Cut and Pull Out Test for Accurate In-Situ Compression Strength of Concrete. the Cut and Pull-Out Test Is a Reliable Test Method to Determine the In-Situ Compressive Strength of Concrete. Book Your Cut and Pull-Out Test with the Sigma Test and Research Centre. Please Visit Our Website https://www.sigmatest.org, Call on +91 - 9560222333 and Email at mail@sigmatest.org.

1. In-Place Strength Without
Testing Cores:
The Pullout Test
Nicholas J. Carino, PhD
Consultant, Chagrin Falls, OH, USA
1
Prepared By
www.sigmatest.org

2. Current Practice for Acceptance Testing
of Concrete
2
• Standardized testing of specimens made from concrete
delivered to the project
 Standard consolidation
 Standard curing
• Provides assurance that correct concrete was delivered
• Indicates potential strength
 Does not account for actual consolidation and curing
www.sigmatest.org

3. Future Performance-Based Specifications
• Measure in-place properties of concrete to
ensure structure will perform as intended
• Methods for estimating in-place strength
 Testing drilled cores
 Rebound number method
 Probe penetration test
 Ultrasonic pulse velocity
 Pullout test
High cost
Requires correlation
testing for each
concrete mixture
Reliable estimates
3
www.sigmatest.org

4. Outline
4
• Explain pullout test
• Strength correlation and failure mechanism
• Describe CAPO-Test
• Case study
• Summary
www.sigmatest.org

5. Pullout Test
ASTM C 900
5
Measure force to pullout an insert anchored in concrete.
 Cast-in-place (CIP): LOK-Test
 Post-installed (PI): CAPO-Test
www.sigmatest.org

6. CIP-Pullout Test
Insert
25 mm
Insert
25 mm
Formwork
6 www.sigmatest.org

7. CIP-Pullout Test
ternsI
Insert
55 mm
Pullout
Force
Reaction
Ring
7 www.sigmatest.org

8. CIP-Pullout Test
Insert
Insert
Pullout
Force
Reaction
Ring
8 www.sigmatest.org

9. Pullout Test
Apply Pullout Load
Conical Fragment
COMA-meter
9 www.sigmatest.org

10. 100
80
60
40
20
0
0
Compressive
Strength,
MPa
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Pullout Load, kN
Estimate Concrete Strength
10 www.sigmatest.org

11. Correlation Testing
ACI 228.1R
• Prepare cylinders (or cubes) for standard
compressive strength testing
• Prepare 200-mm cubes with inserts
• Cure all specimens under same conditions
11 www.sigmatest.org

12. Correlation Testing
12
• At ages of 1, 2, 3,
7, 14 and 28 days:
 Test 2 cylinders
(or cubes) for
compressive
strength
 Perform 8 pullout
tests (2 cubes)
200 mm
200 mm
www.sigmatest.org

13. Example of Correlation
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
13
10 15 25 30
Cylinder
Strength,
MPa
20
Pullout Force, kN
www.sigmatest.org

14. Why is there a correlation?
14
• Analytical studies of pullout test have
been done
 Plasticity theory
 Compression-strut theory
 Aggregate-interlock theory
• Pullout strength is related fundamentally
to concrete strength
www.sigmatest.org

15. Pullout Failure Mechanism
Compression strut theory
15 www.sigmatest.org

16. Pullout Failure Mechanism
Compression strut theory
16 www.sigmatest.org

17. Compression Strut
17 www.sigmatest.org

18. Robust Correlation
18
Not affected by:
• Type of cementitious materials
• Water-cement ratio
• Age
• Air entrainment
• Types of admixtures
• Shape or size of normal density aggregate
up to 40 mm
 Lightweight aggregate, however, produces
significantly different correlation
www.sigmatest.org

19. Cube Strength Correlations
40
20
0
60
80
100
120
0 10 20 60 70 80
Johansen - LOK core
Gerhard - LOK
Winden - LOK
Winden - LOK
Bellander - CAPO core
Bellander - LOK core
Bellander - CAPO
Bellander - LOK
Worthers - CAPO
Moczko - CAPO core
Price - LOK
Price - LOK
General Correlation
Cube
or
Core
Strength,
MPa
30 40 50
Pullout Force, kN
cube
f = 0.76 F
1.16
19 www.sigmatest.org

20. Cylinder Strength Correlations
0
80
60
40
20
120
100
0 20 80 100
Gay - LOK
Bickley - LOK
Krenchel - LOK
Krenchel - CAPO
Krenchel - LOK
Jensen - LOK
Drake - LOK
Drake - LOK
Poulsen - LOK
Kierkegaard - LOK
Lekso - LOK
Lekso - LOK
Krenchel - LOK
Krenchel - CAPO
McGee - LOK
Bickley - LOK
AEC - LOK & CAPO
Obla - LOK
General Correlation
Cylinder
Strength,
MPa
40 60
Pullout Force, kN
cyl
f = 0.69 F1.12
20 www.sigmatest.org

21. Manufacturer’s General Correlations
0
21
20
40
60
80
100
0
Compressive
Strength,
MPa
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Pullout Load, kN
General Correlations for
Cylinder and Cube Strength
f = 0.76 F1.16
cube
cyl
f = 0.69 F1.12
www.sigmatest.org

22. Post-Installed Pullout Test CAPO-Test
22
• Does not require pre-planning test
locations
• Can perform test at any accessible
location
• Permits testing of existing structures
• Immediate test results compared with
cores
www.sigmatest.org

23. Prepare Concrete
25 mm
25 mm
Cut slot
Plane surface
Drill hole
23
18 mm
www.sigmatest.org

24. Surface
Planing
24
www.sigmatest.org

25. 25
www.sigmatest.org

26. Cut Slot
25 mm
3.5 mm
26
www.sigmatest.org

27. Cut Slot
27
www.sigmatest.org

28. Cut Slot
28
www.sigmatest.org

29. Insert Expansion Cone and Coiled
Split-Ring
Coiled ring
Cone
29 www.sigmatest.org

30. Ring Expansion Hardware
Bevel
30 www.sigmatest.org

31. Expand Ring
Nut
31
www.sigmatest.org

32. Pullout the Expanded Ring
32 www.sigmatest.org

33. 33
www.sigmatest.org

34. CAPO-Test vs LOK-Test
0
10
20
60
50
40
30
70
0 10 20 50 60 70
Krenchel
Bellander
Best-fit line
CAPO-Test
Load,
kN
30 40
LOK-Test Load, kN
CAPO = b*LOK
Value Error
b 1.0038 0.0051703
Chisq 112.19 1.3 kN
R 0.99593
34
www.sigmatest.org

35. Case Study
November/December 2016
35 www.sigmatest.org

36. Polish Bridge Study
36
• Tested 15 bridges: ages 25 to 52 years
• Measured depth of carbonation (2 to 35 mm)
• Tested drilled cores with L/D = 1 to represent cube
strength
• Conducted companion CAPO tests
• Used manufacturer’s correlation to estimate
cube strength from CAPO-Test
• Investigated effect of carbonation depth
www.sigmatest.org

37. Correlation
30
20
10
40
50
0
0 5 10 30 35 40
60
Core
Strength
Best fit curve: f = 0.77F1.15
core
Upper Confidence
Limit Lower
Confidence Limit
General Correlation: f = 0.76F1.16
cube
37
Core
Strength,
MPa
15 20 25
CAPO-TEST, kN
www.sigmatest.or

38. Relative Error
CT
38
 
Estimated Cube Strength Core Strength
100
%
Core Strength
www.sigmatest.org

39. Summary for 15 Bridges
39
Bridge
No.
Carbonation
depth, mm
Average core
strength, MPa
Average
CAPO-TEST,
kN
Estimated
compressive
strength, MPa
Relative error,
αCT, %
1 2 34.2 28.1 36.4 6.4
2 4 24.7 21.4 26.6 7.7
3 5 46.4 37.3 50.6 9.1
4 5 34.2 28.7 37.3 9.1
5 7 37.1 27.5 35.5 -4.3
6 7 42.0 30.1 39.4 -6.2
7 7 37.5 29.2 38.1 1.6
8 8 35.4 28.3 36.7 3.7
9 10 42.4 30.6 40.2 -5.2
10 19 33.3 24.9 31.7 -4.8
11 20 29.7 24.6 31.2 5.1
12 20 28.5 24.3 30.8 8.1
13 22 31.7 26.1 33.4 5.4
14 26 31.7 26.5 34.0 7.3
15 35 19.6 16.4 19.5 -0.5
www.sigmatest.org

40. Error vs. Carbonation Depth
40
-20
-15
-10
20
15
10
5
0
-5
0 5 10 30 35 40
Relative
Error,
%
15 20 25
Carbonation Depth, mm
Linear Fit
Error
Value
3.2683 2.5763
Intercept
0.15923
-0.033116
Slope
NA
441.56
Sq. Error
NA
R 0.057588
www.sigmatest.org

41. Summary
• Pullout test offers the possibility of estimating in-
place concrete with acceptable reliability
• Stress state created by reaction ring leads to a
compression strut that explains the good correlation
with compressive strength
• CAPO-Test allows testing without pre-placing inserts
• Polish bridge study
 On average, CAPO-Test estimate was 3 % greater
than core strength
 Carbonation did not appear to affect CAPO-Test
results
41
www.sigmatest.org

42. 42