Concrete Core Cutting Test
Concrete Core Cutting Test
Concrete Core Cutting Test
Core Tests:
Easy to Perform, Not
Easy to Interpret
first place the value of the load in than specified. But there may be
Newtons (or pounds), under which other reasons: the cylinders may
failure by crushing occurs, which is have been incorrectly consoli-
then to be divided by the cross- dated (compacted); they may have
sectional area of the core in square been damaged in transit, subjected
millimeters (or square inches). to freezing at a very early age,
Dividing the first of these by the badly cured, or incorrectly tested;
second gives a number in or the resulting compressive
megapascals (or psi); but does this strength may have been incorrectly
number represent the compressive calculated or recorded.
strength of concrete in the struc- The contractor has reasons to
ture from which the core was cut? suggest that it is the cylinders that
The answer is no. Not only must are unsatisfactory, while the
the number be processed, but the concrete in the structure is as
resulting value of strength also specified. On the other hand, the
must be carefully interpreted. engineer has a professional respon-
Why should length- 1.6 (see Fig. 1). The reasons for this the case, I am of the opinion that a
diameter ratio be 2? situation lie in the mode of failure cylinder (molded or a core) with
The simple answer to this of the test specimen: in a squat the value of L/D = 1 has approxi-
question is: because this is the specimen, the restraining effect of mately the same strength as a cube
value of the length-diameter ratio the platens of the testing machine whose edge is equal to the diam-
(L/D) of a standard cylinder. is much more significant than in a eter of the cylinder.
However, more should be said. In more slender specimen. In other
particular, it is worth giving the words, the use of correction factors What are the correction
reasons for the choice of L/D = 2 as necessary to normalize the test factors for L/D ?
a standard. It is also worthwhile to results to the value of strength of a The use of correction factors to
discuss the situation in cores, standard specimen is greater at “convert” the strength determined
because, unlike a test cylinder smaller values of L/D; it is clearly on a test specimen with a given
where the mold controls the value preferable to minimize the need for value L/D to the strength that
of L/D, the choice of the value of L/ correction factors. would be obtained in a test on a
D lies in the hands of those in- The use of cores with the value specimen with L/D = 2 is well
volved in testing. of L/D = 2 is appropriate only when known. But how good are those
Test programs that led to the standard molded test cylinders factors?
choice of L/D = 2 go back a long have that value. In countries using Murdock and Kesler tell us that
time. In 1925, Gonnerman wrote: cubes, the core should preferably the factors are a function of the
“The 6 by 12-in. cylinder is now have L/D = 1; this is recommended level of strength of the concrete.6
generally used for compression in European Standard BS EN 12504- Specifically, stronger concretes are
tests.”5 Supporting arguments for 1:2000, which caters both to less affected by the value of L/D
the choice of L/D = 2 were given by countries using cylinders and to than concretes of lower strength;
Murdock and Kesler in 1957.6 In those using cubes.3 In the United this is shown in Fig. 1. According to
essence, they showed that the Kingdom, which uses cubes, BS ASTM C 42-99, concretes with
variations in the calculated com- 6089:1981 requires the value of L/D strengths above 70 MPa (10,000
pressive strength of a cylinder were to be not less than 0.95 before psi) are even less affected by the
small for L/D values in the vicinity capping, and not more than 1.3.4 value of L/D. It follows that the
of 2, and were more pronounced Although it has not been correction factors tabulated in
for values between about 1.0 and unequivocally demonstrated to be ASTM C 42 and by other standards