3239

30
28

35

COLUMN C24

230

71

3239

230

73

3151

28
30

37

COLUMN C49

230

70

3286

230

72

3194

30
24

39

COLUMN C48

230

63

3651

230

68

3382

26
30

41

COLUMN C65

230

69

3333

230

70

3286

30
28
3240

42
43

COLUMN C62

230

72

3194

230

73

3151

230

62

3710

Direct

240

260

Direct

210

230

Direct

210

230

Direct

240

260

Direct

240

260

Direct

150

170

Direct

180

200

Direct

240

260

Direct

240

260

Direct

210

230

Direct

210

230

Direct

240

260

Direct

280

300

Direct

Medium
28
30
Medium

3430
44

260

Medium

3358
40

Medium

3423
38

240

Medium

3218
36

Method Of
Testing

Medium

3239
34

Est.concrete
strength by
Rebound
Hammer
Method
2
Kg/cm

Medium

3389
B

Concrete
Quality
Grading As
Per IS 13311
(PART I) 1992
plus Leisle &
Cheesman

32

PIONEER ENGINEERS

Job No: PN 322 / 2015-16

0

Date of Testing : 18th February 2016

Grade of Concrete : M20

Tempreture: 27 C
NON DESTRUCTIVE CONCRETE TEST RESULTS

Sr.
No.

Location

45

FIRST
FLOOR
(Age : 6
Months)

46

Thickness
of Element
mm

Element

COLUMN C36

840

Ultrasonic Ultrasonic Average

Pulse
Pulse
Ultrasonic
Reading
Velocity
Pulse
microsec
m/sec
Velocity
m/sec

260

3231

Rebound
No.

Concrete
Quality
Grading As
Per IS 13311
(PART I) 1992
plus Leisle &
Cheesman

28
3351

Est.concrete
strength by
Rebound
Hammer
Method
2
Kg/cm

Method Of
Testing

210

230

Direct

Medium

840

242

3471

30

240

260

Direct

920

384

2396

24

150

170

Direct

48

240

81

2963

180

200

Direct

49

920

309

2977

26

180

200

Direct

920

395

2329

26

180

200

Direct

51

240

81

2963

210

230

Direct

52

920

371

2480

180

200

Direct

230

77

2987

150

170

Direct

240

260

Direct

210

230

Direct

47

50

53

COLUMN C53

COLUMN C51

COLUMN C39

2779

2591

26

28

55

COLUMN C38

850

244

3484

920

299

3077

24
Medium
30
28
3187

56

Poor

26
3235

54

Poor

Medium

920

279

3297

30

240

260

Direct

1220

489

2495

24

150

170

Direct

58

230

72

3194

210

230

Direct

59

1220

446

2735

180

200

Direct

57

COLUMN C19

2808

28
26

Poor

PIONEER ENGINEERS

Job No: PN 322 / 2015-16

0

Date of Testing : 18th February 2016

Grade of Concrete : M20

Tempreture: 27 C
NON DESTRUCTIVE CONCRETE TEST RESULTS

Sr.
No.

Location

60

FIRST
FLOOR
(Age : 6
Months)

Thickness
of Element
mm

Element

920

272

3382

920

306

3007

920

280

3286

230

75

3067

920

296

3108

230

78

2949

230

61

3770

230

69

3333

230

74

3108

1150

307

3746

1530

553

2767

71

230

65

3538

72

1530

496

3085

850

275

3091

74

850

287

2962

75

230

77

2987

61
62

COLUMN C11

Ultrasonic Ultrasonic Average

Pulse
Pulse
Ultrasonic
Reading
Velocity
Pulse
microsec
m/sec
Velocity
m/sec

COLUMN C10

63
64

COLUMN C2

65
66

COLUMN C8

67
68
69
70

73

SECOND COLUMN C46

FLOOR
(Age : 45
Days)
COLUMN C30

COLUMN C18

3194

Rebound
No.

28

Concrete
Quality
Grading As
Per IS 13311
(PART I) 1992
plus Leisle &
Cheesman

230

Direct

180

200

Direct

210

230

Direct

210

230

Direct

240

260

Direct

210

230

Direct

280

300

Direct

210

230

Direct

150

170

Direct

26

180

200

Direct

24

150

170

Direct

180

200

Direct

26

180

200

Direct

24

150

170

Direct

150

170

Direct

150

170

Direct

28

Medium

28
3028

30

Medium

28
3552

32

Good

28
3427

3130

3013

Method Of
Testing

210

Medium

26
3176

Est.concrete
strength by
Rebound
Hammer
Method
2
Kg/cm

24

26

24
24

Medium

Medium

Medium

PIONEER ENGINEERS

Job No: PN 322 / 2015-16

0

Date of Testing : 18th February 2016

Grade of Concrete : M20

Tempreture: 27 C
NON DESTRUCTIVE CONCRETE TEST RESULTS

Location

76

SECOND COLUMN C22

FLOOR
(Age : 45
Days)

830

270

3074

830

229

3624

230

67

3433

COLUMN C14

760

287

2648

77
78
79

Thickness
of Element
mm

Ultrasonic Ultrasonic Average

Pulse
Pulse
Ultrasonic
Reading
Velocity
Pulse
microsec
m/sec
Velocity
m/sec

Sr.
No.

Element

Rebound
No.

24
3377

26

81

COLUMN C7

760

239

3180

230

77

2987

22

83

COLUMN C5

230

70

3286

230

81

2840

24
22

Method Of
Testing

150

170

Direct

180

200

Direct

180

200

Direct

120

140

Direct

150

170

Direct

120

140

Direct

120

140

Direct

90

110

Direct

Medium
22
20

3023
84

Est.concrete
strength by
Rebound
Hammer
Method
2
Kg/cm

Poor

3136
82

Medium

26
2914

80

Concrete
Quality
Grading As
Per IS 13311
(PART I) 1992
plus Leisle &
Cheesman

Medium

920

287

3206

26

180

200

Direct

1150

406

2833

24

150

170

Direct

86

230

77

2987

150

170

Direct

87

1150

385

2987

24

150

170

Direct

1530

789

1939

20

90

110

Direct

89

230

72

3194

120

140

Direct

90

230

80

2875

90

110

Direct

85

88

COLUMN C12

COLUMN C41

2936

2670

24

22
20

Poor

Poor

PIONEER ENGINEERS

Job No: PN 322 / 2015-16

0

Date of Testing : 18th February 2016

Grade of Concrete : M20

Tempreture: 27 C
NON DESTRUCTIVE CONCRETE TEST RESULTS

Sr.
No.

Location

91

SECOND COLUMN C40

FLOOR
(Age : 45
Days)

92
93

Thickness
of Element
mm

Element

Ultrasonic Ultrasonic Average

Pulse
Pulse
Ultrasonic
Reading
Velocity
Pulse
microsec
m/sec
Velocity
m/sec

760

281

2705

230

79

2911

760

241

3154

Rebound
No.

Concrete
Quality
Grading As
Per IS 13311
(PART I) 1992
plus Leisle &
Cheesman

20
2923

22

Poor

22

Est.concrete
strength by
Rebound
Hammer
Method
2
Kg/cm

Method Of
Testing

90

110

Direct

120

140

Direct

120

140

Direct

Note : These results are valid only for the elements tested at site.

M. I. PANDIT
CHARTERED ENGINEER

LOCATION PLAN

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

PIONEER ENGINEERS
Site Photographs

PIONEER ENGINEERS
Site Photographs

PIONEER ENGINEERS
Site Photographs