Agunwamba, J., & Adagba, T. (2012). A Comparative Analysis of the Rebound Hammer and Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity in Testing Concrete. Nigerian Journal of Technology, 31(1), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.4314/njt.v31i1.
Copyright belongs to the Faculty of Engineering, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria
The contents of the articles are the sole opinion of the author(s) and not of NIJOTECH. NIJOTECH allows open access for distribution of the published articles in any media so long as whole (not part) of articles are distributed. A copyright and statement of originality documents will need to be filled out clearly and signed prior to publication of an accepted article. The Copyright form can be downloaded from https://www.nijotech.com/downloads/COPYRIGHT%20FORM.pdf while the Statement of Originality is in Statement of Originality.pdf (nijotech.com) For articles that were developed from funded research, a clear acknowledgement of such support should be mentioned in the article with relevant references. Authors are expected to provide complete information on the sponsorship and intellectual property rights of the article together with all exceptions. It is forbidden to publish the same research report in more than one journal.
Main Article Content
A Comparative Analysis of the Rebound Hammer and Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity in Testing Concrete
JC Agunwamba
T Adagba
Abstract
This work presents a study on the comparison between some non-destructive testing tech-niques (Rebound Hammer and Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity). Tests were performed to com-pare the accuracy between the rebound hammer and the ultrasonic pulse velocity methodin estimating the strength of concrete. Eighty samples (cubes of 150 x 150 x 150) wereprepared using two mix designs of 1:2:4 and 1:3:6 with a constant w=c ratio of 0.45 andwere tested at 7, 14, 21 and 28 days. The slump test was between 62 - 78mm. The resultsobtained from the non-destructive testing methods were correlated with the compressivestrength results which showed that a higher correlation existed between the Rebound Ham-mer and the compressive strength than the Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity. The rebound ham-mer readings had a correlation coecient of 0.794 while the ultrasonic pulse velocity hada correlation coecient of 0.790 for the 1:2:4 mix and the rebound hammer readings for1:3:6 was 0.783 and that for the ultrasonic pulse velocity was 0.777. Statistical analysisof the results obtained showed that there was no signicant dierence between the meansof the two methods for both mix at a 0.05 level of signicance.
Donate
AJOL is a Non Profit Organisation that cannot function without donations.
AJOL and the millions of African and international researchers who rely on our free services are deeply grateful for your contribution.
AJOL is annually audited and was also independently assessed in 2019 by E&Y.
Your donation is guaranteed to directly contribute to Africans sharing their research output with a global readership.
Once off donations here:
For annual AJOL Supporter contributions, please view our Supporters page.
Tell us what you think and showcase the impact of your research!
Please take 5 minutes to contribute to our survey so that we can better understand the contribution that African research makes to global and African development challenges. Share your feedback to help us make sure that AJOL's services support and amplify the voices of researchers like you.