materials

Article
Variation in Compressive Strength of Concrete aross
Thickness of Placed Layer
Jarosław Michałek
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Wrocław University of Science and Technology, 50-370 Wrocław, Poland;
jaroslaw.michalek@pwr.edu.pl; Tel.: +48-71-320-2264




Received: 18 June 2019; Accepted: 4 July 2019; Published: 5 July 2019


Abstract: Is the variation in the compressive strength of concrete across the thickness of horizontally
cast elements negligibly small or rather needs to be taken into account at the design stage? There are
conflicting answers to this question. In order to determine if the compressive strength of concrete
varies across the thickness of horizontally cast elements, ultrasonic tests and destructive tests were
carried out on core samples taken from a 350 mm thick slab made of class C25/30 concrete. Special
point-contact probes were used to measure the time taken for the longitudinal ultrasonic wave to pass
through the tested sample. The correlation between the velocity of the longitudinal ultrasonic wave
and the compressive strength of the concrete in the slab was determined. The structure of the concrete
across the thickness of the slab was evaluated using GIMP 2.10.4. It was found that the destructively
determined compressive strength varied only slightly (by 3%) across the thickness of the placed layer
of concrete. Whereas the averaged ultrasonically determined strength of the concrete in the same
samples does not vary across the thickness of the analyzed slab. Therefore, it was concluded that the
slight increase in concrete compressive strength with depth below the top surface is a natural thing
and need not be taken into account in the assessment of the strength of concrete in the structure.

Keywords: concrete slabs and floorings; horizontal casting; compressive strength; ultrasonic tests

1. Introduction
The view that the compressive strength of concrete varies across the thickness of horizontally cast
elements (concrete slabs, floorings, etc.) is seldom expressed in the literature on the subject. Opinions
as to the significance of this variation are widely divided, as the following survey of literature indicates.
The research published by Stawiski [1–3] provided the direct incentive for this study of the
distribution of concrete compressive strength along the height of horizontally cast elements. On the
basis of ultrasonic tests of core samples taken from concrete, Stawiski found the compressive strength
of the concrete to be lower in the top zone than in the bottom zone by as much as 40–50% [1–3].
The variation in compressive strength along the height of the cross section was approximately linear.
The fall in ultrasonic wave velocity at the sample’s top surface is ascribed by Stawiski [1] to the
surface weakening effect connected with concrete consolidation resulting in the segregation of concrete
components. The main factor responsible for the decrease in concrete compressive strength is considered
to be porosity, which very strongly affects ultrasonic wave velocity. Also the inadequate curing of
fresh concrete, damage to the structure of concrete caused by corrosion, and mechanical damage to
the top surface of the concrete which can arise in the course of the service life of the element are also
possible factors.
Stawiski [3] proposed to introduce (besides the grade of concrete) strength gradient ∇fc into the
evaluation of concrete in horizontally cast elements (e.g., floor toppings). On the basis of his research [3]
Stawiski pointed out that in, e.g., an approximately 15 cm thick element the strength gradient of the
concrete at the depth of 10 cm from the bottom amounted to 0.7 MPa/cm, whereas in the layers situated

Materials 2019, 12, 2162; doi:10.3390/ma12132162 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2019, 12, 2162 2 of 14

closer to the top surface it varied markedly (−3.0, −4.5, −8.0 MPa/cm). Therefore, Stawiski calls for [3]
defining allowable variations in concrete compressive strength, e.g., ∇fc ≤ 1.0 MPa/cm. The increase of
1.0 MPa/cm in the strength of concrete in the lower situated layers relative to the top layer suggested
by Stawiski [3] seems to be very large.
On the basis of ultrasonic tests of the compressive strength across the thickness of samples taken
from cut out pieces of 40, 45 and 60 mm thick floorings made of cement mortars, Hoła, Sadowski and
Hoła A. [4] found the strength was not identical and varied across the thickness. The lowest strength
was in the top zone, the highest in the bottom zone, while in the middle zone, it was close to the
destructively determined compressive strength. In the considered case, the strength gradient of the
mortar across the thickness of the flooring amounted to 6–7 MPa/cm.
Petersons in [5] found the compressive strength of the lower situated layers to be higher than that
of the top layer, but only by 10–20%. No further increase in concrete strength was observed in the
layers situated below 300 mm. The difference in compressive strength between the top surface and the
bottom surface in slabs was ascribed to the inadequate curing of the concrete [5].
In monograph [6], Dabrowski,
˛ Stachurski and Zieliński found that the deeper situated layers of
concrete had higher strength than the surface layer. Below 80 cm, this increase in strength stabilized at
the level of approximately 10%. In the authors’ opinion [6], this is due to the well-known property of
concrete—it reaches higher strength when hardening under a moderate pressure—and that is why this
phenomenon does not occur in samples of low height.
Yuan, Ragab, Hill and Cook [7] found that the compressive strength of concrete along the height
of the placed layer did not vary significantly. Suprenant [8] found that the compressive strength of
concrete in slabs varied minimally, and only in a small upper part of the element. The most marked
variation in concrete strength along element height has been observed in walls and beams. This is
mainly due to the greater static pressure exerted by the concrete situated above.
Neville [9] found that the slight increase in concrete compressive strength below the top surface
was a natural thing, but need not be taken into account. When testing a reinforced concrete wall and
beam by means of the ultrasonic method, Watanabe, Hishikawa, Kamae and Namiki [10] found the
compressive strength of concrete in samples taken from the lower part of the element was slightly
higher than in samples taken from its upper part. They treated this as a natural thing which did not
need to be taken into account.
Neville [11] ascribed the variation in the compressive strength of concrete along the height of the
sample to the presence of retained water, occurring during concrete bleeding.
According to standard [12], the compressive strength of concrete in a structure can be lower
in the top layer than in the bottom layer by as much as 25%. Concrete characterized by lower
compressive strength usually occurs to a depth of 300 mm or to 20% of the height of the cross section,
depending on which of the values is lower. According to standard [13], the range of variation in
the compressive strength of concrete in a structure can differ between the particular portions of
the structure. The variation is random and often forced (by, e.g., the relative density, the degree of
compaction, the curing conditions, etc.).
Therefore, the questions arises: Is the variation in the compressive strength of concrete across the
thickness of horizontally cast elements negligibly small or rather needs to be taken into account at the
design stage?

2. Description of Author’s Investigations

2.1. Ultrasonic Tests of Concrete

In order to verify the phenomenon of concrete compressive strength variation across the thickness
of horizontally cast elements, samples with diameter d = 100 mm height h = 350 mm (Table 1), taken
from a specially cast slab made of concrete C25/30 (the grade of the concrete was determined using
concrete cubes cast when casting the slab) were subjected to ultrasonic tests. CEMII/BS-32.5 cement
Materials 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 13
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 3 of 14
kg/m3 of natural aggregate (sand 0/2 mm −40%, gravel 2/8 mm −26%, gravel 8/16 mm −34%) were
used in the concrete mix for the slab construction. The latter had been compacted by means of an
(270 kg/m3 ),vibrator
immersion fly ash and
additive
cured (60forkg/m
3 plasticizer (2.43 kg/m3 ), water (170 kg/m3 ) and 1879 kg/m3
28 in),the laboratory conditions defined in standard [14]. The slab
of natural aggregate (sand 0/2 mm −40%,
had been exposed to variable weather conditions gravel 2/8for
mm two−26%,
years.gravel
Samples mm −34%)
8/16 (01−06 were 1)
in Figure used in
were
the concrete
drilled out ofmix
thefor theperpendicularly
slab slab construction. Thetop
to its latter had been
surface. compacted
For reference by means
purposes of an immersion
specimens (07−12)
vibrator and cured for 28 in the laboratory conditions defined in standard [14].
were drilled out of the slab parallel with its top surface. Prior to the tests, the actual dimensions The slab had been
of
exposed to variable weather conditions for two
the samples and their weight were determined (Table.1). years. Samples (01−06 in Figure 1) were drilled out of
the slab perpendicularly to its top surface. For reference purposes specimens (07−12) were drilled out
of the slab parallel with
Tableits1.top
Thesurface. Prior to the
mean dimensions tests,
of core the actual
samples dimensions
and their weight. of the samples and
their weight were determined (Table 1).
Sample dśr hśr m V 
number
Table mm
1. The mean dimensions of core g cm their weight.
samples and
3 g/cm3
01 98.7 351.7 6158.5 2691 2.29
02 dśr 351.4hśr 6167.5m 2680 V 2.30 ρ
98.5
Sample Number
3 3
03 98.6 mm 351.5 6138.0 g 2682 cm 2.29 g/cm
0104 98.6
98.7 351.4 351.7 6176.5 6158.5 26822691 2.30 2.29
02 05 98.5
98.5 350.0351.4 6121.5
6167.5 26692680 2.29 2.30
03
06 98.6
98.6
350.2351.5
6121.0
6138.0
26752682 2.29 2.29
07 98.6 350.0 6122.0 2672 2.29
04 98.6 351.4 6176.5 2682 2.30
08 98.7 351.3 6172.5 2688 2.30
0509 98.5 351.4
98.5 350.0 6168.2 6121.5 26782669 2.30 2.29
0610 98.6 350.0
98.5 350.2 6122.4 6121.0 26672675 2.30 2.29
0711 98.6
98.6 351.5 350.0 6140.0 6122.0 26842672 2.29 2.29
08 12 98.5
98.7 351.4351.3 6137.6
6172.5 26782688 2.29 2.30
The measuring points 09 spaced at every 98.5 1 cm (Figures6168.2
351.4 1 and 2) were2678 marked 2.30on the sides of the
core samples. Velocity CL of ultrasonic wave passage through concrete was measured in two
10 98.5 350.0 6122.4 2667 2.30
perpendicular directions. No concrete/probe coupling material was used. The probes were set
11 98.6
perpendicularly to the tested side surface of the 351.5 6140.0
sample (Figure 2). The2684 2.29
distributions of velocity CL of
12 98.5 351.4 6137.6 2678 2.29
longitudinal ultrasonic wave passage through the concrete were obtained from the tests (Tables 2 and
3, and Figures 3 and 4).

Figure 1. The samples to be tested using ultrasonic device.

The
A measuring
Unipan pointsTester
Materials spaced at every
Type 1 cmpoint-contact
543 with (Figures 1 and 2) were marked
exponential probes on[15]
the and
sidesa of the core
frequency
samples.
of 40 kHzVelocity
(Figure C of ultrasonic
2)L was wave passage
used to measure through
the time taken concrete was measured
for the longitudinal in two perpendicular
ultrasonic wave to pass
through the tested sample. Prior to the tests, the instrument had been calibrated to determine thetotime
directions. No concrete/probe coupling material was used. The probes were set perpendicularly the
tested side surface of the sample (Figure 2). The distributions of velocity
taken for the ultrasonic wave to pass through the probes alone (t0 = 36.6 C L of s). The details of the
longitudinal ultrasonic
wave passage
operation through theheads
of exponential concrete
withwere obtained from
point-to-point the tests
contact with(Tables 2 and 3,surface
the examined and Figures 3 and 4).
are described
in detail in the paper [15].
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 4 of 14
Materials 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13

Figure 2. The
Figure measurement
2. The measurementofofvelocity CLLofoflongitudinal
velocity C longitudinal ultrasonic
ultrasonic wave.
wave.

2. Velocities
TableTable CL ultrasonic
2. Velocities wave
CL ultrasonic wavepropagation, measuredinintwo
propagation, measured two perpendicular
perpendicular directions
directions in core
in core
samples taken perpendicularly to top surface of slab.
samples taken perpendicularly to top surface of slab.

Measuring
Measuring place
Place Distance Sample
Sample 01 Sample
Sample 02 Sample
Sample 03 Sample
Sample 04 Sample
Sample 05 Sample
Sample 06
from Sample Top
distance from CL 1 01CL 2 CL 102CL 2 CL 1 03 CL 2 CL 104 CL 2 CL05
1 C L2 C 061
L CL 2
sample
cm top CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2 km/s
CL 1 CL 2 C L 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2
0.5cm 3.19 3.39 3.49 3.18 3.32 km/s3.40
3.44 3.31 3.36 3.36 3.23 3.29
1.50.5 3.19 3.35
3.18 3.39 3.49
3.48 3.18
3.02 3.32
3.28 3.44
3.38 3.40
3.29 3.31
3.26 3.36
3.35 3.36
3.30 3.233.22 3.293.33
2.51.5 3.18 3.41
3.30 3.35 3.48
3.49 3.02
3.48 3.28
3.31 3.38
3.37 3.29
3.40 3.26
3.36 3.35
3.28 3.30
3.33 3.223.27 3.333.36
3.52.5 3.30 3.63
3.58 3.41 3.49
3.62 3.48
3.57 3.31
3.43 3.37
3.54 3.40
3.57 3.36
3.62 3.28
3.33 3.33
3.54 3.273.55 3.363.65
4.53.5 3.58 3.68
3.60 3.63 3.62
3.60 3.57
3.61 3.43
3.49 3.54
3.52 3.57
3.53 3.62
3.62 3.33
3.53 3.54
3.52 3.553.61 3.653.63
5.54.5 3.60
3.51 3.68
3.66 3.60
3.64 3.61
3.54 3.49
3.66 3.52
3.62 3.53
3.66 3.62
3.62 3.53
3.62 3.52
3.67 3.613.57 3.633.61
6.55.5 3.51
3.60 3.66
3.68 3.64
3.70 3.54
3.52 3.66
3.57 3.62
3.67 3.66
3.68 3.62
3.44 3.62
3.47 3.67
3.66 3.573.60 3.613.63
7.56.5 3.60
3.53 3.68
3.59 3.70
3.62 3.52
3.48 3.57
3.64 3.67
3.58 3.68
3.58 3.44
3.60 3.47
3.53 3.66
3.62 3.603.62 3.633.58
8.57.5 3.53
3.46 3.59
3.60 3.62
3.72 3.48
3.61 3.64
3.57 3.58
3.50 3.58
3.70 3.60
3.60 3.53
3.54 3.62
3.61 3.623.56 3.583.58
9.58.5 3.46
3.53 3.60
3.57 3.72
3.74 3.61
3.57 3.57
3.26 3.50
3.62 3.70
3.71 3.60
3.58 3.54
3.44 3.61
3.59 3.563.60 3.583.65
10.5
9.5 3.53
3.61
3.57
3.59
3.74
3.70
3.57
3.57
3.26
3.57
3.62
3.63
3.71
3.54
3.58
3.53
3.44
3.47
3.59
3.58
3.603.67 3.653.79
10.5
11.5
3.61
3.58
3.59
3.59
3.70
3.62
3.57
3.66
3.57
3.60
3.63
3.62
3.54
3.62
3.53
3.56
3.47
3.50
3.58
3.58
3.673.58 3.793.62
11.5 3.58 3.59 3.62 3.66 3.60 3.62 3.62 3.56 3.50 3.58 3.58 3.62
12.5 3.56 3.65 3.62 3.65 3.55 3.65 3.60 3.58 3.52 3.62 3.41 3.62
12.5 3.56 3.65 3.62 3.65 3.55 3.65 3.60 3.58 3.52 3.62 3.41 3.62
13.5 3.32 3.63 3.61 3.60 3.57 3.49 3.65 3.61 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.70
13.5 3.32 3.63 3.61 3.60 3.57 3.49 3.65 3.61 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.70
14.5 3.38 3.65 3.72 3.66 3.55 3.63 3.70 3.70 3.63 3.62 3.66 3.76
14.5 3.38 3.65 3.72 3.66 3.55 3.63 3.70 3.70 3.63 3.62 3.66 3.76
15.5 3.45 3.67 3.73 3.57 3.65 3.63 3.44 3.53 3.61 3.65 3.73 3.68
15.5 3.45 3.67 3.73 3.57 3.65 3.63 3.44 3.53 3.61 3.65 3.73 3.68
16.5 3.60 3.66 3.73 3.58 3.62 3.51 3.72 3.59 3.50 3.61 3.62 3.65
16.5 3.60 3.66 3.73 3.58 3.62 3.51 3.72 3.59 3.50 3.61 3.62 3.65
17.5 3.53 3.68 3.72 3.53 3.53 3.62 3.66 3.53 3.54 3.61 3.65 3.70
17.5 3.53 3.68 3.72 3.53 3.53 3.62 3.66 3.53 3.54 3.61 3.65 3.70
18.5 3.68 3.67 3.64 3.49 3.62 3.53 3.70 3.59 3.54 3.66 3.61 3.70
18.5 3.68 3.67 3.64 3.49 3.62 3.53 3.70 3.59 3.54 3.66 3.61 3.70
19.5 3.58 3.72 3.66 3.59 3.47 3.48 3.65 3.57 3.62 3.66 3.63 3.62
19.5 3.58 3.72 3.66 3.59 3.47 3.48 3.65 3.57 3.62 3.66 3.63 3.62
20.5 3.59 3.68 3.63 3.47 3.57 3.39 3.64 3.70 3.43 3.70
20.5 3.59 3.68 3.63 3.47 3.57 3.39 3.64 3.70 3.43 3.70 3.623.62 3.663.66
21.5 3.62 3.57 3.57 3.58 3.53 3.56 3.62 3.54 3.54 3.62
21.5 3.62 3.57 3.57 3.58 3.53 3.56 3.62 3.54 3.54 3.62 3.483.48 3.653.65
22.5
22.5 3.40
3.40 3.61
3.61 3.62
3.62 3.61
3.61 3.55
3.55 3.45
3.45 3.703.70 3.50
3.50 3.54
3.54 3.61
3.61 3.583.58 3.703.70
23.5
23.5 3.45
3.45 3.64
3.64 3.62
3.62 3.65
3.65 3.68
3.68 3.59
3.59 3.593.59 3.61
3.61 3.40
3.40 3.37
3.37 3.583.58 3.653.65
24.5
24.5 3.35
3.35 3.62
3.62 3.51
3.51 3.62
3.62 3.52
3.52 3.58
3.58 3.643.64 3.70
3.70 3.48
3.48 3.53
3.53 3.623.62 3.653.65
25.5
25.5 3.55
3.55 3.66
3.66 3.65
3.65 3.48
3.48 3.53
3.53 3.50 3.53
3.50 3.53 3.65
3.65 3.46
3.46 3.57
3.57 3.643.64 3.573.57
26.5
26.5 3.38
3.38 3.71
3.71 3.69
3.69 3.61
3.61 3.57
3.57 3.32 3.48
3.32 3.48 3.65
3.65 3.44
3.44 3.61
3.61 3.583.58 3.583.58
27.5
27.5 3.54
3.54 3.55
3.55 3.62
3.62 3.55
3.55 3.54
3.54 3.43
3.43 3.58
3.58 3.63
3.63 3.37
3.37 3.58
3.58 3.543.54 3.493.49
28.5
28.5 3.54
3.54 3.61
3.61 3.52
3.52 3.57
3.57 3.56
3.56 3.59
3.59 3.62
3.62 3.66
3.66 3.57
3.57 3.66
3.66 3.623.62 3.653.65
29.5
29.5 3.61
3.61 3.65
3.65 3.63
3.63 3.58
3.58 3.60
3.60 3.59
3.59 3.68
3.68 3.69
3.69 3.48
3.48 3.54
3.54 3.573.57 3.573.57
30.5
30.5 3.57
3.57 3.62
3.62 3.64
3.64 3.57
3.57 3.57
3.57 3.57
3.57 3.55
3.55 3.62
3.62 3.57
3.57 3.53
3.53 3.613.61 3.543.54
31.5
31.5 3.45
3.45 3.61
3.61 3.58
3.58 3.52
3.52 3.45
3.45 3.48
3.48 3.57
3.57 3.29
3.29 3.57
3.57 3.50
3.50 3.273.27 3.513.51
32.5 3.24 3.20 3.52 3.25 3.13 3.34 3.30 3.42 3.48 3.26 3.43 3.34
33.5 3.33 3.25 3.57 3.22 3.28 3.20 3.51 3.42 3.54 3.41 3.42 3.42
34.5 3.39 3.29 3.59 3.23 3.47 3.04 3.62 3.49 3.49 3.49 3.40 3.49
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 5 of 14

Table 3. Velocities CL of longitudinal ultrasonic wave propagation, measured in two perpendicular

directions in core samples taken parallel with the top surface of the slab.

Measuring Place Distance Sample 07 Sample 08 Sample 09 Sample 10 Sample 11 Sample 12

from Sample Top CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2
cm km/s
0.5 3.31 3.42 3.60 3.40 3.34 3.60 3.60 3.35 3.30 3.28 3.50 3.38
1.5 3.27 3.33 3.50 3.28 3.25 3.30 3.32 3.34 3.29 3.26 3.40 3.31
2.5 3.55 3.47 3.31 3.60 3.36 3.56 3.41 3.51 3.32 3.41 3.45 3.33
3.5 3.56 3.45 3.25 3.46 3.59 3.42 3.62 3.53 3.52 3.54 3.43 3.59
4.5 3.54 3.49 3.54 3.42 3.45 3.55 3.50 3.51 3.40 3.41 3.46 3.56
5.5 3.55 3.46 3.46 3.60 3.40 3.50 3.48 3.44 3.41 3.55 3.42 3.36
6.5 3.57 3.50 3.41 3.45 3.51 3.44 3.41 3.44 3.28 3.38 3.46 3.37
7.5 3.49 3.50 3.57 3.42 3.51 3.53 3.44 3.45 3.39 3.50 3.56 3.43
8.5 3.45 3.43 3.56 3.60 3.47 3.54 3.55 3.41 3.49 3.51 3.51 3.49
9.5 3.55 3.43 3.60 3.52 3.44 3.57 3.48 3.51 3.50 3.44 3.45 3.50
10.5 3.40 3.47 3.49 3.50 3.45 3.50 3.40 3.45 3.41 3.49 3.39 3.39
11.5 3.56 3.43 3.46 3.51 3.54 3.46 3.41 3.55 3.36 3.46 3.44 3.50
12.5 3.55 3.38 3.42 3.50 3.54 3.46 3.42 3.47 3.52 3.55 3.43 3.43
13.5 3.57 3.43 3.38 3.46 3.51 3.56 3.37 3.40 3.39 3.50 3.55 3.51
14.5 3.48 3.47 3.41 3.55 3.57 3.51 3.38 3.40 3.51 3.55 3.46 3.52
15.5 3.59 3.47 3.55 3.51 3.43 3.59 3.42 3.41 3.48 3.58 3.44 3.45
16.5 3.54 3.45 3.56 3.46 3.42 3.46 3.38 3.38 3.41 3.45 3.56 3.40
17.5 3.50 3.40 3.53 3.35 3.57 3.56 3.49 3.44 3.40 3.38 3.41 3.39
18.5 3.47 3.44 3.46 3.47 3.49 3.45 3.40 3.36 3.42 3.39 3.38 3.40
19.5 3.42 3.43 3.41 3.55 3.45 3.43 3.40 3.46 3.42 3.50 3.43 3.54
20.5 3.40 3.48 3.47 3.46 3.44 3.50 3.44 3.43 3.38 3.40 3.38 3.55
21.5 3.45 3.50 3.50 3.39 3.42 3.42 3.44 3.56 3.48 3.44 3.44 3.49
22.5 3.40 3.41 3.41 3.42 3.46 3.42 3.40 3.44 3.50 3.43 3.42 3.43
23.5 3.43 3.43 3.41 3.45 3.54 3.41 3.41 3.49 3.33 3.50 3.37 3.41
24.5 3.50 3.38 3.53 3.50 3.38 3.42 3.49 3.42 3.52 3.38 3.51 3.50
25.5 3.42 3.50 3.51 3.38 3.40 3.57 3.46 3.40 3.46 3.41 3.45 3.53
26.5 3.56 3.38 3.45 3.36 3.44 3.37 3.45 3.25 3.55 3.45 3.49 3.44
27.5 3.54 3.45 3.51 3.47 3.39 3.31 3.30 3.36 3.36 3.43 3.41 3.46
28.5 3.42 3.37 3.55 3.46 3.40 3.38 3.48 3.36 3.37 3.37 3.50 3.55
29.5 3.50 3.43 3.46 3.34 3.43 3.36 3.44 3.35 3.43 3.35 3.53 3.50
30.5 3.56 3.50 3.42 3.43 3.45 3.45 3.44 3.53 3.50 3.37 3.37 3.32
31.5 3.57 3.40 3.55 3.33 3.44 3.43 3.46 3.50 3.40 3.37 3.37 3.45
32.5 3.40 3.34 3.40 3.53 3.40 3.41 3.50 3.56 3.40 3.45 3.45 3.44
33.5 3.50 3.40 3.59 3.51 3.47 3.45 3.42 3.49 3.51 3.40 3.44 3.47

A Unipan Materials Tester Type 543 with point-contact exponential probes [15] and a frequency of
40 kHz (Figure 2) was used to measure the time taken for the longitudinal ultrasonic wave to pass
through the tested sample. Prior to the tests, the instrument had been calibrated to determine the
time taken for the ultrasonic wave to pass through the probes alone (t0 = 36.6 µs). The details of the
operation of exponential heads with point-to-point contact with the examined surface are described in
detail in the paper [15].
Materials 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13

32.5 3.24 3.20 3.52 3.25 3.13 3.34 3.30 3.42 3.48 3.26 3.43 3.34
33.512, 2162
Materials 2019, 3.33 3.25 3.57 3.22 3.28 3.20 3.51 3.42 3.54 3.41 3.42 3.42
6 of 14
34.5 3.39 3.29 3.59 3.23 3.47 3.04 3.62 3.49 3.49 3.49 3.40 3.49

3,8

Sample 04
3,7

Materials 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 13

3,6
16.5 3.54 3.45 3.56 3.46 3.42 3.46 3.38 3.38 3.41 3.45 3.56 3.40
Top of sample

17.5 3.50 3.40 3.53 3.35 3.57 3.56 3.49 3.44 3.40 3.38 3.41 3.39
Ultrasonic wave velocity CL [km/s]

3,5
18.5 3.47 3.44 3.46 3.47 3.49 3.45 3.40 3.36 3.42 3.39 3.38 3.40
19.5 3.42 3.43 3.41 3.55 3.45 3.43 3.40 3.46 3.42 3.50 3.43 3.54
3,4 20.5 3.40 3.48 3.47 3.46 3.44 3.50 3.44 3.43 3.38 3.40 3.38 3.55

Bottom of sample
21.5 3.45 3.50 3.50 3.39 3.42 3.42 3.44 3.56 3.48 3.44 3.44 3.49
3,3
22.5 3.40 3.41 3.41 3.42 3.46 3.42 3.40 3.44 3.50 3.43 3.42 3.43
23.5 3.43 3.43 3.41 3.45 3.54 3.41 3.41 3.49 3.33 3.50 3.37 3.41
distribution of velocity CL of longitudinal ultrasonic wave in plane X
24.5 3.50 3.38 3.53 3.50 3.38 3.42 3.49 3.42 3.52 3.38 3.51 3.50
3,2 distribution of velocity CL of longitudinal ultrasonic wave in plane Y
25.5 3.42 3.50 3.51 3.38 3.40 3.57 3.46 3.40 3.46 3.41 3.45 3.53
26.5 3.56 3.38 3.45 3.36 3.44 3.37
mean distribution of velocity3.45 3.25 3.55
CL of longitudinal ultrasonic3.45
wave 3.49 3.44
3,1 27.5 3.54 3.45 3.51 3.47 3.39 3.31 3.30 3.36 3.36 3.43 3.41 3.46
28.5 3.42 3.37 3.55 3.46 3.40 3.38 3.48 3.36 3.37 3.37 3.50 3.55
direction of casting
29.5 3.50 3.43 3.46 3.34 3.43 3.36 3.44 3.35 3.43 3.35 3.53 3.50
3,0
0 130.5
2 3 4 5 6 3.56 7 8 3.50
9 10 113.42
12 13 3.43
14 15 163.45 17 18 3.45
19 20 21 3.44
22 23 3.53
24 25 3.50
26 27 283.3729 30 3.37 3.32
31 32 33 34 35
Height of core sample [cm]
31.5 3.57 3.40 3.55 3.33 3.44 3.43 3.46 3.50 3.40 3.37 3.37 3.45
32.53. Exemplary3.40
Figure 3.34 of
distribution 3.40 3.53CL 3.40
velocity 3.41 3.50
of longitudinal 3.56 wave
ultrasonic 3.40along 3.45the height
3.45 of 3.44
Figure33.5
sample 3.04
Exemplary 3.50 3.40 of
distribution
taken perpendicularly to3.59 3.51
velocity
the top CL of3.47
surface of the3.45
slab. 3.42
longitudinal ultrasonic3.49wave 3.51along3.40 3.44 of3.47
the height
sample 04 taken perpendicularly to the top surface of the slab.
3,8

Sample 07
Table 3. Velocities CL of longitudinal ultrasonic wave propagation, measured in two perpendicular
(the edge of the element)

directions in core samples taken parallel with the top surface of the slab.
3,7
Top of sample

Measuring place Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample

distance from
3,6 07 08 09 10 11 12
sample top CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2 C L 1 CL 2 CL 1 CL 2
Ultrasonic wave velocity CL [km/s]

3,5
cm km/s
0.5 3.31 3.42 3.60 3.40 3.34 3.60 3.60 3.35 3.30 3.28 3.50 3.38
1.5 3.27 3.33 3.50 3.28 3.25 3.30 3.32 3.34 3.29 3.26 3.40 3.31
3,4
2.5 3.55 3.47 3.31 3.60 3.36 3.56 3.41 3.51 3.32 3.41 3.45 3.33
Bottom of sample (interior of the element)

3.5 3.56 3.45 3.25 3.46 3.59 3.42 3.62 3.53 3.52 3.54 3.43 3.59
3,3 4.5 3.54 3.49 3.54 3.42 3.45 3.55 3.50 3.51 3.40 3.41 3.46 3.56
5.5 3.55 3.46 3.46 3.60 3.40 3.50 3.48 3.44 3.41 3.55 3.42 3.36
distribution of velocity C L of longitudinal ultrasonic wave in plane X
direction of casting

3,2
6.5 3.57 3.50 3.41 3.45 3.51 3.44 3.41 3.44 3.28 3.38 3.46 3.37
distribution of velocity C of longitudinal ultrasonic wave in plane Y
7.5 3.49 3.50 3.57 3.42 3.51 3.53 L 3.44 3.45 3.39 3.50 3.56 3.43
8.5 3.45 3.43 3.56 3.60 3.47 3.54
mean distribution 3.55
of velocity 3.41 3.49
C L of longitudinal 3.51
ultrasonic wave 3.51 3.49
3,1
9.5 3.55 3.43 3.60 3.52 3.44 3.57 3.48 3.51 3.50 3.44 3.45 3.50
10.5 3.40 3.47 3.49 3.50 3.45 3.50 3.40 3.45 3.41 3.49 3.39 3.39
3,0 11.5 3.56 3.43 3.46 3.51 3.54 3.46 3.41 3.55 3.36 3.46 3.44 3.50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
12.5 3.55 3.38 3.42 3.50 3.54 3.46 3.42 3.47 3.52 3.55 3.43 3.43
Height of core sample [cm]
13.5 3.57 3.43 3.38 3.46 3.51 3.56 3.37 3.40 3.39 3.50 3.55 3.51
14.54. Exemplary3.48
Figure distribution
3.47 of3.41
velocity CL of3.57
3.55 longitudinal
3.51 ultrasonic
3.38 3.40 wave3.51along height
3.55 of sample
3.46 3.52
Figure 4.
07 taken Exemplary distribution
15.5 parallel with the top
3.59 of velocity
surface
3.47 of the
3.55 C of longitudinal ultrasonic wave
slab. 3.43 3.59 3.42 3.41 3.48 3.58 3.44 3.45
L
3.51 along height of sample
07 taken parallel with the top surface of the slab.

Tables 2 and 3 and Figures 3 and 4 showed that the distributions of velocity CL of the longitudinal
ultrasonic wave along the height of the core samples with d  100 mm were quite constant (except
for the top layers). The mean velocity CL of ultrasonic wave propagation in the samples (01–06) taken
perpendicularly to the top surface of the slab was CL1 = 3.54 km/s, a standard deviation sCL1 = 0.13
km/s and a variation coefficient CL1 = 3.67%. In the case of the samples (07–12) taken parallel with
the top of the slab, the following were obtained: C L2 = 3.45 km/s, sCL2 = 0.072 km/s and CL2 = 2.09%.
 the
the range
range of of 3.0–3.5
3.0–3.5 km/s
km/s indicated
indicated dubious
dubious quality.
quality.
The
The observed slight fluctuations of velocity C
observed slight fluctuations of velocity CLL of
of the
the longitudinal
longitudinal ultrasonic
ultrasonic wave wave in in the
the inner
inner
layers
layers of the concrete are due to local concrete defects (e.g., air voids) or local strengthening with
of the concrete are due to local concrete defects (e.g., air voids) or local strengthening with
larger aggregate grains. Lower velocities C L of the longitudinal ultrasonic wave were registered in
larger aggregate grains. Lower velocities CL of the longitudinal ultrasonic wave were registered in
the
the samples
samples
Materials
(01–06)
2019, 12,(01–06)
2162
taken
taken perpendicularly
perpendicularly to to the
the top
top surface
surface of of the
the slab
slab (Figures
(Figures 33 and and 5).5). 7In
Inofthe
the
14
samples (07–12) taken parallel with the top of the slab, a decline
samples (07–12) taken parallel with the top of the slab, a decline in velocity CL of the longitudinal in velocity CL of the longitudinal
ultrasonic
ultrasonic wave wave was was observed
observed only only at at the
the edge
edge constituting
constituting the the side
side edge
edge of of the
the slab
slab (Figures
(Figures 44 and and
6).
6). Tables 2 and 3 and Figures 3 and 4 showed that the distributions of velocity C L of the longitudinal
ultrasonic waveit
Initially,
Initially, it along
was the height
was though
though thatof
that the
thethe core
falls
falls insamples
in velocitywith
velocity C ofdthe
CLL of  100
the mm were quite
longitudinal
longitudinal constant
ultrasonic
ultrasonic wave
wave (except
were
were due for
due
the
to top sample
to the
the layers). end
sample The effect.
end mean velocity
effect. Ultimately,
Ultimately, CL of it ultrasonic
it was
was decided
decided wave thatpropagation
that this
this phenomenon
phenomenon in the samples
in
in samples
samples (01–06)
01–06
01–06 takenwas
was
perpendicularly
caused from to
the the
top top
by surface
bleeding
caused from the top by bleeding [17] and concreteof the
[17] slabandwas C
concrete
L1 = 3.54 km/s, a
sedimentation,standard and deviation
sedimentation, and from theCL1 from thes =
bottom 0.13
bottom by the km/s
by the
and a variation
improper coefficient
vibration of the ν =
concrete
CL1 3.67%. by In
means the case
of of
the the samples
immersion
improper vibration of the concrete by means of the immersion vibrator (the vibrator was not fully (07–12)
vibrator taken
(the parallel
vibrator with
was the
not top
fully
ofimmersed
the slab, the
immersed in following
in the
the freshly were
freshly placed
placed obtained:
concrete).
concrete). CL2 In=samples
In 3.45 km/s,
samples 07–12,
07–12, = 0.072
sCL2the
the fall inkm/s
fall in and νC
velocity
velocity L of=
CCL2 2.09%.
the On the
longitudinal
L of the longitudinal
basis
ultrasonic wave can be caused Lby the wall effect [9,10]. Figures 5 and 6 show theL structure km/s,
of
ultrasonic the obtained
wave can velocities
be caused C byof the
the longitudinal
wall effect ultrasonic
[9,10]. Figureswave5 in
and the
6 range:
show C
the = 3.5–4.5
structure of
of thethe
itconcrete
can be assessed
along [16]
the whether
height of the
the quality
samples of the
taken concrete as
perpendicularly good,
concrete along the height of the samples taken perpendicularly to and parallel with the top surface whereas
to and the
parallel velocities
with thein the
top range
surface
ofof
of3.0–3.5
the
the slab.
slab.km/s
Theindicated
The image
image of ofdubious
the
the structurequality.
structure of
of the
the samples
samples in in Figures
Figures 55 and
and 66 waswas prepared
prepared in in GIMP
GIMP 2.10.4
2.10.4
usingThe the observed
filter: slight
LCHH(ab) fluctuations
component
using the filter: LCHH(ab) component with a contrast of velocity
with a C
contrast
L of the
of longitudinal
50%. In Figure ultrasonic
5 the altered
of 50%. In Figure 5 the altered structure wave in
structurethe inner
of
of thethe
layers
concreteof the
is concrete
visible in are
the due
sample’s to local
upper concrete
part (an defects (e.g.,
approximately air voids)
30–40
concrete is visible in the sample’s upper part (an approximately 30–40 mm thick layer) and lower part mm or local
thick strengthening
layer) and lower with
part
larger
(an aggregate grains.
(an approximately
approximately 30–50
30–50 Lower
mm
mm thickvelocities
thick layer).
layer). CLIn
Inofthese
the longitudinal
these places,
places, reduced
reducedultrasonic
velocities
velocitieswave of were
of the registered inwave
the longitudinal
longitudinal the
wave
samples
velocity (01–06)
velocity were taken
were observed. perpendicularly
observed. In In Figure
Figure 6, to the
6, the top
the altered surface
altered structureof the
structure of slab (Figures
of the
the concrete 3 and
concrete can 5).
can be In the
be seen samples
seen in in an an
(07–12) taken
approximately parallel with the top of the slab, a decline in velocity
approximately 20–80 mm thick layer located at the side wall of the slab. Also in this layer, falls in
20–80 mm thick layer located at the side wall of the CL
slab.of the
Also longitudinal
in this layer, ultrasonic
falls in the
the
wave wasof
velocity
velocity ofobserved
the only at the
the longitudinal
longitudinal edge constituting
ultrasonic
ultrasonic wave
wave were werethe side edge of the slab (Figures 4 and 6).
recorded.
recorded.

Figure
Figure5.5. The
5.The structure
structureofof
Thestructure concrete
concreteofof
ofconcrete the
ofthe sample
thesample taken
sampletaken perpendicularly
perpendicularlytoto
takenperpendicularly the
tothe top
thetop surface
surfaceofof
topsurface the
ofthe slab
theslab
slab
Figure
(slab
(slab top
top surface
surface on
on left).
left). The
The image
image also
also shows
shows distribution
distribution of
of the
the mean
mean velocity
velocity C
C L of longitudinal
L of longitudinal
(slab top surface on left). The image also shows distribution of the mean velocity CL of longitudinal
ultrasonic wave
ultrasonicwave (red
wave(red line)
(redline) and
line)and disturbance
anddisturbance zone
zoneatat
disturbancezone the
atthe top
thetop and
topand bottom
andbottom surface
surfaceofof
bottomsurface the
ofthe slab
theslab (yellow
slab(yellow line).
(yellowline).
line).
ultrasonic

Figure 6. The structure of concrete of the sample taken parallel with the top surface of the slab (slab top
surface on left). The image also shows distribution of the mean velocity CL of longitudinal ultrasonic
wave (red line) and zone of disturbance at the lateral surface of the slab (yellow line).

Initially, it was though that the falls in velocity CL of the longitudinal ultrasonic wave were
due to the sample end effect. Ultimately, it was decided that this phenomenon in samples 01–06
was caused from the top by bleeding [17] and concrete sedimentation, and from the bottom by the
improper vibration of the concrete by means of the immersion vibrator (the vibrator was not fully
immersed in the freshly placed concrete). In samples 07–12, the fall in velocity CL of the longitudinal
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 8 of 14

ultrasonic wave can be caused by the wall effect [9,10]. Figures 5 and 6 show the structure of the
concrete along the height of the samples taken perpendicularly to and parallel with the top surface of
the slab. The image of the structure of the samples in Figures 5 and 6 was prepared in GIMP 2.10.4
using the filter: LCHH(ab) component with a contrast of 50%. In Figure 5 the altered structure of
the concrete is visible in the sample’s upper part (an approximately 30–40 mm thick layer) and lower
part (an approximately 30–50 mm thick layer). In these places, reduced velocities of the longitudinal
wave velocity were observed. In Figure 6, the altered structure of the concrete can be seen in an
approximately 20–80 mm thick layer located at the side wall of the slab. Also in this layer, falls in the
velocity of the longitudinal ultrasonic wave were recorded.
Materials 2019,
Materials 2019, 11,
11, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 88 of
of 13
13
2.2. Ultrasonic Tests of Concrete
2.2. Ultrasonic
2.2. Ultrasonic Tests
Tests of
of Concrete
Concrete
For further investigations the core samples (Table 1) were cut into smaller samples (Figure 7) with
For
For
height further
= 100 mm
h further investigations
investigations the
(h/d = 1). In
the core
core
the samples
samples
terminal (Table(e.g.,
(Table
samples 1) were
1) were cut into
cut
01/1—the intotop
smaller
smaller samples
of thesamples (Figure
sample, (Figure
01/3—the 7)
7)
with height
with height
bottom h = 100 mm
h =sample)
of the 100 mmthe (h/d
(h/d = 1). In
= 1). In
actual end the
the terminal
terminal
faces samples
were samples (e.g. 01/1
(e.g. 01/1
left unchanged – the
(or– were top
the top of the sample,
of the sample,
slightly 01/3
trimmed01/3 – the
– the
to make
bottom
bottom
them of the
of the
level). Thesample)
sample) the
middlethe actual end
actual(e.g.,
sample faces
end01/2) were
faceswas
were left
cutleft unchanged
unchanged
to the (or
required (or were
sizewere
of 100slightly
slightly
mm. Then,trimmed
trimmed to make
to make
the end faces
them prepared
them
were level). The
level). Thebymiddle
middle sample
sample
grinding (e.g. 01/2)
(e.g. 01/2) was
for compressive was cut to
cut to the
strength the required
required
tests size
(Figure size
8). ofof 100
100 mm.
mm. Then,
Then, the
the end
end faces
faces
were prepared
were prepared by by grinding
grinding for
for compressive
compressive strength
strength tests
tests (Figure
(Figure 8).
8).

Figure 7.
Figure 7. Core
Core samples
samples with
with height/diameter
height/diameter ratio
ratio h/d
h/d =
== 1,
1, obtained
obtained from
from samples
samples 01–06.
01–06.

Figure 8.
Figure One of
8. One of the
the core
core samples during grinding
samples during grinding of
of its
its end
end surface.
surface.

The compressive
compressive strength
The compressive strength tests
tests were
were carried
carried out
out in conformance
conformance with
in conformance standard
standard [13]
with standard [13] in the ZD100
in the
the ZD100
The strength tests were carried out in with [13] in ZD100
strength testing
strength testing machine
testing machine (Figure
machine (Figure 9a)
(Figure 9a) satisfying
9a) satisfying the
satisfying the requirements
the requirements of
requirements of standard
of standard [18].
standard [18]. All
[18]. All the
All the samples
the samples
samples
strength
showed
showed the
the same
same type
type of
of failure
failure (Figure
(Figure 9b).
9b). The parameters
The parameters of the
of the samples
samples and the
and the test
test results
results are
are
showed the same type of failure (Figure 9b). The parameters of the samples and the test results are
presented in
presented in Table
in Table 2.
Table 2.
2.
presented
 Figure 8. One of the core samples during grinding of its end surface.

The compressive strength tests were carried out in conformance with standard [13] in the ZD100
strength testing machine (Figure 9a) satisfying the requirements of standard [18]. All the samples
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 9 of 14
showed the same type of failure (Figure 9b). The parameters of the samples and the test results are
presented in Table 2.

(a) (b)

FigureFigure
9. The9.sample
The sample in strength
in strength testingtesting machine:
machine: a) during
(a) during loading,
loading, b) after
(b) after failure.
failure.

The concrete strength values (Table 4) yielded by the tests carried out on the100 mm high samples
were used to evaluate the class of the concrete and the variation of strength along the core sample height
(h = 350 mm) and were correlated with the results obtained using the ultrasonic method. According to
standard [19], the result of concrete compressive strength tests carried out on cylindrical specimens
with diameter d = 100 mm and height h = 100 mm, cut out of a structure directly corresponded to the
strength of concrete determined on 150 × 150 × 150 mm standard cubes (fck,is = fck,is,cube ).

Table 4. The results of concrete compressive strength tests.

Samp.
dm hm m Ac Vc ρ Fis fis Samp. dm hm m Ac Vc ρ Fis fis
No.
No.
mm g cm2 cm3 g/cm3 kN MPa mm g cm2 cm3 g/cm3 kN MPa
01/1 98.7 99.9 1725 76.51 764 2.26 236 30.85 07/1 98.6 100.0 1760 76.36 764 2.30 226 29.60
01/2 98.7 99.8 1743 76.51 764 2.28 240 31.37 07/2 98.6 99.9 1751 76.36 763 2.30 231 30.25
01/3 98.7 99.8 1765 76.51 764 2.31 242 31.63 07/3 98.6 99.8 1746 76.36 762 2.29 232 30.38
02/1 98.5 100.0 1724 76.20 762 2.26 236 30.97 08/1 98.7 99.9 1755 76.51 764 2.30 230 30.06
02/2 98.5 99.8 1761 76.20 760 2.32 238 31.23 08/2 98.7 99.9 1761 76.51 764 2.30 235 30.71
02/3 98.5 99.9 1762 76.20 761 2.31 243 31.89 08/3 98.7 99.9 1757 76.51 764 2.30 237 30.98
03/1 98.5 99.8 1711 76.20 760 2.25 233 30.58 09/1 98.5 99.7 1744 76.20 760 2.30 234 30.71
03/2 98.5 99.9 1741 76.20 761 2.29 241 31.63 09/2 98.5 99.9 1740 76.20 761 2.29 238 31.23
03/3 98.6 99.6 1768 76.36 761 2.32 248 32.48 09/3 98.5 100.0 1760 76.20 762 2.31 243 31.89
04/1 98.5 99.9 1731 76.20 761 2.27 237 31.10 10/1 98.5 99.6 1754 76.20 759 2.31 239 31.36
04/2 98.5 99.9 1755 76.20 761 2.31 240 31.50 10/2 98.5 99.8 1742 76.20 760 2.29 245 32.15
04/3 98.5 99.8 1779 76.20 760 2.34 240 31.50 10/3 98.5 99.8 1748 76.20 760 2.30 248 32.55
05/1 98.5 99.9 1717 76.20 761 2.26 234 30.71 11/1 98.6 99.7 1741 76.36 761 2.29 237 31.04
05/2 98.5 99.9 1745 76.20 761 2.29 240 31.50 11/2 98.6 99.7 1747 76.36 761 2.29 232 30.38
05/3 98.5 99.9 1769 76.20 761 2.32 242 31.76 11/3 98.6 99.9 1750 76.36 763 2.29 238 31.17
06/1 98.5 99.9 1716 76.20 761 2.25 240 31.50 12/1 98.5 99.9 1766 76.20 761 2.32 240 31.50
06/2 98.5 99.9 1741 76.20 761 2.29 242 31.76 12/2 98.5 99.8 1754 76.20 760 2.31 243 31.89
06/3 98.5 99.9 1762 76.20 761 2.31 245 32.15 12/3 98.5 100.1 1750 76.20 763 2.29 245 32.15

Standard [19] states that due to drilling, which undoubtedly can slightly damage the core’s
material, the strengths of core samples determined in-situ are usually lower than the strengths of the
standard samples. For this reason, it is allowed to use a correction factor of 0.85, understood as a ratio
of the in-situ characteristic compressive strength to the characteristic compressive strength determined
on the standard samples. As a result, the concrete compressive strength values coming directly from
strength tests are increased.
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 10 of 14

The mean compressive strength of the concrete, determined on the 18 samples taken
perpendicularly to the top surface of the slab, amounted to fm(18),is = 31.45 MPa (the minimum
value fis,lowest = 30.58 MPa). The mean standard deviation amounted to s = 0.49 MPa. The coefficient
k1 = 1.48 was assumed. The characteristic compressive strength of the concrete in the structure
(fck,is ) was determined on the basis of standard [13], from the condition: fck,is = min(fm(18),is − k1 × s;
fis,lowest + 4) = (30.72 MPa, 34.58 MPa). Thus the characteristic cube compressive strength of the
concrete determined on samples taken perpendicularly to the top surface of the slab amounted to
fck,is = fck,is,cube = 30.72 MPa.
The mean compressive strength of the concrete determined on the 18 samples taken parallel with
the top surface of the slab amounted to fm(18),is = 31.11 MPa (the minimum value fis,lowest = 29.60 MPa).
The mean standard deviation amounted to s = 0.81 MPa. The characteristic cube compressive strength
of the concrete, determined on the samples taken parallel with the top surface of the slab, amounted
to fck,is = (29.91 MPa, 33.60 MPa) = 29.91 MPa. The cube strength determined on the samples taken
parallel to the top surface of the slab was 3% lower than the strength determined on the samples taken
perpendicularly to the top surface of the slab. This confirms the observation that the strength of core
samples drilled out horizontally is lower (on average by 8% [12,13]) than that of core samples drilled
out vertically.
On the basis of the obtained fck,is,cube values, the actual strength class of the concrete in the
structure is estimated to be fck,is,cube = 30.72 MPa and 29.91 MPa, respectively. When the correction
factor of 0.85 is applied, this gives the concrete strength class respectively fck,is,cube = 36.1 MPa and
35.2 MPa, which corresponds to at least concrete class C25/30.

2.3. Scaling of Correlation Curve

On the basis of the measurements, the mean longitudinal ultrasonic wave passage velocities
CL were correlated with the mean compressive concrete strengths fis . When calculating the mean
longitudinal ultrasonic wave passage velocity CL , the values from the areas of disturbances near
the ends of the samples were rejected. The correlation curve was scaled according to the procedure
described in standard [13] (version 2). In accordance with [16], a hypothetical base regression curve
for ordinary concrete, i.e., fCL,b = 2.39CL 2 − 7.06CL + 4.2 for CL = 2.4–5.0 km/s, was adopted. Then,
the differences δf between experimental compressive strength fis and the strength obtained from
base curve fCL , as well as the mean value δfm(n) of the differences and standard deviation s were
determined. The shift of the base correlation curve was calculated from the relation ∆f = δfm(n) − k1 ·s
for coefficient k1 = 1.48 [13]. Ultimately, the corrected correlation curve fCL = fCL,b + ∆f has the form
fCL = 2.39CL 2 − 7.06CL + 25.09. The obtained curve only slightly differs from the curves determined
separately for samples 01 ÷ 06 and 07–12.
The obtained correlation was evaluated using two accuracy characteristics, i.e., the correlation
coefficient η > 0.75 and the mean square relative deviation νk ≤ 12 ≤ %. The correlation coefficient
amounted to:
η = [0.25 × (fCL,I − fCL(36),ν )2 ]1/2 ÷ [0.25 × (fis − fm(36),is )2 ]1/2
P P
(1)
η = [0.25 × 15.34]1/2 ÷ [0.25 × 16.33]1/2 = 0.97 > 0.75
and the mean square relative deviation to:

νk = 100 × {[1/(n − 1)] × [(fCL,i − fis )/fCL,i ]2 }1/2

P
(2)
νk = 100 × [(1/35)] × 0.12555]1/2 = 5.99% < 12%.

Thus, it can be said that a good correlation between the mean longitudinal ultrasonic wave passage
velocities CL and the mean concrete compressive strengths fis was obtained.
The class of the concrete in the structure was determined on the basis of the concrete compressive
strength values obtained from the correlation curve fCL = 2.39 × CL 2 − 7.06CL + 25.09 for the
mean longitudinal ultrasonic wave passage velocities CL . The mean compressive strength of the
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 11 of 14

concrete determined using the ultrasonic method amounted to fCL(36),is = 29.80 MPa (minimal
fCL,is,lowest = 28.80 MPa) and the mean standard deviation to s = 0.66 MPa. Hence, the characteristic
compressive strength of the concrete amounted to fck,is = fck,is,cube ≤ (29,80 – 1.48 × 0.66, 28.80 + 4)
= (28.82 MPa, 32.80 MPa) = 28.82 MPa. When the correction factor of 0.85 was taken into account,
concrete class C25/30 was obtained. The concrete class determined on the basis of the compressive
strength values obtained from the correlation curve confirmed the destructively determined class of
the concrete.

3. Analysis of Test Results

With the corrected correlation curve: fCL = 2.39·CL 2 − 7.06·CL + 25.09, it was possible to trace
the variation of the compressive strength of the concrete along the height of the analyzed samples.
Figures 10 and 11 show the variations of concrete compressive strength along the height of the core
samples respectively, and perpendicular to (Figure 10) and parallel with (Figure 11) the top surface of
the slab. Further, the results of the destructive tests and the averaged results of the ultrasonic tests for
the particular
Materials 2019, 11, samples with
x FOR PEER a height h = 100 mm are included in the diagrams.
REVIEW 11 of 13

35

Top of sample (element edge)

30 30,36 30,95

25
Height of sample [cm]

Direction of casting

20

30,67 31,50

15

10

5 30,11 31,90

Bottom of sample (element edge)

0
27,5 28,0 28,5 29,0 29,5 30,0 30,5 31,0 31,5 32,0 32,5
Strength of concrete fCL [MPa]

Figure 10. The mean distribution of compressive strength fCL of concrete along the height of the sample
Figure 10. The mean distribution of compressive strength fCL of concrete along the height of the
taken perpendicularly to top surface of slab. The diagram includes the mean concrete strengths for the
sample taken perpendicularly to top surface of slab. The diagram includes the mean concrete
top, middle and bottom samples, obtained from ultrasonic tests (marked blue) and destructive tests
strengths for the top, middle and bottom samples, obtained from ultrasonic tests (marked blue) and
(marked red).
destructive tests (marked red).
An analysis of the concrete compressive strength values for the particular samples 01–06 (Figure 10)
35
taken perpendicularly to the top plane of the slab indeed showed a slight increase (by 3%) in this
Top of sample (element edge)
strength in the sample’s lower part relative to its upper part. A similar phenomenon (also an increase
by approximately 2.6%) was observed for samples 07–12 (Figure 11) taken parallel with the top plane
30 29,22 30,71
of the slab. However, it should be noted that the compressive strength values were strongly averaged
for the samples and included the effect of various factors connected with the destructive test itself.
25

Direction of casting
Height of sample [cm]

20

29,28 31,10

15
 Strength of concrete fCL [MPa]

Figure 10. The mean distribution of compressive strength fCL of concrete along the height of the
sample taken perpendicularly to top surface of slab. The diagram includes the mean concrete
strengths for the top, middle and bottom samples, obtained from ultrasonic tests (marked blue) and
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 12 of 14
destructive tests (marked red).

35

Top of sample (element edge)

30 29,22 30,71

25

Direction of casting
Height of sample [cm]

20

29,28 31,10

15

10

5 29,11 31,52

Bottom of sample (interior of the element)

0
27,5 28,0 28,5 29,0 29,5 30,0 30,5 31,0 31,5 32,0
Strength of concrete fCL [MPa]

Figure 11. The mean distribution of compressive strength fCL of concrete along the height of the sample
Figure 11. The mean distribution of compressive strength fCL of concrete along the height of the
taken parallel with the top surface of the slab. The diagram includes the mean concrete strengths for
sample taken parallel with the top surface of the slab. The diagram includes the mean concrete
the top, middle and bottom samples obtained from ultrasonic tests (marked blue) and destructive tests
(marked red).

The averaged compressive strength results obtained from the ultrasonic measurements showed
(Figures 10 and 11), however, that there was no increase in the compressive strength of the concrete
along the height of the sample. This applies to the samples taken both perpendicularly to and parallel
with the top plane of the slab.
The ultrasonic tests indicate that the variation in the compressive strength of concrete along the
height of the sample is minimal and random. It can even be considered as negligible. The obtained
results do not corroborate Stawiski’s theses [1–3], but confirm the results reported in [7–10].
The decreases in the compressive strength of the concrete occurring at the ends of the samples
taken perpendicularly to the top plane of the slab (samples 01–06) and at the edge constituting the side
edge of the slab for the samples taken parallel with the top plane of the slab (samples 07–12) were
found to be interesting.

4. Conclusions
The following conclusions emerge from the investigations of the compressive strength of concrete
carried out on core samples taken perpendicularly to and parallel with the top surface of the
approximately 35 cm thick element, using different testing methods (the ultrasonic method and the
destructive method):
The concrete compressive strength destructively determined along the height of the placed layer
of concrete changed slightly (by 3%—samples 01–06) with a depth below the top surface of the element.
The averaged concrete strength determined on the basis of the ultrasonic tests of the same samples did
not vary across the thickness of the analyzed slab.

1. The obtained compressive strength increments across the thickness of the placed layer of concrete
do not corroborate Stawiski’s theses [1–3], but confirm the results reported in, [7–9]. Therefore,
there can be agreement with Neville’s statement [10] that the slight increase in concrete compressive
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 13 of 14

strength with depth below the top surface is a natural thing and need not to be taken into account
in the evaluation of the strength of concrete in the structure.
2. The concrete compressive strength determined on core samples only slightly depends on the
depth of where the sample came from (provided the ingredients of the concrete do not segregate
as it is being placed and compacted).
3. The use of the ultrasonic method for testing concrete with point-contact exponential probes
showed the variation in concrete strength along the height of the core sample could be quite
accurately evaluated and areas of lower quality concrete could be indicated. This was mainly
from the thick layer (approximately 30–40 mm) extending from the top edge and the thick
layer (approximately 30–50 mm) extending from the bottom edge of the samples 01–06 taken
perpendicularly to the upper plane of the element. Further, from the thick layer (approximately
20–80 mm) extending from the edge constituting the side plane of the slab for the samples taken
parallel with the top plane of the element (samples 07–12). The decline in the strength of the
concrete in the upper part of samples 01–06 is caused by the bleeding of water from the concrete
mixture (the bleeding phenomenon [17]) and the sedimentation of the latter. While in the lower
part of the samples, it is due to the improper vibration of the placed layer of concrete mixture.
The decrease in concrete strength at the side edge of the slab in the case of samples 07–12 can be
due to the wall effect [9,10].
4. From the point of view of the assessment of the concrete structure, supplementary tests on the
slab in the future should be carried out using ultrasonic tomography [20,21].
5. The ultrasonic method of testing concrete by means of point-contact exponential probes enables
the accurate assessment of the quality of concrete (the segregation of concrete components,
porosity, density, strength, etc.) along the height of a core sample drilled out perpendicularly to
the placed layer.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Stawiski, B. Ultrasonic Testing of Concrete and Mortar Using Point Probes; Wroclaw University of Technology:
Wroclaw, Poland, 2009; p. 154. (In Polish)
2. Stawiski, B. The heterogeneity of mechanical properties of concrete in formed constructions horizontally.
Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2012, 12, 90–94. [CrossRef]
3. Stawiski, B. Concrete strength gradients in industrial floors. Mater. Bud. 2017, 543, 22–24. (In Polish)
4. Hoła, J.; Sadowski, L.; Hoła, A.M. The effect of failure to comply with technological and technical requirements
on the condition of newly built cement mortar floors. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part L J. Mater. Des. Appl.
2019, 233, 268–275. [CrossRef]
5. Petersons, N. Should standard cube test specimens be replaced by test specimens taken from structures?
Mater. Struct. 1968, 1, 425–435. [CrossRef]
6. Dabrowski,
˛ K.; Stachurski, W.; Zieliński, J.L. Concrete Constructions; Wydawnictwo Arkady: Warsaw, Poland,
1982. (In Polish)
7. Yuan, R.L.; Ragab, M.; Hill, R.E.; Cook, J.E. Evaluation of core strength in high-strength concrete. Concr. Int.
1991, 13, 30–34.
8. Suprenant, B.A. Core Strength Variation of in-Place Concrete; The Aberdeen Group: Boston, MA, USA, 1995.
9. Neville, A. Core tests: Easy to perform, not easy to interpret. Concr. Int. 2001, 11, 59–68.
10. Watanabe, S.; Hishikawa, K.; Kamae, K.; Namiki, S. Study on estimation of compressive strength of concrete
in structure using ultrasonic method. J. Struct. Constr. Eng. 2016, 81, 191–198. [CrossRef]
11. Neville, A.M. Properties of Concrete; Polski Cement Sp. z o.o.: Cracow, Poland, 2000. (In Polish)
12. PN-EN 12390-2:2011. Testing Hardened Concrete. Part 2. Making and Curing Specimens for Strength Tests; Polish
Committee for Standardization: Warsaw, Poland, 2011.
Materials 2019, 12, 2162 14 of 14

13. PN-EN 13791:2008. Assessment of In-Situ Compressive Strength in Structures and Precast Concrete Components;
Polish Committee for Standardization: Warsaw, Poland, 2008.
14. PN-EN 12390-3:2011. Testing Hardened Concrete. Part 3: Compressive Strength of Test Specimens; Polish
Committee for Standardization: Warsaw, Poland, 2008.
15. Gudra, T.; Stawiski, B. Non-destructive strength characterization of concrete using surface waves. NDT E Int.
2000, 33, 1–6. [CrossRef]
16. Drobiec, L.; Jasiński, R.; Piekarczyk, A. Diagnosis of Reinforced Concrete Structures. Methodology, Field Tests,
Laboratory Tests of Concrete and Steel; Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warsaw, Poland, 2010. (In Polish)
17. Soshiroda, T. Effects of bleeding and segregation on the internal structure of hardened concrete. In Properties
of Fresh Concrete; Taylor & Francis: Mild Park, UK, 1990; pp. 225–232.
18. PN-EN 12390-4:2001. Testing Hardened Concrete. Part 4: Compressive Strength. Specification for Testing Machines;
Polish Committee for Standardization: Warsaw, Poland, 2001.
19. PN-EN 12504-1:2011. Testing Concrete in Structures. Part 1: Cored Specimens. Taking, Examining and Testing in
Compression; Polish Committee for Standardization: Warsaw, Poland, 2011.
20. Schabowicz, K. Ultrasonic tomography—The latest nondestructive technique for testing concrete
members—Description, test methodology, application example. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2014, 14, 295–303.
[CrossRef]
21. Schabowicz, K.; Suvorov, V.A. Nondestructive testing of a bottom surface and construction of its profile by
ultrasonic tomography. Russ. J. Nondestruct. Test. 2014, 50, 109–119. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).