U NIVERSITY OF THE P HILIPPINES D ILIMAN

INSTITUTE OF CIVIL ENGINEERIN

CE 297 Practical and Research Applications of Non-Destructive Testing

2nd Semester AY 2020-2021

REBOUND HAMMER

After this lesson, the student should be able to:

Define Rebound Hammer Test;
Understand the fundamental principles;
Discuss the test procedure.

Outline
This lecture is broken into 4 parts

Definition
Historical Background
Fundamental Principles
General Applications

* It should be noted that the contents of this lecture material were directly taken from
the Handbook on Nondestructive Testing of Concrete Second Edition by
Malhotra and Carino.

I. Definition

The rebound hammer (also known as Schmidt rebound hammer) is a non-destructive

testing tool to measure surface hardness of a material. Figure 1 shows picture of a
Schimdt rebound hammer. The hammer weighs about 1.8 kg and is suitable for use
both in a laboratory and in the field. A schematic cutaway view of the rebound hammer
is shown in Figure 2. The main components include the outer body, the plunger, the
hammer mass, and the main spring. Other features include a latching mechanism that
locks the hammer mass to the plunger rod and a sliding rider to measure the rebound
of the hammer mass. The rebound distance is measured on an arbitrary scale marked
from 10 to 100. The rebound distance is recorded as a “rebound number”
corresponding to the position of the rider on the scale. Aside from the surface
hardness, it can also be used to assess the uniformity and detect weak spots of
concrete, masonry units and rocks. A digital version of rebound hammer is shown in
Figure 3. Both the analog and digital rebound hammers can be used to estimate the
strength of a material through correlation. The standards methods for performing the
rebound hammer test are ASTM Standard: C805 (D5873 for rocks), British Standard:
BS 1881, and European Standard: EN 12504-2.

Page 1 of 7
 U NIVERSITY OF THE P HILIPPINES D ILIMAN
INSTITUTE OF CIVIL ENGINEERIN

indiamart.com
bhoomitech.com

Figure 1. Schmidt Rebound Hammer. Figure 3. Digital Rebound Hammer.

engineersdaily.co
m
Figure 2. Cutaway Schematic View of Schimdt Rebound
Hammer.

Method of Testing

To prepare the instrument for a test, release the plunger from its locked position by
pushing the plunger against the concrete and slowly moving the body away from the
concrete. This causes the plunger to extend from the body and the latch engages the
hammer mass to the plunger rod (Figure 2A). Hold the plunger perpendicular to the
concrete surface and slowly push the body toward the test object. As the body is
pushed, the main spring connecting the hammer mass to the body is stretched (Figure
2B). When the body is pushed to the limit, the latch is automatically released, and the
energy stored in the spring propels the hammer mass toward the plunger tip (Figure
2C). The mass impacts the shoulder of the plunger rod and rebounds. During rebound,

Page 2 of 7
 U NIVERSITY OF THE P HILIPPINES D ILIMAN
INSTITUTE OF CIVIL ENGINEERIN

the slide indicator travels with the hammer mass and records the rebound distance
(Figure 2D). A button on the side of the body is pushed to lock the plunger in the
retracted position, and the rebound number is read from the scale. The test can be
conducted horizontally, vertically upward or downward, or at any intermediate angle.
Due to different effects of gravity on the rebound as the test angle is changed, the
rebound number will be different for the same concrete and will require separate
calibration or correction charts.

Correlation Procedure

Each hammer is furnished with correlation curves developed by the manufacturer

using standard cube specimens. However, the use of these curves is not
recommended because material and testing conditions may not be similar to those in
effect when the calibration of the instrument was performed. A typical correlation
procedure is given below.
1. Prepare a number of 150 × 300-mm cylinders* covering the strength range to be
encountered on the job site. Use the same cement and aggregates that are to be used
on the job. Cure the cylinders under standard moist-curing room conditions, keeping
the curing period the same as the specified control age in the field.
2. After capping, place the cylinders in a compression-testing machine under an initial
load of approximately 15% of the ultimate load to restrain the specimen. Ensure that
cylinders are in a saturated surface-dry condition.
3. Make 15 hammer rebound readings, 5 on each of 3 vertical lines 120° apart, against
the side surface in the middle two thirds of each cylinder. Avoid testing the same spot
twice. For cubes, take five readings on each of the four molded faces without testing
the same spot twice.
4. Average the readings and call this the rebound number for the cylinder under test.
5. Repeat this procedure for all the cylinders.
6. Test the cylinders to failure in compression and plot the rebound numbers against
the compressive strengths on a graph.
7. Fit a curve or a line by the method of least squares.

An example of typical curve for limestone aggregate concrete is shown in Figure 4.

This curve was based on tests performed at 28 days using different concrete mixtures.
Figure 5 shows four calibration curves obtained by research workers in four different
countries. It is important to note that some of the curves deviate considerably from the
curve supplied with the hammer.

Although the rebound hammer provides a quick, inexpensive means of checking the
uniformity of concrete, it has serious limitations, and these must be recognized. The
results of the Schmidt rebound hammer are affected by:
1. Smoothness of test surface
2. Size, shape, and rigidity of the specimens
3. Age of test specimens
4. Surface and internal moisture conditions of the concrete
5. Type of coarse aggregate
6. Type of cement
7. Type of mold
8. Carbonation of the concrete surface

Page 3 of 7
 U NIVERSITY OF THE P HILIPPINES D ILIMAN
INSTITUTE OF CIVIL ENGINEERIN

Figure 4. Relationship between strength

Figure 5. Correlation Curves
and rebound number for limestone
Obtained from Different Investigators.
aggregate concrete.

II. History

In 1948 a Swiss engineer, Ernst Schmidt, developed a test hammer for measuring the
hardness of concrete by the rebound principle. Results of his work were presented to
the Swiss Federal Materials Testing and Experimental Institute of Zurich, where the
hammer was constructed and extensively tested. About 50,000 Schmidt rebound
hammers had been sold by 1986 on a worldwide basis.

The rebound method has won considerable acceptance, and standards have been
issued both by the ASTM and ISO and by several other countries for determining the
rebound number of concrete. ASTM Standard C 805 “Standard Test Method for
Rebound Number of Hardened Concrete” was first issued as a tentative test method
in 1975 and adopted as a standard test method in 1979. The test method has been
revised periodically; the significance and use statement of the 2002 version of the
standard is as follows:

5.1 This test method is applicable to assess the in-place uniformity of concrete, to
delineate regions in a structure of poor quality or deteriorated concrete, and to
estimate in-place strength development.

5.2 To use this test method to estimate strength requires establishing a relationship
between strength and rebound number. The relationship shall be established for a
given concrete mixture and given apparatus. The relationship shall be established
over the range of concrete strength that is of interest. To estimate strength during
construction, establish the relationship by performing rebound number tests on
molded specimens and measuring the strength of the same or companion molded
specimens. To estimate strength in an existing structure, establish the relationship by
correlating rebound numbers measured on the structure with the strengths of cores
taken from corresponding locations. See ACI 228.1R for additional information on
developing the relationship and on using the relationship to estimate in-place strength.

Page 4 of 7
 U NIVERSITY OF THE P HILIPPINES D ILIMAN
INSTITUTE OF CIVIL ENGINEERIN

5.3 For a given concrete mixture, the rebound number is affected by factors such as
moisture content of the test surface, the method used to obtain the test surface (type
of form material or type of finishing), and the depth of carbonation. These factors need
to be considered in preparing the strength relationship and interpreting test results.

5.4 Different hammers of the same nominal design may give rebound numbers
differing from 1 to 3 units. Therefore, tests should be made with the same hammer in
order to compare results. If more than one hammer is to be used, perform tests on a
range of typical concrete surfaces so as to determine the magnitude of the differences
to be expected.

5.5 This test method is not intended as the basis for acceptance or rejection of
concrete because of the inherent uncertainty in the estimated strength.

III. Fundamental Principles

The Schmidt rebound hammer is principally a surface hardness tester with little
apparent theoretical relationship between the strength of concrete and the rebound
number of the hammer. However, within limits, empirical correlations have been
established between strength properties and the rebound number.

According to Kolek [4] and Malhotra [5,6] there is a general correlation between
compressive strength of concrete and the hammer rebound number. However, there
is a wide degree of disagreement among various researchers concerning the accuracy
of the estimation of strength from the rebound readings and the correlation
relationship. Coefficients of variation for compressive strength for a wide variety of
specimens averaged 18.8% and exceeded 30% for some groups of specimens. The
large deviations in strength can be narrowed down considerably by developing a
proper correlation curve for the hammer, which allows for various variables discussed
earlier. By consensus, the accuracy of estimation of compressive strength of test
specimens cast, cured, and tested under laboratory conditions by a properly calibrated
hammer lies between ±15 and ±20%. However, the probable accuracy of estimation
of concrete strength in a structure is ±25%.

Carette and Malhotra [7] have investigated the within-test variability of the rebound
hammer test at test ages of 1 to 3 days and to the ability of the test to determine early-
age strength development of concrete for formwork removal purposes. The rebound
tests were performed at 1, 2, and 3 days on plain concrete slabs 300 × 1270 × 1220
mm in size. Also, companion cylinders and cores taken from the slabs were tested in
compression. Boundy and Hondros [8] have suggested the use of the rebound
hammer in conjunction with some method of accelerated curing to provide a rapid and
convenient method for estimating the expected strength and quality of concrete test
specimens. For in situ applications, Facaoaru [9] has suggested combined methods
based on rebound number and pulse velocity measurements.

From the analyses of the test data, the authors concluded that because of the large
within-test variation, the rebound hammer test was not a satisfactory method for
predicting strength development of concrete at early ages.

Page 5 of 7
 U NIVERSITY OF THE P HILIPPINES D ILIMAN
INSTITUTE OF CIVIL ENGINEERIN

Therefore, the limitations of the Schmidt hammer should be recognized and taken into
account when using the hammer. It cannot be overstressed that the hammer must not
be regarded as a substitute for standard compression tests but rather as a method for
determining the uniformity of concrete in the structures and comparing one concrete
against another. Estimation of strength of concrete by the rebound hammer within an
accuracy of ±15 to ±20% may be possible only for specimens cast, cured, and tested
under conditions similar to those from which the correlation curves are established.

IV. General Applications

The hammer can be used in the horizontal, vertically overhead or vertically downward
positions as well as at any intermediate angle, provided the hammer is perpendicular
to the surface under test. The position of the mass relative to the vertical, however,
affects the rebound number due to the action of gravity on the mass in the hammer.
Thus, the rebound number of a floor would be expected to be smaller than that of a
soffit and inclined and vertical surfaces would yield intermediate results. Although a
high rebound number represents concrete with a higher compressive strength than
concrete with a low rebound number, the test is only useful if a correlation can be
developed between the rebound number and concrete made with the same coarse
aggregate as that being tested. Too much reliance should not be placed on the
calibration curve supplied with the hammer since the manufacturer develops this curve
using standard cube specimens and the mix used could be very different from the one
being tested.[2]

REFERENCES

[1] Malhotra, V. M. and Carino, N. J. (2004), Handbook on Nondestructive Testing

of Concrete Second Edition. CRC Press, USA.

[2] International Atomic Energy Agency (2002), Guidebook on Non-destructive

Testing of Concrete Structures, AIEA, Austria.

[3] Japanese Society for Non-destructive Inspection (JSNDI).

[4] Kolek, J., An appreciation of the Schmidt rebound hammer, Mag. Concr. Res.
(London), 1958.

[5] Malhotra, V.M., Non-destructive Methods for Testing Concrete, Mines Branch
Monogr. No. 875, Department of Energy Mines and Resources, Ottawa, 1968.

[6] Malhotra, V.M., Testing of hardened concrete: non-destructive methods, ACI

Monogr. No. 9, 1976,188.

Page 6 of 7
 U NIVERSITY OF THE P HILIPPINES D ILIMAN
INSTITUTE OF CIVIL ENGINEERIN

[7] Carette, G.G. and Malhotra, V.M., In-situ tests: variability and strength prediction
of concrete at early ages, Malhotra, V.M., Ed., American Concrete Institute, Special
Publication SP-82, 111.

[8] Boundy, C.A.P. and Hondros, G., Rapid field assessment of strength of concrete
by accelerated curing and Schmidt rebound hammer, ACI J. Proc., 61(9), 1185,
1964.

[9] Facaoaru, I., Report on RILEM Technical Committee on Non-destructive Testing

of Concrete, Materials and Structure/Research and Testing (Paris), 2(10), 251, 1969.

Page 7 of 7