In-Place Testing without taking cores, the Pullout Test
                     In-Place Strength Without  
Testing Cores:
The Pullout Test
Prepared By
Nicholas J. Carino, PhD
Consultant, Chagrin Falls, OH, USA
1 www.sigmatest.org
Current Practice for Acceptance  Testing 
of Concrete
• 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
2
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 High cost
 Rebound number method
Requires correlation 
 Probe penetration test  testing for each  
 Ultrasonic pulse concrete mixture
 vPeullolocuitty test Reliable estimates
www.sigmatest.org
3
Outline
• Explain pullout test
• Strength correlation and failure mechanism
• Describe CAPO-Test
• Case study
• Summary
4 www.sigmatest.org
Pullout Test
ASTM C 900
Measure force to pullout an insert anchored in  concrete.
 Cast-in-place (CIP): LOK-Test
 Post-installed (PI): CAPO-Test
5 www.sigmatest.org
CIP-Pullout Test
25 mm
Insert
25 mm
Formwork
6 www.sigmatest.org
Inser
t
CIP-Pullout Test
ItsneIsrenrt
55 mm
Pullou
Reactio t  
n  Force
Ring
7 www.sigmatest.org
CIP-Pullout Test
Insert
Pullou
Reactio t  
n  Force
Ring
8 www.sigmatest.org
Inser
t
Pullout Test
COMA-
meter
Apply Pullout Load
Conical 
9 Fragwmwwen.stigmatest.org
Estimate Concrete Strength
10
0
80
60
40
20
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
80
Pullout Load, kN
10 www.sigmatest.org
Compressive Strength, 
MPa
Correlation 
Testing  ACI 
• Prepare cylinde2rs2 (8or. 1cuRbes) for standard 
 compressive strength testing
• Prepare 200-mm cubes with inserts
• Cure all specimens under same conditions
11 www.sigmatest.org
Correlation Testing
• At ages of 1, 2, 3, 
 7, 14 and 28 
days:
 Test 2 cylinders 200 
 (or cubes) for  
compressive  mm
strength 200 
 Perform 8 pullout mm
 tests (2 cubes)
www.sigmatest.org
12
Example of Correlation
3
5
3
0
2
5
2
0
1
5 1 1 20 2 3
0 5Pullout Force, kN5 0
1
0
13 www.sigmatest.org
5
Cylinder Strength, 
MPa
Why is there a correlation?
• Analytical studies of pullout test have 
 been done
 Plasticity theory
 Compression-strut theory
 Aggregate-interlock theory
• Pullout strength is related fundamentally 
 to concrete strength
14 www.sigmatest.org
Pullout Failure 
MechCaonmpisremssion strut theory
15 www.sigmatest.org
Pullout Failure 
MechCaonmpisremssion strut theory
16 www.sigmatest.org
Compression Strut
17 www.sigmatest.org
Robust Correlation
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
18 www.sigmatest.org
Cube Strength Correlations
12
0 Johansen - LOK 
core  Gerhard - f = 0.76 1.16
LOK  Winden - LOK cub
10  Winden - LOK Fe
0 Bellander - CAPO 
core  Bellander - 
LOK core  Bellander 
8 - CAPO  Bellander - 
0 LOK  Worthers - 
CAPO  Moczko - 
CAPO core
6
PPrricicee -  -L OK  
0   General 
LOK
Correlation
4
0
2
0
0 1 2 30 40 50 6 7 8
0 0 0 Pullout Force, kN 0 0 0
19 www.sigmatest.org
Cube or Core Strength, 
MPa
Cylinder Strength Correlations
12
0
10 f = 0.69 
0 cyF1.12l Gay - LOK
8 Bick ley - LOK  
Krenchel - LOK  
0 Krenchel - CAPO 
 Krenchel - LOK  
Jensen - LOK  
Drake - LOK  
6 Drake - LOK  
Poulsen - LOK  
0 Kierkegaard - 
LOK  Lekso - 
LOK  Lekso - 
LOK  Krenchel - 
4 LOK  Krenchel - CAPO  McGee - 
0 LOK  Bickley - 
LOK
AEC - LOK & 
CAPO
0 Obla - LOK  2 General 
0 0 2 40 60 8 Correlatio1n0
0Pullout Force, kN 0 0
2 www.sigmatest.org
0
Cylinder Strength, 
MPa
Manufacturer’s  General Correlations
10
0
8 f = 0.76 
0 F1.16
cube
6
0
f = 0.69 
c
F1
y.12
4 l
0
2 General Correlations for 
0    Cylinder and Cube 
Strength
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
80
Pullout Load, kN
21 www.sigmatest.org
Compressive Strength, 
MPa
Post-Installed Pullout Test  CAPO-Test
• 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
22
Prepare Concrete
Plane 
surface
Drill hole
25 18 
mm mm
Cut 
slot
25 
23 mm www.sigmatest.org
Surface  
Planing
www.sigmatest.org
24
www.sigmatest.org
25
Cut 
Slot
3.5 mm
25 mm
www.sigmatest.org
26
Cut 
Slot
www.sigmatest.org
27
Cut 
Slot
www.sigmatest.org
28
Insert Expansion Cone  and Coiled 
Split-Ring
Coiled 
ring
Cone
29 www.sigmatest.org
Ring Expansion Hardware
Bevel
30 www.sigmatest.org
Expand 
Ring
Nu
t
www.sigmatest.org
31
Pullout the Expanded Ring
32 www.sigmatest.org
www.sigmatest.org
33
CAPO-Test vs LOK-Test
7
0
CAPO = 
6 b*LOVaKlue Error
0 b 1.0038 0.0051703
Chisq 112.19 1.3 kN
5 R 0.99593
0
4
0
Krenchel  
Bellander 
2
3  Best-fit 0
0 line
1
0
0
0 1 2 30 40 5 6 7
0 0 0 0 0
LOK-Test Load, 
kN
www.sigmatest.org
34
CAPO-Test Load, 
kN
Case 
Study
November/December 
2016
35 www.sigmatest.org
Polish Bridge Study
• 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
36
Correlation
60
Core 
Strength
Best fit curve: f = 
5 0.77F1.15 core
0 Upper Confidence 
Limit  Lower 
4 Confidence Limit
0 General Correlation: 
f
3 = 0.76F1.16
c
0 u
b
e
2
0
10 15 20 25
0 0 5 1 CAPO-TEST, 3 3 4
0 0 5 0
kN
3 www.sigmatest.or
7 g
Core Strength, 
MPa
Relative Error
 Estimated Cube Strength  Core Strength CT  100 
%
Core Strength
www.sigmatest.org
38
Summary for 15 Bridges
Bridge Carbonatio Average core Average Estimated Relative 
No. n strength, MPa CAPO-TEST, compressiv error,
depth, kN e  strength, αCT, %
mm MPa
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
3
9 www.sigmatest.org
Error vs. Carbonation Depth
2
0
1
5
1
0
5
0 Linear 
- Fit Valu Erro
10 Interce 3
e.2683 r
- pt Slop - 2.5763 0.1592
- 5 Sq.e 0.0434311.15 3 NA
15 Error R 6 6 NA
- 0.05758815 20 25
20 0 5 1 3 3 4
0 Carbonation Depth, 0 5 0
4 mm www.sigmatest.org
0
Relative Error, 
%
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
www.sigmatest.org
4
1
Thank You !
 Sigma Test and Research Centre 
Regd. Office: 99, Badli Industrial 
Area, Phase 2, Delhi 110042
Call +91 - 9560222333
www.sigmatest.org
[email protected]
42