×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Swiss Hammer

Swiss Hammer

Swiss Hammer

(OP)
I have a Swiss Hammer (and the Anvil, too), but It's not calibrated. Actually, it reads 80.23 when the right reading should be 84.

How do I do the correction to accurate reanding?

RE: Swiss Hammer

Send it off to Soiltest, Durham-Geo, or the supplier you purchased it from.  Most likely, you have a spring problem.  If you insist on doing it yourself, change the spring and see what kind of reading you get.  A knowledgeable repairman can put small spring crimpers to increase readout or loosen the spring to provide the correct anvil reading.

RE: Swiss Hammer

You can also use a known strength of concrete and take readings to compare and work up a correction factor. If the hammer is to far out then you may need to send it off and have it calibrated.

RE: Swiss Hammer

Comparing Swiss Hammer readings to concrete cylinders (or anything else for that matter) would have a higher variation than using the Hammer as is.  The two tested reults would not be close - it's common knowledge that a Swiss Hammer reads higher than the actual strength of concrete.  Swiss Hammer testing should only be used to provide a relative strength and should always (if possible) be compared to destructive test results, i.e., core testing.  I see it all too often that Swiss Hammer results are used for acceptance testing when original test cylinder strengths are low.  

RE: Swiss Hammer

I agree with dirtdoctor that Swiss (rebound) hammer results should be used in a qualitative sence, and should be interpreted with caution and judgment. Converse to dirtdoctor's experience, I recall a situation where a contractor was very 'generous' with the application of release agent on his concrete form work.  Subsequent to the pour, a very soft skin of concrete was exposed after the forms were removed. The quality of the concrete immediately fell into question and a rebound hammer was used to evaluate the concrete. Even after a seamingly appropriate amount of grinding to prepare each rebound test location, the test surface remained soft producing a low rebound result. Coring was undertaken and revealed that the problem was surfacial only.

RE: Swiss Hammer

Good point SirAl - I agree with you that when surface defects are of interest, a Swiss Hammer is a good tool.  I was referring to its use as a means of determining the structural integrity of concrete.  Pressure from concrete producers has caused many consultants to do testing that they know is not valid - I guess that's life for us slump monkey ringleaders.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources