IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i4p931-d137675.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

QSI Methods for Determining the Quality of the Surface Finish of Concrete

Author

Listed:
  • Francisco Javier Benito Saorin

    (Department of Architecture and Building Technoloy, Technical University of Cartagena, Paseo Alfonso XIII, 30203 Cartagena, Spain)

  • Isabel Miñano Belmonte

    (Department of Architecture and Building Technoloy, Technical University of Cartagena, Paseo Alfonso XIII, 30203 Cartagena, Spain)

  • Carlos Parra Costa

    (Department of Architecture and Building Technoloy, Technical University of Cartagena, Paseo Alfonso XIII, 30203 Cartagena, Spain)

  • Carlos Rodriguez Lopez

    (Department of Construction Material, Technological Research Center of Murcia Country, 30820 Alcantarilla, Spain)

  • Manuel Valcuende Paya

    (Department of Architecture Constructions, Polythenic University of Valencia, Camí de Vera, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

Abstract

The surface finish of a concrete element may become an index of its quality, relating the external and internal porosity with the mechanical and durability properties. Few methods are used to determine the surface quality of concrete elements. Mention must be made the Quality Surface Index (QSI) proposes a simplified method to quantify the surface occupied by the pores in relation with the total surface inspected, analyzing groups of pores by their diameter. The method of the CIB W29 (Commission W29 “Concrete Surface Finishings”) proposes an inspection of the concrete element and its visual comparison with some standard templates. Finally, the digital processing of images allows the zones with surface defects to be delimited and quantified according to premises of quality introduced into the control software. These three methods are employed in this work and are applied in three concrete walls situated three meters from the observer (M-1, M-2 and M-3). Following the conversion of the results of the method with ImageJ and QSI, the results suppose differences that go from 0.1 tenths (2%) for M-3 up to 0.3 tenths (8%) for M-1. All values are within the obtained range with CIB W29 templates. This can validate the QSI and digital processing methods and allows a quick verification of the results. With the digital method, it is obtained that 23.5% of the total pores of M-1 have a diameter of less than 10 mm 2 and 44% of less than 100 mm 2 . For M-2 and M-3 the proportions of pores with a dimension below 10 mm 2 is of 43.1% and 27.7%, respectively, and that 77.5% and 60.7% are smaller than 100 mm 2 . From all the above it can be highlighted that M-1 is the one with the lowest amount of pores, however the proportion of the largest is greater than for M-2 and M-3. In the case of M-3, although it has a lower proportion of larger pores than M-1, its greater amount means it is the worst in terms of surface finish of the three.

Suggested Citation

  • Francisco Javier Benito Saorin & Isabel Miñano Belmonte & Carlos Parra Costa & Carlos Rodriguez Lopez & Manuel Valcuende Paya, 2018. "QSI Methods for Determining the Quality of the Surface Finish of Concrete," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:931-:d:137675
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/4/931/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/4/931/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:931-:d:137675. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.