International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 9, No.

2, May 2020

Correlation between Compressive Strength of

Concrete Using Schmidt Rebound Hammer and
Universal Testing Machine of Concrete
(Replacement of Cement with C.E.T.P Sludge)
Neelabh Singh, Anantha Singh T. S., Niragi Dave, Satvik Pratap Singh, Pranjal Chaudhary, and Bhargav
Tukadiya
Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India
Email: [Link]@[Link]

Abstract—This paper aims to study the correlation between determine the compressive strength. When conducting the
Non-destructive testing of concrete also known as Schmidt test the hammer should be held at right angles to the
Rebound Hammer Testing and Destructive testing methods surface which in turn should be flat and smooth. The
which is testing in Universal Testing Machine (UTM). The rebound reading will be affected by the orientation of the
rebound hammer was invented by Ernst Schmidt. The
hammer, when used in a vertical position (on the
hammer measures the rebound of a spring-loaded mass
impacting against the surface of the sample. The test underside of a suspended slab for example) gravity will
hammer will hit the concrete at a defined energy. Its increase the rebound distance of the mass and vice versa
rebound is dependent on the hardness of the concrete and is for a test conducted on a floor slab. The Schmidt hammer
measured by the test equipment. By reference to the is an arbitrary scale ranging from 10 to 100. The concrete
conversion chart, the rebound value can be used to cubes are cured for 28 days, 90 days and 180 days. Then
determine the compressive strength. The universal testing the concrete cubes are tested in laboratory and were also
machine of 1000kN capacity was used to test the tested with a Schmidt rebound hammer using two
compressive strength of concrete. In this research work, different impact directions on each testing points such as
industrial sludge from a common effluent treatment plant
horizontal impact and vertical impact. A series of 5
was utilized as a replacement of cement. This sludge was
recovered from The Green Environment Services Co-op rebounds were carried out for each cube.
Society Ltd., Vatva, Gujarat. Cement is replaced by C.E.T.P B. Universal Testing Machine
(Common Effluent Treatment Plant) sludge by 2%, 5% and
10%, where cubes of different ages such as 28 days, 90 days [2] A universal testing machine (UTM), also known as
and 180 days were casted. a universal tester, materials testing machine or materials
test frame, is used to test the tensile strength and
Index Terms—schmidt rebound hammer, universal testing compressive strength of materials. An earlier name for a
machine, common effluent treatment plant, C.E.T.P tensile testing machine is a tensometer. The "universal"
(common effluent treatment plant) sludge by 2%, 5% and part of the name reflects that it can perform many
10%. standard tensile and compression tests on materials,
components, and structures (in other words, that it is
versatile).
I. INTRODUCTION
C. Determination of Strength
A. Schmidt Hammer or Rebound Hammer Concrete is the major need for construction purpose. [3]
A [1] Schmidt hammer, also known as a Swiss Engineers usually specify the required compressive
hammer or a rebound hammer, is a device to measure the strength of concrete, which is normally given as the 28-
elastic properties or strength of concrete or rock, mainly day compressive strength. Strength gain depends on the
surface hardness and penetration resistance. type of mixture, its constituents, the use of standard
[1] It was invented by Ernst Schmidt, a Swiss engineer. curing and by proper testing. [3] Determination of
The hammer measures the rebound of a spring-loaded compressive strength is the most important part for every
mass impacting against the surface of the sample. The researcher to check the strength of any type of concrete.
test hammer will hit the concrete at a defined energy. Its D. Materials & Methods
rebound is dependent on the hardness of the concrete and
is measured by the test equipment. By reference to the In this experimental study we aim to study the
conversion chart, the rebound value can be used to correlation between the rebound hammer test and testing
under universal testing machine. The materials used were:
1) Portland Pozzolana Cement with 30% fly ash
Manuscript received July 3, 2019; revised April 1, 2020.

© 2020 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 170

doi: 10.18178/ijscer.9.2.170-174
 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 9, No. 2, May 2020

2) C.E.T.P Sludge of 7 N/mm2 when the impact energy of the hammer is

3) Sand (Fine Aggregate) about 2.2 N-m. The load should be increased for
4) Course Aggregate calibrating rebound hammers of greater impact energy
5) Water and decreased for calibrating rebound hammers of lesser
impact energy. The test specimens should be as large a
TABLE I. PROPERTIES OF PPC [4] mass as possible in order to minimize the size effect on
the test result of a full scale structure. 150 mm cube
specimens are preferred for calibrating rebound hammers
of lower impact energy (2.2 N-m), whereas for rebound
hammers of higher impact energy, for example 30 N-m,
the test cubes should not be smaller than 300 mm. If the
specimens are wet cured, they should be removed from
wet storage and kept in the laboratory atmosphere for
about 24 hours before testing. To obtain a correlation
between rebound numbers and strength of wet cured and
wet tested cubes, it is necessary to establish a correlation
between the strength of wet tested cubes and the strength
of dry tested cubes on which rebound readings are taken.
A direct correlation between rebound numbers on wet
cubes and the strength of wet cubes is not recommended.
Only the vertical faces of the cubes as cast should be
tested. At least nine readings should be taken on each of
the two vertical faces accessible in the compression
[4] Where ‘X’ is the declared percentage of fly ash in testing machine when using the rebound hammers. The
given Portland pozzolana cement. points of impact on the specimen must not be nearer an
According to the specifications given on the cement edge than 20mm and should be not less than 20mm from
bag, the cement contains 30% of fly ash in it. M30 grade each other. The same points must not be impacted more
concrete cubes were casted in which cement was replaced than once. In this experimental study 5 reading were
by industrial C.E.T.P sludge by 2%, 5% and 10%. The taken on one plane side of the cubes with impacting it
cubes of different ages like 28 days, 90 days and 180 with the rebound hammer at an angle of 180 degree.
days were casted for testing. The quantities of materials
used in the mix design are shown below in Table II. Table F. Procedure for Compression Test under Universal
II Different composition of materials in M30 mix as per Testing Machine
IS 10262:2009 Dimension of test cube is measured at three different
places along its height/length to determine the average
TABLE II. PROPORTION OF CSA cross-section area.
1) Ends of the cube should be plane for that the ends
are tested on a bearing plate.
2) The specimen is placed centrally between the two
compression plates, such that the center of
moving head is vertically above the center of
specimen.
The dimensions of cube molds were 3) Load is applied on the specimen by moving the
150mm*150mm*150mm. Reference cubes of M30 grade movable head.
with 0% sludge content were also casted of same ages as 4) The load and corresponding contraction are
28 days, 90 days and 180 days. These cubes were casted measured at different intervals.
for comparing the results with the cubes containing 2%, 5% 5) Load is applied until the cube fails.
and 10% sludge. 6) Data is recorded after the cube fails.
7) The computer shows the stress-strain graph
E. Procedure for Obtaining Correlation between 8) The maximum load taken by the cube and the
Compressive Strength of Concrete and Rebound compressive strength of concrete.
Number
[5] The most satisfactory way of establishing a II. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
correlation between compressive strength of concrete and
its rebound number is to measure both the properties A. Rebound Hammer Testing
simultaneously on concrete cubes. The concrete cubes The rebound hammer tests were conducted on cubes of
specimens are held in a compression testing machine dimensions 150*150*150mm. Cubes with sludge
under a fixed load, measurements of rebound number percentage of 2%, 5% and 10% were placed under the
taken and then the compressive strength determined as compressive testing machine under a constant force on a
per IS.516: 1956. The fixed load required is of the order

© 2020 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 171

 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 9, No. 2, May 2020

cleaned cube surface(cleaned with the help of a porous TABLE IV. REBOUND HAMMER TEST FOR (90 DAYS)
stone) after a period of 28 days, 90 days and 180 days.
The compressive strength of the concrete cubes were
determine by referring the [7] graph given below:

Figure 1. Rebound number Caliberation chart

The results recorded were as follows:

TABLE III. REBOUND HAMMER TEST FOR (28 DAYS)

Figure 3. Rebound hammer compressive strength (90 days)

TABLE V. REBOUND HAMMER TEST FOR (180 DAYS)

Figure 4. Rebound hammer compressive strength (180 days)

Figure 2. Rebound hammer compressive strenght (28 days)

© 2020 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 172

 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 9, No. 2, May 2020

B. Test Under Universal Testing Machine TABLE VIII. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (180 DAYS)

For the determination of compressive strength of

concrete with sludge percentage of 2%, 5% and 10%,
there were 150*150*150*mm cubes were casted of
different ages (28 days, 90 days and 180 days) and were
tested under the UTM for the compression test. The
maximum capacity of the UTM was 1000KN. The cubes
were placed in such a manner that the load applied on the
perfectly plane and smooth side of the cube so that there
is no partial distribution of load. The loading rate on the
cube was 125KN/min.
The results recorded were as follows:

TABLE VI. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (28 DAYS)

Figure 7. Compressive strength under UTM (128 days)

As seen through the graphical representation of the

compressive strengths of the concrete with different
sludge composition of 2%, 5% and 10% we can observed
that:
The Non-destructive method of testing or also called as
the Schmidt Rebound Hammer testing method was
efficient in calculating the compressive strength of the
concrete.
Figure 5. Compressive Strength Under UTM (28 Days) As seen in destructive testing method the cube was
destroyed after testing hence the sample cannot be used
for other testing or experiments.
TABLE VII. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (90 DAYS)
As seen in the graphical representation below we can
see that the compression strength measured by both
Rebound Hammer and UTM have some correlation
between them and can be compared.
The strength measured is almost same and nominal in
both Rebound Hammer and UTM.
As we can see via graphical representation, the sludge
content affects the concrete strength as it reduces the
compressive strength.
After addition of 2% of sludge we can see the strength
of concrete is reduced but it is nominal for construction
purpose.
The strength of concrete after adding 5% of sludge we
observed that the strength decreases but it is not nominal
for construction or it may be used for specific loading
conditions
The strength in concrete when 10% sludge is added, it
decreases drastically can can’t be used for any
construction purpose. As the cube was of M30 grade, the
compressive strength was not at all nominal for
construction.

Figure 6. Compressive strength under utm (90 days)

© 2020 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 173

 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 9, No. 2, May 2020

C. Correlation between the Rebound Hammer and the The rebound hammer is considerably suitable because
UTM the cubes are not destroyed as in the UTM and can be
reused for further experiments.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare no conflict of interest.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Author Neelabh Singh, Satvik Pratap Singh, Pranjal
Chaudhary and Bhargav Tukadiya contributed in the
execution of the project. Author Neelabh Singh wrote the
Figure 8. Comparison for cubes after 28 days of curing by UTM and content of the paper and concluded the project. Author Dr.
rebound hammer. Anantha singh and Dr. Niragi dave came up with the idea
of using c.e.t.p sludge in concrete and they helped in the
processing of the project.

REFERENCES
[1] Proceq. [Online]. Available:
[Link]
group/[Link]?pqr=2
[2] Davis, R. Joseph, Tensile Testing, 2nd ed., ASM International, p. 2,
2004.
[3] F. Aydin and M. Saribiyik, Scientific Research and Essays, vol. 5,
no. 13, pp. 1644-1648, July 4, 2010.
[4] Praveen Babu. [Online]. Available:
Figure 9. Comparison for cubes after 90 days of curing by UTM and
rebound hammer. [Link]
[5] T. Gehlot, S. S. Sankhla, A. Gupta, vol. 5, no. 8, pp.192-198.
[6] Myindialist. [Online]. Available:
[Link]
compression-test-on-utm/#.W2ujwtIzbIU
[7] S. Sinthaworn, MATEC Web of Conferences 130, 04003 (2017),
S. Sinthaworn, T. Koseekageepat, O. Saengmanee, Advanced
Materials Research 974, 350-353 (2014)

Copyright © 2020 by the authors. This is an open access article

distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-
NC-ND 4.0), which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any
medium, provided that the article is properly cited, the use is non-
Figure 10. Comparison for cubes after 180 days of curing by UTM commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
and rebound hammer.
Neelabh Singh born on 23rd December 1996 is
III. CONCLUSION currently pursuing B. Tech (final year) in Civil
Engineering at Pandit Deendayal Petroleum
The compressive strength obtained for 2% sludge University Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India and
content is nominal for construction as M30 grade have presented his paper in conference ICCUE
concrete cubes were casted and as compared to the 2019.
reference cube of M30 grade the compressive strength
was found to be similar.
The cubes which have 5% of sludge content the
compressive strength was lower as compared to the
reference cubes were casted. Anantha Singh is a Assistant Professor and has
The cubes of 5% sludge content it was observed that done his B.E. (Civil Engineering, Sun College
the compressive strength was quite low and hence it is of Engg and Tech., Nagercoil/Anna University
Chennai), 2009. [Link]. (Environmental
not suitable for construction purpose but can be used for Engineering, National Institute of Technology
some specific loading. Trichy), 2011. Ph.D (Environmental
For the 10% sludge content the compressive strength Engineering, National Institute of Technology
was drastically low and hence it cannot be used for Trichy), 2014. His professional Affiliation-
Certified Lead Auditor for Environmental
construction. Management System ISO 14001. Accolades-
As for the correlation between the non-destructive and Anna University Chennai, 37th rank holder in BE- Civil Engineering
the destructive testing, the results on both rebound (2005-2009 batch) Awarded first prize in the views talk, in SELECT-
hammer and the UTM was similar. X3, organized by CSIR- CECRI, 15th-16th February- 2013 Own 25000
cash prize in the poject presentation competition organized by Hi-Tech
solution and IIM Ahmedabad.

© 2020 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 174