Análise comparativa entre ensaios estrutivos e não destrutivos na avaliação da resistência do concreto.

Abstract

Concrete is the most widely used material in civil construction, with compressive strength being its main property for evaluating the mechanical character of its performance and structural safety. In this context, this article aimed to conduct a state-of-the-art review of destructive and non-destructive tests applied to concrete, followed by an experimental component to validate the research, aiming to analyze and compare the results obtained through these tests in the mechanical evaluation of concrete in structural elements of a building located in the municipality of Olinda–PE. Initially, a bibliographic and scientific review on the subject was carried out, based on technical standards and consolidated studies. Subsequently, the experimental stage was developed, in which the results of compressive strength tests performed at 28 days on specimens molded on site were evaluated, identifying three structural elements with values lower than the resistance specified in the project. Based on this finding, sclerometry tests were performed on the selected elements, followed by the extraction of concrete cores. The extracted cores were sent to the laboratory for preparation, face regularization, and subsequent axial compression testing. The results obtained showed differences between the methods, with the values estimated by sclerometry being lower than those obtained in the compression tests of the cores. It should be noted that sclerometry has limitations related to surface factors of the concrete, while core extraction allows for a direct evaluation of the material's resistance. However, it is important to highlight that the sampling restricted to only three structural elements does not allow for definitive conclusions, and it is necessary to expand the sampling for greater reliability of the results.