Features of the Schmidt hammer sclerometer models: OMSh 1, MS 225 and others

A Schmidt hammer sclerometer is a vital instrument for determining the concrete’s hardness. They provide a rapid and accurate means of evaluating the strength and quality of concrete, which is essential for guaranteeing structural integrity. The OMSh 1 and MS 225 are popular options among the available models among many professionals in the construction industry.

Every model has special qualities and benefits of its own. For example, many people choose the OMSh 1 because of its ease of use and accuracy when determining the hardness of concrete. The MS 225, on the other hand, has sophisticated features that address more specialized requirements. Knowing how these models differ from one another makes it easier to choose the best instrument for your specific testing needs.

The main characteristics of the OMSh 1, MS 225, and other well-known Schmidt hammer sclerometer models will be discussed in this article. This will give you a concise rundown of their features, enabling you to choose the model that best meets your needs.

Model Features
OMSh 1 Basic model for measuring concrete hardness. Simple design, manual calibration, and suitable for general use.
MS 225 Advanced model with digital display. Offers more precise measurements and additional calibration options. Ideal for detailed testing.
Other Models Varies by manufacturer. Some may offer enhanced features like automatic data recording, improved accuracy, or specialized measurement modes.

What kind of equipment is this?

Devices called sclerometers, also known as hardness testers, are used to measure the strength of solid materials and the products made from them. Created with strength analysis in mind:

  1. concrete;
  2. cement;
  3. stones;
  4. bricks;
  5. solutions from which screeds, walls, floors, slabs, columns, ceilings, etc. are made. d.

Additionally, there are particular models for:

  • wood;
  • rocks;
  • to determine the winding density of paper rolls.

Strength needs to be determined and tested, for instance, especially in the construction industry to see if a particular mixture satisfies design requirements and can support the given loads.

The rebound height of the plunger placed on the material when it is struck by a striker is recorded by the elastic rebound hardness tester, which does not instantly determine the strength of the object being tested. Next, this indicator is compared to unique tables that hold the values of the associated desired quantity.

Sclerometers use the principle of impact on the object and measuring its damage, resistance, recoil.

In addition to non-destructive techniques like ultrasound and pulses, there are techniques that destroy the object (such as chipping, tearing, crushing, or pressing parts of the measuring device into the surface, or plastic deformation). Schmidt Hammer uses elastic rebound, which is the most widely used technique in this field.

Hardness testers are available in concrete-specific models, which can be used in conjunction with other materials (such as brick or stone) or independently of other objects.

Historical background

Up until the turn of the 20th century, the primary method—and possibly the only one—for figuring out a material’s hardness was standard scratching with a hard object, or sclerometry. This is a traditional technique of measuring "by eye," though it should be noted that skilled artisans can still provide remarkably accurate measurements with a nail even today.

Ranking of materials by hardness in its rudiments was created in the 17th century. Then in the 19th century. German mineralogist Mohs created a 10-point scale, which is still relevant today, for assessing the relative hardness of tested objects (the lower step is talc, the upper one is diamond) by the strength of the scratches displayed on them by standards. The first sclerometers used the scratching principle up until the 30s of the 19th century.
A leap in the improvement of methods for determining the strength of materials was observed in the 1940s … 1950s., It is in this period that devices with the principle of impact (pressing) and elastic rebound were invented. With the same design, they are used in modern conditions, it is the latter that became the most popular.

They therefore rejected the scratch and substituted it with an analysis of the standard’s damage (print), the surface of the surface (hammers of Kashkarov, Physel), or the height of the box’s bunch when it struck the plunger designated for the object under study (Hammer of Schmidt). Other techniques, such as coatings, separation, and later ultrasound, also emerged at this time.

The word "sclerometer" is derived from the word "scratch," but it eventually came to refer to any instrument that measures a material’s hardness using other working principles (impulses, rebound, ultrasound, destruction, etc.). "Solidomer" is another term that is often used.

The Schmidt Hammer, also known as the Swiss Hammer or Sclerometer, is a fully metal portable device measuring approximately 35 cm in length and 6 cm in diameter that uses the elastic rebound method to measure the hardness of concrete.

That is, by measuring an indirect value – the height of the striker after striking the plunger. The device was invented in 1948 by engineer Ernst O. Schmidt from Proceq SA (Switzerland). There are varieties with different impact energies: for concrete, brick, rocks, for analyzing the winding density of paper rolls, for several materials at the same time.
The device is a compact smooth metal cylinder (length approximately 35 cm, diameter 6 cm) one end of which is conical with a plunger (indenter) coming out of it, the other is closed with a flat lid with a stop bolt with a lock nut, which can be used to adjust the height of the striker strike, located inside together with the spring. On the body there is a scale with a slider, and error tables, diagrams are often glued or engraved there.

The hardness tester in question may refer to the TsNIISK, Borovogo Pistol, or KM sclerometer at times, particularly when dealing with older users. These are the names of Soviet-era analogues of the elastic rebound principle that are no longer in production and are now uncommonly found.

Proceq SA is the company that manufactures the original products; these are the best and most expensive products; all other companies are license holders with patent rights. When new standards and technologies pertaining to elastic rebound hardness testers are introduced, the designated organization is typically the first in the world to adopt them.

The Proceq Original Schmidt model, which is typically always mentioned in international standards, serves as the benchmark for all comparable hammer sclerometers.

What concrete is the Schmidt Hammer suitable for?

The Schmidt hammer is the main tool for the elastic rebound method that is implied by GOSTs, SNiPs, TU, and other regulatory mandatory and recommendatory documents.

In the table. 1 GOST 22690 specifies the standard, which method, to which type of concrete for compressive strength to use for the best research result (the first row refers to the measuring device we are considering). But this is a recommendation, in practice, Schmidt hammers cover a range of up to 70 MPa and higher, which is also confirmed by other standards of this GOST and N31914.
GOST 31914 states the following:
Suitable concretes depend on the model of the hardness tester, on what range of ultimate compressive strength of the solution it covers, and for the Schmidt hammer this is 5 … 70 N / mm 2 (equal to the same figure in MPa).
You need to look at the passport not only for each specific model, but also for its type (modification) and the measurement range characteristic of it. Compressive strength classes (impact hardness) of various concrete grades are in GOST 25820.

For instance, the following excerpt from the product instructions for the ORIGINAL SCHMIDT reference model demonstrates how the size and composition of an object’s material can affect the availability of particular measuring device options: The ORIGINAL SCHMIDT technical documentation contains similar clauses:

  • with standard (type N – 2.2 Nm) – for objects made of concrete with a thickness of 10 cm and more, for solutions with a maximum particle size of up to 32 mm;
  • with reduced (type L – 0.735 Nm) – for testing small-sized products, such as thin-walled objects with a thickness of 50 to 100 mm.

What method is used to determine the strength of concrete?

The Schmidt Hammer method, also known as non-destructive, elastic rebound, involves measuring and recording the height of the striker’s rebound (recoil) as soon as it hits the plunger that is attached to the material, as well as the distance it will return with a constant amount of the metal spring’s kinetic energy.

The benefit of this approach is that, in most cases, the force of such influence is too small to harm the concrete being tested.

Concrete’s impact hardness, or compressive strength, measured in N/mm2, kg/cm2, and MPa, is the value we are aiming for. distinguished by the measuring device striker’s height of elastic rebound. The calibration curves show that when the second increases, the first also increases.

Since the measuring device’s direction affects the magnitude of the rebounds, it is important to consider the angle at which the hammer is positioned during testing. These graphs are affixed to the Schmidt Hammer, sometimes being pasted or engraved directly onto its body. The idea is thus to measure the striker’s rebound when it strikes an indenter, or plunger, with a standardized energy and presses against the concrete’s surface.

In conventional units of the device scale, the height of the rebound (R) of the specified element is measured instead of the force itself. This is an indirect measure of the tested material’s hardness in compression. After obtaining the value that was described, the graphs showing the dependencies between the two values mentioned above are used to determine the desired value.

A passage from the device manual is shown below:

Varieties

Analogs, adaptations, and models of the Schmidt hammer

  1. Models of the original product from Proceq:
  2. ORIGINAL SCHMIDT (with the widest range of impact energy), Schmidt OS. With an electronic module: Digi Shmidt, SILVER SCHMIDT and Original Schmidt Live;
  3. models can be one of 4 types: N, L, NR, LR. The Schmidt OS modification can have two varieties – 120PT, 120PM;
  4. Analogues of other manufacturers. For example, Vostok-7, Novotest, RostSnab, Matest, ADA Instruments with somewhat difficult to identify origin (with Russian-Chinese-Ukrainian-English-USA registration, with production in China), but with good quality. Here are the most famous models in the CIS:
  5. series, including ada schmidt hammer МШ225, МШ75, МШ20;
  6. OMSh-1 is perhaps the oldest and cheapest device, but it is quite functional and effective, reminiscent of a product from the Soviet era;
  7. RGK SK 60.

All Schmidt hammers are mechanical, but some variations (SilverSchmidt) are referred to as electronic or digital because they have an external unit or built-in module with a microcircuit, display, power battery, and memory for processing, storing, and recording measurement results.

Every product has a very basic mechanical foundation (spring, striker, plunger, stopper).

Contrary to what some sources may claim, Hammer Schmidt hardness testers are not ultrasonic; instead, they are based solely on elastic rebound, and any other approaches result in entirely different products with essentially distinct working principles.

This confusion resulted from the fact that Schmidt hammers are sometimes mistakenly referred to as all hardness testers in general "among the people" because of their widespread use. Hardness tester models and types are separated based on the following attributes:

  1. impact energy;
  2. measurement range of compressive strength values;
  3. what type of material and its dimensions (thin-walled, brittle, thickness) are intended for?.

Because of their relatively simple design, all conventional (non-electronic) Schmidt sclerometers within their capability range have similar advantages and disadvantages. Furthermore, all of them go through certification by very strict metrological organizations, both domestically and internationally.

The spring, housing, and other materials used in one brand may be inferior to those used in another (look at the differences in appearance between OMSH-1 and ORIGINAL SHMIDT or even MSh). This should not theoretically have an impact on measurement quality because all instruments go through certification and verification processes.

However, for models with marginally inferior materials (refer to the OMSh section for a review), perhaps:

  • reduced verification period;
  • operating period;
  • increased error;
  • they are more often contaminated due to leaky housing, which requires disassembly and cleaning.

Furthermore, low-quality products might have a few small design flaws that make the job harder:

  • sinking of the antennae at the OMS on the arrow;
  • poor fixation of the runner.

Nevertheless, the declared deviations are not greater than those of the ORIGINAL SHMIDT even if we use this model. It’s possible that some batches have corrected the aforementioned flaws, and it’s important to remember that different manufacturers can provide products of varying quality.

If you select the highest quality, it ought to resemble the goods made by German, Swiss, and Proceq manufacturers. However, the MS225, for instance, is not all that dissimilar from those materials because it is constructed of similar ones.

Hardness testers, however, can be classified more clearly based on how easy it is to read and interpret the indicators. For instance, some examples have easy-to-read diagrams that can be engraved or pasted onto the body, while others require you to consult the instructions separately (OMSh-1).

We cannot conclude that one MS model is superior to another in terms of capabilities, power, or material coverage. For instance, small, thin-walled objects are not always a good fit for a powerful device.

In other words, the set of capabilities best suited to the tasks at hand and the constraints of the structures under study should guide the decision. The comparative tables of models and product types display characteristics. We also highlight models that have electronic modules separately:

  1. They have a higher measurement range, can reach 5 … 120 MPa.
  2. They are the best in terms of accuracy and ease of working with indicators, their reading, processing.
  3. Exclude the human factor, there is no dependence on the direction of impact.

These are devices with even simpler applications that don’t compromise efficiency, and with the fewest conditions affecting the accuracy of the values.

These include:

  1. SILVER SCHMIDT;
  2. Original Schmidt Live;
  3. Digi Smidt.

Using the SilverSchmidt ST/PC type N/L, which is currently the most recent example of this type, as an example, we will discuss the benefits of electronic sclerometers:

  • smaller spread of readings, errors are lower than in products without electronics;
  • one of the main advantages is independence from the direction of impact, which completely eliminates errors associated with this, the human factor;
  • automatic assessment according to a given criterion;
  • software creates new opportunities, for example, you can assess the homogeneity of materials;
  • often it is necessary to create individual calibration curves for each specific mixture, but here such user diagrams can be loaded via software;
  • the entire possible range of work with a computer, smartphone (only for PC modification): loading, data processing, etc. d. You can enter the form factor and carbonization coefficients, which will allow you to achieve a perfectly accurate assessment of the compressive strength;
  • you can save data in memory.

HammerShmidt (OriginalShmidt NR, LR) models come in second place among electronic models in terms of easy-to-read indicators. These models have a roll of paper integrated into the case that is marked during measurements by a special scribe. There are drawbacks as well. Occasionally, albeit very infrequently, you will need to purchase special rolls of paper and insert them into the machine.

Hardness tester OMSh-1

OMSh-1:

  • a domestically produced sclerometer, perhaps, among more or less modern devices it is the oldest;
  • with measurement limits from 5 to 40 MPa (for concrete grades from M50 to M500, that is, with an impact strength of 5 … 50 MPa), with a thickness of at least 10 cm. The specified range is not very wide, which is one of the disadvantages of the model;
  • the case materials are the simplest of all possible;
  • on the case there is only a scale, there are no stickers or engravings with error tables, calibration graphs. Only one diagram is included on poor quality paper;
  • the appearance is extremely unpresentable, the protective layer that covers the metal of the case is damaged, scratches are visible.

Advantages:

  • one of the most famous in the CIS, therefore familiar;
  • this is the cheapest sclerometer;
  • the capabilities are enough for the vast majority of tasks;
  • craftsmen made an Android application for it, facilitating calculations;
  • cheapness, unpretentiousness, full repairability make the product very practical, classify it as a special category of tools that survive in any conditions.


inexpensive and in terms of measurement accuracy do not differ from foreign ones

Sclerometers in the OMSH series have a harsh, "Soviet" feel to them due to their basic materials, poor presentation, and limited functionality in the electronic OMSH-1E version (although the bare minimum is still fully presented). In addition, the product is inexpensive, modest, and useful. Users also report that it is very easy to maintain. It must be acknowledged that the OMSH-1 from the most recent batches looks fairly decent and has more complete equipment; however, these details mainly rely on the manufacturer.

We will respond to the inquiry from one of the specialist forums regarding which is preferable, OMSh-1 or MS: Another helpful tip from the same forum lists some of the drawbacks of the OMSh and some benefits of alternative models.

Model MS 225, 75, 20

Made in the CIS, this series is well-liked by local producers. Let’s examine it with the samples 225A, 75A, and 20A (Vostok-7 brand) as an example.

The situation for the models in question is better when compared to the OMSh-1 (one drawback is that there is no electronic version):

  • more compact and lightweight;
  • incomparably better materials and appearance;
  • the package includes more items and is more complete: a box, a case, a stone for grinding the surface of the material being tested and, what should be especially noted, very detailed and high-quality instructions with graphs, tables, a manual, which fit into an entire brochure;
  • more precisely, according to some minor parameters, for example, the radius of the indenter sphere is 25±1, and for OMSh-1 this figure is 25±5;
  • the error range is the same.

RGC SK 60

RGK SK sclerometer with a compressive strength range of 10 to 60 MPa for a variety of hard materials. The manufacturer, RGC (also known as RZhK or RGK), is mentioned in the name. The benefits of the RGC SK 60 strength meter are the same as those of the 225A, 75A, and 20A series mentioned above; in fact, there is very little difference in the devices’ quality or even appearance.

Design features

A cylindrical body with a thinning at one end, where the plunger (indenter) protrudes and is pressed into the object under study, is the basic design of the Schmidt hammer.

A striker on a spring is inside, striking the latter. The striker’s force can be adjusted using the flat cap with nut located at the second end. A locking button and a horizontal cutout with a slider surrounded by a scale are located on the side of the body. The electronic models’ mechanical components are comparable.

The diagram displays a more intricate device: There are Schmidt hammers (NR and LR Original Schmidt modifications) that come with a paper roll that the slider marks: The hardness tester’s electronic module design (which, as we can see, still has a mechanical foundation): The Schmidt OS-120 model, which has a unique wide sole and a plunger for lightweight concrete and mortars in their early stages of maturation, deserves special attention. It is also appropriate for soft materials like plasterboard:

Operating principle

We will go over how to use the hardness tester handbook for materials that are tested with Schmidt hammers, a very common model MS 225A, which are tested using the elastic rebound method. It should be noted that these devices have nearly identical designs, making them as similar as possible.

Instead of measuring strength, an indirect quantity is used instead, which is then translated using specific graphs. This quantity is the striker’s rebound height (abbreviated R in English for "rebound value") after the plunger is struck (within the hardness tester body). The latter is an indenter, which is simply a pin that protrudes from one end of the device and is pressed onto the surface being tested, holding it there until the slider is locked in place with a locking button.

A spring is activated when the rod is pressed against an object at a specific point in the stroke. The striker then breaks off and strikes the object, giving a very noticeable push, and both of them bounce back to a predetermined position while the slider simultaneously displays the value on the scale. In the video version, we will go into more detail about the algorithm:

You can inspect the device first. The indenter is drawn into the body if the device is locked and the indenter is retracted and fixed, as it should be when stored. Your finger will bounce back when you press it into the cylinder, causing the locking button to unlock and fully come out.

Press the plunger into the case, depress the stop button, and replace the protective lid to secure the plunger’s position. This is the proper way to store the product.

The measurement procedure is as follows: after the indenter is unlocked and smoothly pressed against the object, the user will feel the striker strike the plunger at a specific point in the stroke, and the slider will bounce to a specific value on the scale. This is our indicator.

Once the slider is fixed in place, we can more precisely determine where on the scale the hardness tester stopped. Hold the tester in this position and press the locking button.

How to use the test anvil (this method is comparable to the one that follows):

  1. Pull out the plunger, as we described above.
  2. Insert the hardness tester into the test anvil.
  3. Press smoothly with both hands, at a certain point in the stroke the striker will hit the plunger with a bounce of the pointer – hold the product in this position, not allowing the indenter to move out, and hold down the locking button, locking it in this position, fixing the position of the slider.
  4. The slider on the scale is fixed and shows the measurement result, compare with the instructions.
  5. Our device showed 20 N/mm, which corresponds to the standard according to the documents. The product can be used on other objects.

If the material being tested has an extremely rough surface, you should clean it before using the rebound sclerometers. A grinding stone is included with the device for this purpose. The readings may be impacted by minute irregularities.

The ideal horizontal-parallel position of the hammer corresponds to α=0 (angle 0°), as defined by the calibration dependencies and corrections table on the body (or in the instructions; the data is also available online). We adjust if this value—which represents the sclerometer’s position in relation to the surface—changes.

For instance, while measuring the ceiling, we add 90° (positive angle, "+") when the plunger is pointing upward, and subtract 90° (negative angle, "-") when the plunger is pointing downward (measuring the floor). The indicated signs ("+", "-") should be included in the written results exactly as they are. Measurements are made of any object in the same way. Guidelines:

  • place the hammer perpendicularly, press the indenter to the surface;
  • press smoothly until it clicks;
  • it is necessary to perform at least 10 elastic rebounds for better control, since it will be necessary to calculate the average value. When the locking key is pressed, the position of the pointer is fixed, which makes it possible to record the values. It is advisable to enter them in a table similar to the one we gave in the section on the OMSh-1 in this article;
  • after the last measurement, fix the plunger with the locking button in the position retracted into the housing, put a protective cover on it, and store the device in this state;
  • then proceed to calculating the average value of the obtained measurements and comparing it with the calibration curves.

It’s critical to comprehend the main differences between Schmidt hammer sclerometer models, such as the OMSh 1 and MS 225, and how these differences affect concrete testing when comparing them. Every model has distinct benefits when it comes to measuring the strength of concrete; these include variations in functionality, accuracy, and ease of use. Comprehending these attributes can aid in the appropriate selection of a sclerometer for particular testing requirements, guaranteeing dependable outcomes and efficient quality control in building projects.

Decoding the readings

How to interpret the outcome (the number that marked the slider’s stop):

  • you need to take the average value from 10 to 16 or from 8 to 10 (for some models, the number is recommended differently, you need to read the instructions) rebound values ​​R. GOST 22690 prescribes 9 measurements;
  • Next, you need to calculate the average value, removing 3 maximum and 3 minimum values ​​from the calculations;
  • the average rebound value Rm is compared with calibration graphs (conversion curves) and the corresponding compressive strength is found there (may have a spread from ±4 to ±8 N/mm2). In this case, it is necessary to take into account the corrections for the angle of the hardness tester (α);
  • then you can look at the tables, what strength corresponds to the brand/class of concrete, such data is abundantly available on the Internet in the public domain.

Possible malfunctions and errors in operation

The manufacturer states that the MS225 series has normal errors in strength measurements of ±10%, the RGC and ORIGINAL SCHMIDT have normal errors of ±15%, and the methodical error of models with an electronic module is up to 5% (signals – up to 0.2%).

The following are typical breakdowns: Application errors resulting in inaccurate data:

  • calibration on a test anvil was not carried out after 1000 elastic rebounds or 3 months. use, after 1 year of storage, after repair, falling from a great height;
  • failure to comply with the temperature conditions specified in the instructions;
  • do not take into account the angle corrections;
  • do not press the locking button to fix the slider in time to save the readings;
  • do not hold the device firmly with both hands;
  • take measurements during vibrations, excessive surface roughness;
  • do not take into account the carbonation of concrete, its age (there are separate rules on how to determine and make corrections for these factors).

Pros and cons of equipment

There are very few devices in their category that are not Schmidt hammers or similar in design when it comes to measuring the strength of materials using the principle of elastic rebound.

There are ball hammers made by Kashkarov and Fizdel, but they work on a different principle (plastic deformation). Instead of literally hitting the material, the steel rod that the bearing ball on the product’s head comes into contact with will deform, determining the strength of the hit.

Although there are many factors that contribute to errors, the accuracy is high.

  1. covers to a greater extent only the upper layers;
  2. increased influence of surface roughness;
  3. the greater the strength of the concrete, the more difficult it is to get a sufficiently high-quality dent.

The indentation method presents comparable drawbacks. Furthermore, there should be more frequent changes to standards. Their affordability is their sole benefit.

Benefits of Schmidt Hammer:

  • the method is extremely simple;
  • high practicality, mobility, portability (the product can be carried with you and used whenever and as much as you like, one rebound will only take a few seconds);
  • ease of use (there are no pauses between measurements), no special preparation of the device is required before use (except for the periodic checks prescribed in the instructions on the test anvil);
  • high repeatability of results, there is an error, but within an acceptable level (up to 10…15%);
  • this is a familiar device: 90% of devices for determining the strength of concrete, stone, brick, masonry mortar are Schmidt hammers;
  • models with electronic modules have independence from the direction of impact and advanced capabilities (processing results on a PC, loading individual graphs, etc. d.);
  • no need to change consumables;
  • easy to disassemble and clean, repairable.

Naturally, destructive techniques (chipping, tearing off) are slower, more labor-intensive, and more costly than the Schmidt hammer. However, they are also significantly more accurate. need large, bulky equipment and samples.

The only devices that outperform HammerShmidt in every way are ultrasonic ones, which are pricey but can also be used to detect flaws.

Drawbacks:

  • it is difficult to translate readings, you need to compare them with calibration graphs (calibration dependencies), often you have to create them individually for the object being studied;
  • the price is lower than for ultrasonic hardness testers, but still these are not cheap devices;
  • non-electronic models have a dependence on the direction of impact (the position of the hammer relative to the horizon – angle ɑ), which must be corrected;
  • internal friction increases errors;
  • due to insufficient sealing, dirt can penetrate inside, which increases deviations, there is a need for cleaning;
  • does not take into account the degree of carbonation, age of concrete and other specific characteristics, measurements do not penetrate very deep into the thickness of the object.

Average price on the market

The original Proceq SA products are the priciest, typically costing between 75,000 and 144,000 rubles.

One can purchase domestic brands at a reasonable cost:

  • OMSh-1 can be found even for 11 thousand., and on average it costs about 15 thousand.;
  • electronic OMSh-1E is already about 40 thousand.;
  • RGK: about 16 thousand.;
  • MS series: from 20 thousand.

Consider purchasing an ultrasonic hardness tester instead of an elite sclerometer from Proceq SA if you plan to purchase one, as it will be even less expensive than the majority of models from this Swiss manufacturer. Naturally, regular brand products are substantially less expensive.

For measuring concrete hardness, the Schmidt hammer sclerometer models OMSh 1, MS 225, and others each have special benefits. You can choose the model that best suits your needs for assessing the quality of concrete by being aware of the features that distinguish each of these models.

Many professionals favor the OMSh 1 because of its reputation for accuracy and usability. Because of its design, measurements can be taken quickly and accurately, which is particularly helpful on construction sites where time is of the essence.

However, the MS 225 model has extra features that can offer more in-depth understanding of the characteristics of the concrete. Because of its sophisticated capabilities, it might be better suited for in-depth investigation and study.

The level of detail required in your assessments and your unique requirements will determine which model is best. You can improve your concrete evaluation process by choosing a well-informed Schmidt hammer sclerometer by taking into account its features.

Video on the topic

Schmidt Hammer

Sclerometer. What is it? And how to use it?

ADA device Schmidt Hammer 225 concrete strength meter

Sclerometer for determining compressive strength (concrete, brick, tile) – Models 225A, 75A and 20A

SCLEROMETER FOR CONCRETE SMSh-I I SCHMIDT HAMMER | Assessing the strength of concrete and reinforced concrete structures

Schmidt hammer – testing concrete for strength without a laboratory.

Which aspect of concrete application are you most interested in?
Share to friends
Andrey Ivanov

Experienced civil engineer with more than 20 years of experience. Specializing in the construction of industrial and civil facilities. Author of many publications in professional journals.

Rate author
StroyComfort1.com
Add a comment