Government of India

Ministry of Railways

NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTING

OF
BRIDGES NO. 355, 366, 388 & 390
ON
MUMBAI DIVISION OF W. R.

( Report No. BS - 61)

January 2004

RESEARCH DESIGNS & STANDARDS ORGANISATION

LUCKNOW 226011
 INDEX

S.N. DESCRIPTION Page No.

1. Introduction 1 of 12
2. Objectives 1 of 12
3. History of Bridge 1 of 12
4. Test Conducted & Parameter Observed 2 of 12
5. Analysis of Data 4 of 12
6. Conclusion 8 of 12
7. Recommendation 9 of 12
8. Acknowledgement 11 of 12
9. References 12 of 12
10. Annexure I (Table 1 to 9 ) 1-10 of 10
11. Annexure II 1 of 1
12. Annexure III 1 of 1
13. Annexure IV 1 of 1
14. Annexure V 1 of 1
15. Annexure VI 1 of 1
16. Annexure VII 1 of 1
17. Annexure VIII 1 of 1
18. Annexure IX ( Figure 1 to 11 ) 1-11 of 11
 NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF BRIDGES No. 355,366,388 &
390 ON MUMBAI DIVISION OF WESTERN RAILWAY

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 The study was undertaken as per advise of CE (Gen.) W. Rly. vide letter
No. DO No. W/65/20 Vol.-IV (W3) dated 14/08/03.

1.2 With reference the to above letter, there were eight bridges for testing. Out
of these, four bridges were having exposed reinforcement. In other four
bridges, no symptoms of corrosion from out side was visible. RDSO
selected the four bridges for testing purpose. Bridges no. 388 & 390 were
having exposed reinforcement and bridges no. 355 & 366 were not having
exposed reinforcement.

1.3 DETAIL OF TESTED BRIDGES.

S.No. Bridge No. Type of Section / km.

1 355,Up.(1X5.87m)
2 366 (1X5.86m)
3 388 (2X2.30 m)
4 390 (2XO.91m)
Bridge
RCC Slab. Between DGI - Bilimora stations
on Virar-Surat section at km.
212/19-21.
RCC T-beam. Between Bilimora - Amalsad
stations on Virar-Surat section at
km. 217/17-19.
RCC Box. Between Vedcha - Navasari
stations on Virar-Surat section at
km. 231/2-4.
RCC Slab. Between Vedcha - Navasari
stations on Virar-Surat section at
km. 232/24-26.

2.0 OBJECTIVES

Objectives of the testing was to examine the adequacy of cover, state of

corrosion and to advise remedial measures for repairs / strengthening.

3.0 BRIEF HISTORY OF TESTED BRIDGES

3.1 Bridge No. 355 (Up Line)

The bridge is 100 years old. The up line girder was replaced by RCC slab
on 31.05.96. According to bridge register (ADEN Surat), slab condition
from 1996 to till date is good.
 No speed restriction has been imposed on this bridge. The up line bridge
is RCC slab & the Dn. line is Steel (I-girder). Only up line bridge was
tested.

3.2 Bridge No. 366 (Up Line)

It is a RCC T-Beam bridge. According to bridge register (ADEN-Surat) ,

the reinforcement of the bridge was exposed long back & was repaired by
providing with mortar cover in 1997.
The slab reinforcement was exposed in the year 2000 and was repaired
in 2001 with simple mortar cover.
No speed restriction has been imposed on this bridge. Eight nos. of RCC
T-beams exist in both directions (up & down line) of the bridge. Each
having width about 1.17 m. Only up line Bridge was tested.

3.3 Bridge No. 388

It is a RCC Box culvert. According to the bridge register (ADEN-Surat),

reinforcement got exposed on 19.12.87 and was covered in 1988 with
cement mortar. Again, the reinforcement got exposed at both faces in
1997 and was repaired in 1999. In 1999, the Bridge condition was
recorded good. After this, the reinforcement exposure was noticed in
2001 which was plastered in 2002.
No speed restriction has been imposed on this bridge. Tested bridge is
situated on both up and down lines.

3.4 Bridge No. 390

According to bridge register (ADEN-Surat), the bridge was built in year

1861. The original arch bridge was replaced by RCC slab. The year of
replacement is not recorded in the bridge register.
No speed restriction has been imposed on this bridge. Tested bridge is
situated on both up and down lines. On visual inspection of bridge,
spalling of concrete and rusting of reinforcement is noticed at many
locations.

4.0 TEST CONDUCTED AND PARAMETER OBSERVED:-

As discussed below, different Non-Destructive Tests were conducted to

observe various parameters of the bridge structures.

4.1 Bridge No. 355 up (refer Annexure IX, fig. No. 5):-

(a) Reinforcement scanning and Cover measurements:- Reinforcement

scanning and cover measurements are recorded with profometer. The
measurements are recorded on the top of the first slab from western end.
 An area of 500 x 500 mm is marked at the center of the slab for recording
measurements.
(b) Quality of Concrete:- Quality of concrete is assessed with pulse velocity
meter (TICO).The measurements are recorded at the center of the top
face of the first slab from western end. (Location 1).
(c) Probability of Corrosion: - Probability of reinforcement corrosion is
measured by resistivity meter. The measurements are taken at two test
locations. Location No.1 is at the center of the top face of the first slab
from west side and location No.2 is at the center of the side face of the
same slab.

4.2 Bridge No. 366 (refer Annexure IX, fig. No. 8)

(a) Reinforcement scanning and Cover measurements:-The reinforcement

scanning and cover measurements are recorded with profometer.
Measurements are taken at the web of second T- beam from east side. An
area of 500 x 500 mm is marked on the center of the web for recording
measurements (Location 1).
(b) Quality of Concrete: - Quality of concrete is measured by pulse velocity
meter (TICO). The pulse velocity measurements are taken on the web of
the second T-beam from east side.
(c) Probability of Corrosion: - Probability of reinforcement corrosion is
measured on the web of second T- beam from east side (Location 1) and
at center of the slab from bottom side (Location 2).

4.3 Bridge No. 388 (refer Annexure IX, fig. No. 9 & 10)

(a) Reinforcement Scanning and Cover measurements- The reinforcement

scanning and cover measurement are recorded with profometer. The
measurements are recorded at bottom of the floor of the box from east
face of up line on first span from Mumbai end. An area of 1000x1000 mm
is marked at the center of the span for taking measurements.
(b) Quality of Concrete:- Quality of concrete is measured by pulse velocity
meter (TICO). The measurements are recorded at bottom of the floor of
the box from east face of up line on both the spans from Mumbai end and
on second span from west face of Mumbai end.

(c) Probability of Corrosion:- Probability of corrosion is measured by

resistivity meter from bottom side at first span from east side and at
second span from west side(Location 3&2).

4.4 Bridge No. 390 (refer Annexure IX, fig. No. 11):-

(a) Reinforcement scanning and cover measurements: - The

reinforcement scanning and cover measurements are recorded with
 profometer. The measurements are recorded on a grid area of 500 mm X
500 mm on east face of the slab.
(b) Quality of Concrete: - Quality of concrete is measured by pulse velocity
meter (TICO) by semi-direct method and are taken at the east side of the
slab.
(c) Compressive strength of concrete: - Compressive strength of concrete
is recorded by rebound hammer on east face of the slab.
(d) Probability of corrosion:- Probability of corrosion is measured by
resistivity meter on east face of the slab.
(e) Corrosion activity: - Corrosion activity is measured by corrosion analyzer
(CANIN) on east face of the slab.

Note :- Due to the high level of water in canal and lack of proper testing
arrangements like erection of observation platform by railway, it was not
possible to test and inspect the bottom surface of the slab. Observations
were recorded on the east face of the slab only.

5.0 ANALYSIS OF DATA:-

5.1 Bridge No. 355 :-

-
(a) Reinforcement scanning & Cover measurements:- No. of bars scanned
with the instrument in vertical direction are 10 and the scanned spacing of
bars varies between 33 mm to 93 mm, whereas, the spacing as per
drawing is 150 mm. No. of bars scanned in horizontal direction are 9 and
spacing varies between 44 mm to 75 mm, whereas the spacing as per
drawing is 140 mm. Measured values of cover at four locations are 34
mm, 41 mm, 43 mm and 44 mm. The concrete cover as per drawing is 40
mm (refer Annexure IX, fig. No.1).

(b) Quality of Concrete:- The recorded pulse velocity values at three test
locations are 4220 m/s, 4370 m/s and 4330m/s . Average pulse velocity of
three measurements is 4306 m/s (refer Annexure I, table No.1). The pulse
velocity indicates good quality of concrete. The measurements are
recorded by semi-direct measurement method.

(c) Probability of Corrosion:- Ten Nos. Resistivity measurements are

recorded each at the two test locations. At the first test location, the values
varies between 63 kcm to 99 kcm and the average value of resistivity
is 85 kcm (refer Annexure-II). At the second location, the Resistivity
values varies between 41kcm to 88 kcm and average value of
resistivity is 68 kcm (refer Annexure-III).The observed resistivity values
at both the test locations indicate low risk of reinforcement corrosion.
5.2 Bridge No. 366 :-

(a) Reinforcement scanning & Cover measurements:- :- No. of bars

scanned with the instrument in vertical direction are 4 and the scanned
spacing of bars varies between 92 mm to 117 mm. No of bars scanned in
horizontal direction are 2 and spacing of bars is 371mm.The measured
values of concrete cover at four locations are 23mm, 24mm, 23mm and
26mm (refer Annexure IX, fig. No. 2).
(Note- The original drawing is not available. )
.
(b) Quality of Concrete:- The recorded pulse velocity values at five test
locations are 3920m/s, 4160m/s, 4100m/s, 3880m/s and 3820m/s.
Average pulse velocity of five measurements is 3976 m/s (refer Annexure
I, table No.2) The pulse velocity indicates good quality of concrete. The
measurements are recorded by direct measurement method.

(c) Probability of Corrosion:- Seven Nos. Resistivity measurements

are recorded each at the two test locations. At the first test location, the
values varies between 74 kcm to 99 kcm and the average value of
resistivity is 94 kcm (refer Annexure-IV). At the second location, the
Resistivity values varies between 69kcm to 99 kcm and average value
of resistivity is 94 kcm (refer Annexure-V). The observed resistivity
values at both the test locations indicate low risk of reinforcement
corrosion.

5.3 Bridge No. 388:-

(a) Reinforcement scanning & Cover measurements:- :- No. of bars

scanned with the instrument in vertical direction are 10 and the scanned
spacing of bars varies between 58 mm to 108 mm. No of bars scanned in
horizontal direction are 10 and the scanned spacing of bars varies
between 67 mm to 150 mm. The measured values of concrete cover at
five locations are 24mm, 31mm, 26mm, 38mm and 28mm (refer Annexure
IX, fig. No. 3).
(Note- The original drawing is not available. )

(b) Quality of Concrete:- The pulse velocity measurements are recorded at

three test locations. At the first location, the values are 2270 m/s , 4310
m/s 1800 m/s, 2190 m/s and 2910 m/s. The average pulse velocity
recorded is 2696 m/s. At the second location the pulse velocity values are
3850 m/s, 3180 m/s, 3500 m/s, 3770 m/s and 1270 m/s and the average
value is 3114 m/s. At the third location, The values are 3880m/s, 3550m/s,
3750m/s, 1620m/s and 1570m/s. The average value at this location is
2874m/s(refer table No.3,4&5 of Annexure I). At the first location, the
measurements are recorded by indirect measurement method (surface
measurement), at the second and third locations, the measurements are
 recorded by semi-direct method. The pulse velocity values indicate
medium and doubtful quality of concrete.

(c) Probability of Corrosion:- Four Nos. resistivity measurements are

recorded at the second test location and five Nos. at the third test location.
At the second test location, the values varies between 22 kcm to 27
kcm and the average value of resistivity is 25 kcm (refer Annexure-VI).
At the third location, the Resistivity values varies between 25kcm to 77
kcm and average value of resistivity is 49 kcm (refer Annexure-VII).The
observed resistivity values at both the test locations indicate low risk of
reinforcement corrosion.

5.4 Bridge No. 390:-

(a) Reinforcement scanning & Cover measurement:- No. of bars scanned

with the instrument in vertical direction are 7 and the scanned spacing of
bars varies between 17 mm to 87 mm. No. of bars scanned in horizontal
direction are 5 and spacing varies between 33 mm to 158 mm. Measured
values of cover at five locations are 30 mm, 38 mm, 28 mm, 28mm and 37
mm (refer Annexure IX, fig. No.4). (Note- The actual drawing is not
available. )

(b) Quality of Concrete:- The recorded pulse velocity values at three test
locations are 3250m/s, 3200m/s, and 1670m/s. Average pulse velocity of
three measurements is 2706 m/s (refer Annexure I, table No.6). The
measured pulse velocity indicates medium and doubtful quality of
concrete. The measurements are recorded by semi-direct method.

(c) Probability of Corrosion:- Fourteen Nos. resistivity measurements

are recorded at the single test location. The values varies between 43
kcm to 99 kcm and the average value of resistivity is 76 kcm (refer
Annexure-VIII). The observed resistivity values indicate low risk of
reinforcement corrosion.

(d) Compressive strength of Concrete:- The compressive strength of the

concrete with concrete rebound hammer is recorded on the east end of
the slab. Thirty measurements are taken and the average calculated value
of concrete shall be about 28.06 N/mm2 (As per the calibration chart, refer
Annexure I, table No.7). Compressive strength of the slab is also
calculated theoretically (refer Annexure I, table 9).

(e) Corrosion Monitoring by CANIN:- The corrosion measurements are

recorded with CANIN corrosion analyzer. A grid area of 15 cm x 15 cm on
the east end of the slab is marked and the corrosion potentials are
recorded. The recorded potentials are between the 100 mV to 200 mV.
 The recorded corrosion potentials indicate low risk of reinforcement
corrosion (refer Annexure I, table No.8).

5.5 Co-Relation of Observed Data:-

The observed values for concrete quality (Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity),

corrosion probability (Resistivity values), corrosion activity (Potential
values) and concrete compressive strength are co-related with the
following standards.

(a) Concrete quality-

As per IS 1331 1 (Part-I) : 1992 the concrete quality is divided in four

categories in terms of pulse velocity.

S.No. Pulse Velocity (km / Sec) Concrete Quality grading

1 Above 4.5 Excellent
2 3.5 to 4.5 Good
3 3.0 to 3.5 Medium
4 Below 3.0 Doubtful

(b) Corrosion activity-

As per ASTM C876 80 , Co-relation of potential values for corrosion

activity of embedded steel in concrete.

Corrosion Potential Corrosion Status

0 -100 mV No corrosion
-100 mV -200 mV Very low corrosion
-200 mV -300 mV Corrosion
-300 mV -400 mV High corrosion
-400 mV -450 mV Very high corrosion

(c) Corrosion probability-

As per BS 1881 Part 201,Co-relation of resistivity measurement for

corrosion probability of embedded steel.

Resistivity ( kcm ) Corrosion Rate

<5 Very high
5 10 High
10 20 Moderate / Low
> 20 Low
6.0 CONCLUSION

(a) Bridge No. 355 :-

Based on observed data (refer Annexure I, table No.1 & Annexure-II, III),
the quality of concrete is good. The high values of concrete resistivity
indicate no risk of reinforcement corrosion. The measured values of
concrete cover almost match with the drawing values, so no remedial
measures are required at this stage.

(b) Bridge No. 366 :-

The observed pulse velocity values (refer Annexure I, table No.2 &
Annexure-IV,V) confirm, good quality of concrete also the resistivity
values obtained indicate that reinforcement corrosion is not occurring at
this stage. The observed values indicate low concrete cover which may
increase risk of reinforcement corrosion in future. Since the structural
drawings of the bridge are not available, the theoretical values can not be
compared with measured values. However the actual cover recorded is
not sufficient for this region, from durability point of view.

(c) Bridge No. 388 :-

Based on observed data (refer Annexure I, table No.3,4,5 & annexure

VI,VII ), the concrete is of poor & doubtful category. The high value of
concrete resistivity indicate low risk of reinforcement corrosion, but these
values are to be ignored in view of the fact that readings could not be
taken properly due to improper saturation of the tested area. The
observed values indicate low concrete cover which may increase risk of
reinforcement corrosion in future. Since the structural drawings of the
bridge structure are not available, the theoretical values can not be
compared with measured values. The visual inspection shows high
corrosion, which may be due to poor quality of concrete.

(d) Bridge No. 390 :-

The compressive strength (refer Annexure I, table No.7) measured with

rebound hammer is 28.06 N/mm2, which shows comparatively good
quality of concrete. Where as the average pulse velocity (refer Annexure I,
table No.6) obtained is 2706m/s which indicates doubtful quality of
concrete. Since the rebound hammer observations are affected by
carbonation of concrete, which is quite evident on the structure, hence are
to be discounted suitably. The compressive strength calculated by
 rebound hammer data matches with theoretical calculations (refer
Anneuxre I, table 9).

The observed values indicate low concrete cover which may increase risk
of reinforcement corrosion in future. Since the structural drawings of the
bridge structure are not available, the theoretical values could not be
compared with measured values.
The resistivity & potentials measurements (refer Annexure VIII & Annexure
I, table No.8) obtained confirm no reinforcement corrosion but during the
visual inspection, spalling of concrete and signs of rusting of reinforcement
were clearly visible at many locations. The exposed reinforcement at
number of locations was found covered with corrosive layer and had
become brittle. The resistivity & electric potentials values are affected
largely due to unsaturation of structure & non-continuity of reinforcement
bars. Which was quite possible at the tested location, therefore these
results are to be ignored.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION

(a) Bridge No. 355:-

Based on observed data, the concrete is of good quality. Also high

concrete resistivity values help in minimizing the reinforcement corrosion
risk. Thickness of cover concrete is also sufficient for protecting the rebar
from the attack of corrosive material therefore no remedial measure are
required to be taken presently.

(b) Bridge No. 366:-

Observed pulse velocity and resistivity data reveals good quality of

concrete and minimum risk of rebar corrosion. However, insufficient
concrete cover recorded is harmful for maintaining, the structural integrity.
The low concrete cover may lead to the ingress of corrosive products
inside the concrete, which may ultimately corrode the embedded steel.

As the cover thickness is thin, It is recommended that the concrete surface

may be sealed by some anticorrosive paints to prevent carbonation or
ingress of corrosive agents.

(c) Bridge No. 388:-

During visual inspection, spalling of concrete and exposure of

reinforcement was found at many locations. The exposed reinforcement
was covered with corrosive products and had become brittle. The
recorded data also confirmed the poor and doubtful quality of concrete
 and low cover to the reinforcement. Spalling, poor quality of concrete and
inadequate cover together initiated rebar corrosion, which is evident
during visual inspection.
The rusted exposed reinforcing steel is generally sandblasted or wire
brushed, depending on the seriousness. A careful check and a repeated
treatment of the individual bars is essential.

A corrosion protection should be applied to the cleaned reinforcement

prior to restoration of the concrete cover. If possible, the reinforcing bar
should be encapsulated in an alkaline coating. This can be achieved best
by embedding the steel in rich and dense cement mortar, cement-
concrete, epoxy-mortar or epoxy concrete. The choice of the system
depends on the thickness of concrete involved. Concrete or cement
mortar applied pneumatically is preferable to ordinary concrete or mortar.

It is further recommended that for the repairs and rehabilitation of

damaged areas, the remedial and preventive measures brought out in
RDSO report No.48 may be adopted.

(d) Bridge No. 390:-

Low pulse velocity values recorded indicate towards the poor quality of
concrete and also the cover thickness provided is inadequate. These two
factors are mainly responsible for rebar corrosion, which is quite evident
during visual inspection. The concrete quality as well as the cover
thickness is required to be upgraded by adopting suitable measures.

For repairs and re-habilitations of spalled portion of concrete, the following

remedial measures can be adopted.

Repair Methods Materials

Patching - Concrete, Epoxy, Polymer, Latex, Asphalt
Shotcrete/Gunite- Cement mortar, Fast-setting mortar
Overlay - Latex modified concrete, Asphalt concrete, Concrete
Coating - Bituminous, Linseed oil, Silane, etc.
Replacement - As needed

For corrosion protection of embedded steel, the measures recommended

in para (c) can be adopted. Also for further guidance, RDSO report No. 48,
& remedial measures given in INDIAN RAILWAY BRIDGE MANNUAL
1998 may be followed. For further information reference given at the end
of the report may be referred. The Zonal Railway shall take similar
necessary action for the remaining structures having same type of
problems.
8.O ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This report is based on the field tests and investigation carried out
by the following team of RDSO research staff under the guidance of Shri
S.C.Gupta Director Bridges and Structures (Testing) RDSO LUCKNOW.

1. J.P.Meena SRE
2. A.K.Chakarborty JRE-I
3. Basudev Kumar JRE-I
4. R.R.Sinha JRE-I

Following officials from Mumbai Division of Western Railway were

also present during the field investigations.

1. ADEN Surat
2. PWI Navsari
9.0 REFERENCE :

1. INDIAN RAILWAY BRIDGE MANNUAL 1998

2. Raina, Dr. V.K., CONCRETE BRIDGES : Inspection , Repair,

Strengthening , Testing & Load Capacity evaluation , Published by Tata
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi

3. Guidelines for inspection, maintenance and rehabilitation of concrete

bridges, Report No. BS-48 Sept. 2002 issued by Bridges and Structures
Directorate, RDSO, Manak Nagar, Lucknow 226 011
 Annexure I

Table No.1

Bridge No.-355

Instrument: - Pulse Velocity Meter (TICO)

Method: - Semi Direct Measurement

Location: - Pulse velocity taken at the center of the top face of the first slab from
western end.

Object No. Time Path Length Velocity Average

Velocity
100005 118.4 us 0.500 m 4220 m/s
100006 114.5 us 0.500 m 4370 m/s 4306 m/s
100007 115.5 us 0.500 m 4330m/s
 Annexure I

Table No. 2

Bridge No.-366

Instrument: - Pulse Velocity Meter (TICO)

Method: - Direct Measurement

Location: Pulse velocity taken at the web of the second T- beam from east side.

Object No. Time Path Length Velocity Average

Velocity
100008 76.6 us 0.300 m 3920 m/s
100009 72.1 us 0.300 m 4160 m/s
100010 73.1 us 0.300 m 4100 m/s 3976 m/s
100011 77.4 us 0.300 m 3880 m/s
100012 78.6us 0.300 m 3820 m/s
 Annexure I

Table No. 3

Bridge No.-388

Instrument: - Pulse Velocity Meter (TICO)

Method: - Surface Measurement

Location: - Pulse velocity taken at the bottom of the floor of the box from east
face on second span from Mumbai end.

Object No. Time Path Length Velocity Average

Velocity
100018 64.5 us 0.700 m 2270 m/s
100019 70.5 us 0.700 m 4310 m/s
100020 66.6 us 0.700 m 1800 m/s 2696 m/s
100021 153.9 us 0.700 m 2190 m/s
100022 159.6 us 0.700 m 2910 m/s
 Annexure I

Table No. 4

Bridge No.-388

Instrument: - Pulse Velocity Meter (TICO)

Method: - Semi direct Measurement

Location: - Pulse velocity taken at the bottom of the floor of the box on second
span from west face of Mumbai end.

Object No. Time Path Length Velocity Average

Velocity
100023 65.0 us 0.250 m 3850 m/s
100024 78.6 us 0.250 m 3180 m/s
100025 71.5 us 0.250 m 3500 m/s 3114 m/s
100026 66.4 us 0.250 m 3770 m/s
100027 197.7 us 0.250 m 1270 m/s
 Annexure I

Table No. 5

Bridge No.-388

Instrument: - Pulse Velocity Meter (TICO)

Method: - Semi direct Measurement

Location: - Pulse velocity taken at the bottom of the floor of the box from east
face of UP line on first span from Mumbai end.

Object No. Time Path Length Velocity Average

Velocity
100013 64.5 us 0.250 m 3880 m/s
100014 70.5 us 0.250 m 3550 m/s
100015 66.6 us 0.250 m 3750 m/s 2874 m/s
100016 153.9 us 0.250 m 1620 m/s
100017 159.6 us 0.250 m 1570 m/s
 Annexure I

Table No. 6

Bridge No.-390

Instrument: - Pulse Velocity Meter (TICO)

Method: - Semi Direct Measurement

Location: - Pulse velocity taken in east side of the slab.

Object No. Time Path Length Velocity Average

Velocity
100002 65.5 us 0.213 m 3250 m/s
100003 66.5 us 0.213 m 3200 m/s 2706 m/s
100004 127.5 us 0.213 m 1670m/s
 Table No.7 ANNEXURE-I
BRIDGE No. 390
Location Rebound value taken on the east end of the slab.

S. Rebound Mean Compressive Average

No. No. Rebound No. Strength Compressive strength
(N / mm2) (N / mm2)
1 30 23.6
2 29 21.1
3 28 20.6
4 24 *
5 24 *
6 26 *
7 32 26.9
8 30 23.6
9 30 23.6
10 38 *
11 31 32.36667 25.2 28.06
12 36 33.5
13 38 *
14 34 30.1
15 30 23.6
16 38 *
17 34 30.1
18 44 *
19 44 *
20 34 30.1
21 30 23.6
22 30 23.6
23 26 *
24 36 33.5
25 34 30.1
26 34 30.1
27 34 30.1
28 29 22.1
29 36 33.5
30 28 20.6
( * ) Test hammer observations are not considered as these deviates from the
mean of other observations by more than 5 units.
 Annexure-I

Table No.9

BRIDGE No. 390

Theoritical calculation of Compressive strength

This is the mostly used combined method in field. Both the methods are easy to
perform at site and one can collect large number of data in small interval of time.
This is the most economical combination. The pulse velocity and rebound
number can be combined to obtain multiple linear regression equation with
compressive strength as dependent variable in the form of

Log S = AV + BR C

Where S cube compressive strength kN/cm2

R Rebound number
V Pulse velocity meter m/sec
A, B and C are constants

To calculate A , B and C, the value of S, R and V is taken from the data

collected. The three sets of S, R and V is taken as follows

S = 2.69, 2.36 and 3.01

V = 3250, 3200 and 1670
R = 32, 30 and 34

By putting the values of S, V and R in the above equation and solving the three
equations we get the values of constants A, B and C as follows

A = 0.0000049
B = 0.0283
C = 0.491

Keeping the value of constants A, B and C as above in the original equation and
putting the value of R and V as collected from the field, we get the value of
theoritical compressive strength of the concrete.
 Table No.9 (Contd.)

Comparison of compressive strength by Rebound Hammer and Theoretical

calculation of the bridge slab.

SN Compressive Strength Compressive Strength from Pulse

from Rebound Hammer Velocity meter and Rebound Hammer
(N/mm2) readings theoretically (N/mm2)
1 23.6 23.62
2 21.1 22.13
3 20.6 20.73
4 - -
5 - -
6 - -
7 26.9 26.90
8 23.6 23.62
9 23.6 23.62
10 - -
11 25.2 25.19
12 33.5 34.89
13 - -
14 30.1 30.63
15 23.6 23.60
16 - -
17 30.1 30.63
18 - -
19 - -
20 30.1 30.63
21 23.6 23.19
22 23.6 23.19
23 - -
24 33.5 34.29
25 30.1 30.10
26 30.1 30.10
27 30.1 30.10
28 22.1 21.73
29 33.5 34.29
30 20.6 20.36
 Annexure-II

Bridge No.-355

Instrument: - RESI Resistivity Meter

Location: - Reading are taken at the center of the top face of the first slab from
west side on UP line.

RESI Resistivity Meter 1.20 0012.0607

Object No. 100003

99 63 83 63 73 98 99 99 75 99
_
No. of observation: 10

Resistivity: MIN: 63kcm

MAX: 99kcm

Average Resistivity: 85kcm

 Annexure-III

Bridge No.-355

Instrument: - RESI Resistivity Meter

Location: - Reading are taken at the center of the side face of the first slab from
west side on UP line.

RESI Resistivity Meter 1.20 0012.0607

Object No. 100002

88 83 79 83 86 53 57 57 41 52
_
No. of observation: 10

Resistivity: MIN: 41kcm

MAX: 88kcm

Average Resistivity: 68kcm

 Annexure-IV

Bridge No.-366

Instrument: - RESI Resistivity Meter

Location: - Reading are taken on the web of second T- beam from east face.

RESI Resistivity Meter 1.20 0012.0607

Object No. 100004

99 99 99 99 88 99 74
_
No. of observation: 7

Resistivity: MIN: 74kcm

MAX: 99kcm

Average Resistivity: 94kcm

 Annexure-V

Bridge No.-366

Instrument: - RESI Resistivity Meter

Location: - Readings are taken at center of the web from bottom side of second
T- beam from east face.

RESI Resistivity Meter 1.20 0012.0607

Object No. 100005 94 7 69 99

69 91 99 99 99 99 99
_
No. of observation: 7

Resistivity: MIN: 69kcm

MAX: 99kcm

Average Resistivity: 94kcm

 Annexure-VI

Bridge No.-388

Instrument: - RESI Resistivity Meter

Location: - Readings are taken from bottom side at second span from west Side.

RESI Resistivity Meter 1.20 0012.0607

Object No. 100011

22 27 24 25
_

No. of observation:

Resistivity: MIN: 22kcm

MAX: 27kcm

Average Resistivity: 25kcm

 Annexure-VII

Bridge No.-388

Instrument: - RESI Resistivity Meter

Location: - Readings are taken from bottom side at first span from east side.

RESI Resistivity Meter 1.20 0012.0607

Object No. 100007

25 77 73 36 34

No. of observation: 5

Resistivity: MIN: 22kcm

MAX: 77kcm

Average Resistivity: 49kcm

 ANNEXURE-VIII

Bridge No.-390

Instrument: - RESI Resistivity Meter

Location: - Resistivity taken on the east face of the slab.

RESI Resistivity Meter 1.20 0012.0607

Object No. 100001

85 70 99 99 77 99 99

62 69 69 55 63 77 43
_
No. of observation: 14

Resistivity: MIN: 43kcm

MAX: 99kcm

Average Resistivity: 76kcm