MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR THE PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION

OF IN-SITU CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

IN NORTH CYPRUS
A. ztemel*, Eastern Mediterranean University, North Cyprus
S. ensoy, Eastern Mediterranean University, North Cyprus
29th Conference on OUR WORLD IN CONCRETE & STRUCTURES: 25 - 26 August 2004,
Singapore

Article Online Id: 100029049

The online version of this article can be found at:
http://cipremier.com/100029049

Thisarticleisbroughttoyouwiththesupportof
SingaporeConcreteInstitute
www.scinst.org.sg

AllRightsreservedforCIPremierPTELTD
YouarenotAllowedtoredistributeorresalethearticleinanyformatwithoutwrittenapprovalof
CIPremierPTELTD
VisitOurWebsiteformoreinformation
www.cipremier.com

29th Conference on OUR WORLD IN CONCRETE & STRUCTURES: 25 - 26 August 2004, Singapore

MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR THE PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION

OF IN-SITU CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

IN NORTH CYPRUS

A. Oztemel*, Eastern Mediterranean University, North Cyprus

S. $ensoy, Eastern Mediterranean University, North Cyprus

Abstract

In seismic evaluation of existing RC buildings, carrying out in-situ tests for determining
the compressive strength of concrete is a necessity while examining the behaviour and
condition of structural components. However, when assessing a huge population over the
existing building stock, it becomes uneconomical and waste of time to perform such in-situ
tests on buildings having similar structural properties and construction habits. Therefore, a
significant demand propagates on developing a simple mathematical description in order to
guess accurately the parameter of in-situ compressive strength of concrete, Ie' for the
building population settled in the region. In this study, a mathematical model for the
probability distribution of Ie in North Cyprus is evaluated in stochastic terms by using the
records of measured test data 0 n hundreds 0 f samples 0 btained from many construction
sites over a considerable period of time. For this purpose, the data, enduring the last 14-year
records (1990-2004), on tested samples at different ages and of different concrete classes
gathered from 82 different sites are treated. The compiled data on Ie are then decomposed
to equivalent 28-day strength values by adapting nonlinear regression relations those
indicating the strength development attitude for each concrete class in time. In compliance
with the extended range of data over 28-day compressive strength, a lognormal probability
distribution model of in-situ compressive strength of concrete for the existing buildings is
developed with the prescribed restrictions for satisfying the realism on the bounds of random
sampling. Hence, it is expected that the present study would provide a reliable tool for
seismic fragility assessment of the huge RC building stock in North Cyprus.
Keywords: RC buildings, seismic evaluation, in-situ compressive strength, strength development,
probability distribution, random sampling

1. Introduction
The quality and control 0 ver the production 0 f concrete have significant influence 0 n both the
strength and durability aspects those of which entirely affect the further performances of as-built
structures against the seismic hazards. Past earthquake events have put forward the fact that one of
the main reasons of unintended failure of RC buildings is the lack of material quality, which usually
occurs inconsistently with the design attitude itself. In North Cyprus, there exist a huge low-to-mid rise
RC building population that carries a resembling seismic risk, where insufficient controlling sequence
over the construction sites was handled until today, [1]. This situation would bring a necessity on
determining the extended range of uncertainty in material properties of existing buildings in case of
regional seismic fragility assessment. Reasonably, the primal uncertainty in material properties of RC
buildings is characterized by the variability in properties of concrete, rather than of structural steel or

387

masonry infill units where they are fabricated generally on the sense of unique production. Therefore,
it ensures the logic on investigating the range of uncertainty in properties of structural concrete and
hence the main parameter, in-situ compressive strength, in the region of aspect.
On the other hand, for seismic assessment of an individual building it is strictly required to perform
several in-situ tests at different locations and for different structural components in order to exhibit the
most accurate material information, [2,3]. However, when intended for huge populations, such
processes turn out to be uneconomical and also waste of time, where in cases it would additionally
require official permission individually from the owner of each building. As this because, it is required
to rely on a simple and general definition which would be calibrated from the experimental information.
Reasonably, such a definition shall reflect the trends of regional construction habits in order to guess
the tendency on properties of produced concrete, in other words the in-situ compressive strength.
In North Cyprus, during the past decades, the most usual attitude is to produce concrete on site
before cast in place. In tied, authors believe that the sort of concrete production and placement may
result in an expected augmentation of variability in properties of structural concrete, unless it is taken
under control. Throughout 1986 and 1987, an individual study has been performed by confirming this
issue in order to assess the general quality of concrete produced on site by visiting 84 different
construction sites around North Cyprus, [4]. For the general test population (15 cm cube samples), it
is found that the coefficient of variation of the 28-day mean compressive strength was as high as 51.6
%, where the characteristic compressive strength, fck' and the observed mean compressive strength,

fern' for the population was 16 MPa and 15.17 MPa, respectively. Those results pointed out a
standard deviation of 7.83 MPa. In the same study, it was also observed that the control on quality of
concrete production was handling roughly only for 30% of sites. Also, there was no control on
concrete produced and even on the construction itself at the remaining sites. Although after 1998 the
usage of ready-mixed concrete started to become widespread, which would hopefully reduce the
variability in strength of concrete, this issue has not been carried out in wide ranges.
As a consequence, in this study, it is aimed to investigate and utilize the most recent data on the
quality and strength properties of concrete produced on site for providing a reliable tool on seismic
fragility assessment of existing RC buildings in North Cyprus. Hence, the uncertainty in concrete
properties is decided to be reflected as a random variable in terms of the parameter, in-situ
compressive strength of concrete, fe' Accordingly, a mathematical model for the probability
distribution of that parameter is aimed and evaluated by using the records (1990-2004) of measured
test data (held in materials laboratory of Eastern Mediterranean University) on compressive strength
of concrete specimens at different ages. The test specimens were continuously obtained from many
different construction sites around North Cyprus during this period of time. Furthermore, for satisfying
the realism on the bounds of random sampling from the proposed probabilistic model, the limitations
that shall be given to extend over the generalized standard deviation of the expected in-situ
compressive strength is defined.

2. Properties of concrete
In North Cyprus, the general precautions for the lifetime requirements of concrete are usually
approved according to Turkish Standards. It is enforced by the local jurisdictions to use Normal
Portland Cement 0 r any equivalent cement type ina ccordance with T S 1 9, [5]. Table 1 states the
compressive and tensile strengths for different types of Portland cement at 3, 7 and 28 days
according to TS 19, where NPC 350 is the normal strength, YPC 500 is the high strength and IPC 600
is the rapid hardening Portland cement, respectively. The required a mount 0 f cement within a unit
volume of concrete is usually ranges between 250-400 kg/m 2 in usage.

Compressive Strength (MPa)

Cement
Type

Tensile Strength (MPa)

3 days

7 days

28 days

3 days

7 days

28 days

NPC 350

30

35

2.2

2.8

YPC 500

30

40

50

2.3

2.7

3.0

IPC 600

40

50

60

2.5

3.0

3.5

Table 1. Compressive and tensile strength of Portland cement.

388

The coarse and fine a ggregates are generally obtained from the crushed stone. However until
1992, it was so widespread to use gravel and sand in production of concrete those were commonly
supplied from sea or brook shores. From that time on, it was legalized by local jurisdictions to
abandon the extraction of aggregates from sea and brook shores, whereas the adverse effects of this
sort of aggregate using process have revealed later on.
The general requirements for concrete and ready mixed concrete are approved according to TS
11222, (6) . Accordingly, 28-day compressive strengths of cylindrical specimens having diameter and
height of 15 and 30 cm respectively for different classes of structural concrete are tabulated in Table
2. After 2000, the use of C14 concrete for primary structural components has been dismissed and
C18 concrete has been included by TS 500, (7].

Characteristic
Strength.

Concrete Class

frk

Mean Strength.

fem

(MPa)

(MPa)

Minimum Strength
Required (Field),

f:m

(MPa)

Minimum Mean
Strength Required
(Field).

f:m

C14
C16

14
16

18
20

11
13

17

C18
C20
C25
C30
C35

18
20
25
30
35

26
31
36
43

14
17
22
27
32

22
23
28
33
38

(MPa)

19

Table 2. 28-day cylinder compressive strengths of concrete classes .

3. Data Review
The data was prepared for the tested 15 and 20 cm cubes and 15-30 cm cylinder specimens with
a total of 3563 obtained from 82 different construction sites for the relevant 14-year period. In general,
the sampling of fresh concrete has been handled in direct with the methods described in TS 2940, [8],
and the standard compression tests were performed by regarding TS 3114, [9). Usually, most of the
samples have been stored in laboratory according to the rules stated by TS 3068, (10], and some of
them were stored by the relevant firms until the specified days of testing . The strength values were
variously recorded from tested 15-30 cm cylinder specimens and also from the tested 15 cm and 20
cm cube specimens . All the records obtained for tested cube specimens are approximated to their
equivalent cylinder strengths by considering that the strength values read from cube specimens are
expected to be greater than the standard cylinder (15-30 cm) specimen strengths in the range of 15
% to 25 % for normal weight concrete, [11) . Therefore, the measured 15 cm and 20 cm cube
specimen strength values were decreased by the amounts of 20 % and 15 % respectively to
approximate the expected standard cylinder compressive strengths.
The whole data available for different concrete classes are summarized in Table 3 by indicating
the information over the general test population considered through the modelling phase. It can be
verified that the majority of test data, 91.1%, were recorded for normal strength type concrete (C14,
C16, C20 and C25), which is a fairly expected issue for the overall building population within the
region of aspect. Besides those, the measured data from 82 different fields would correspond at least
to 150 buildings of the type under interest. Additionally, it should also be mentioned that the
specimens of distinct concrete classes (having different characteristic compressive strength) are
gathered from individual construction fields.
Concrete Class

No. of Construction Sites

No. of Test Specimens Obtained

C14
C16
C20
C25
C30
C35
Total

28
19
48
6
6
6
82

399
222
2345
281
133
183
3563

Table 3. General infonmation over the test population considered in modelling phase.

389

4. Equivalent 28-Day Compressive Strength

As the whole discussion relies on 28-day compressive strength, which is a fundamental measure
on strength regulations of concrete, an attempt of converting the extended range of records on
fe obtained for the tested concrete specimens at various ages is handled. For this purpose, the range
of records on

f e for distinct classes of concrete are complied and subjected to nonlinear regression

analysis in order to approximate the most probable mathematical expressions those would represent
the t rends of individual strength development attitudes. Those trends of real compressive strength,
f ei' versus time for each concrete class are then approximated by logarithmic functions, Equation (1).
The strength development attitude of the data provided on
Figures 1-6.
In Equations (1.a-f),

1 is

fei fc:>r each concrete class is illustrated in

fel (I) is a

the time variable in days and

1-dependent

function

representing the trend of approximated compressive strength for the ith class of concrete. Although,
the coefficients of determination, R2 values, for the approximated curves are rather low, this would not
create an improper event as it is because of the high relative dispersion of real data records on f ei '
C14

35 , . - -

" _ ..___._________ C1~.... _.. __.._ _ _.........._ ___,

"'-----'

R2 =0,1919

R'; 0.2397 ,
::

30

~
a.c

25

20

15

10

a;

..

.3

5
o~

14

21

28

35

42

49

56 63

70

77

84

91

98 105

______________________________

,t

11

35

2fI

69

56

Ii)

10

91

&4

!II

las

Tim. (doys)

Figure 2. Strength development for C16 data.

Figure 1. Strength development for C14 data.

C25

C20

60 , -- - - -- -- -- -- - - -- - - -- -- - - - - - - - - ,
R' =0 ,2531

'l

60

'l

50

R': 0,19851

50

!.

!.

;. 40

E 40

iii

'"c

30

30

~a.

20

a.

14

21

28 35

42

49 56 63

70

84

91

10

98 105

14

21

28 35

Time (days)

8530

..

65
60

70 77

84

91 98 lOS

_-_._-_._...._. __.....__
C35

__

.. ........ .... ..------,

............ _.. _

R'

=0.4325

'l

55
50
.t: 45
0.
c 40
f
iii 35
30

40

!.

35
30

iii 25

-:!~

63

Figure 4. Strength development for C25 data.

~,------------------------------,
R' = 0.3591 1
45

!.
.t:
r.

49 5 6

Time (days)

Figure 3. Strength development for C20 data.

:.

42

.~

20

15

a.

~ 10

20
15
10

14

21

28

35 42

49 56

63 70

77

84

91 98 lOS

Time (days)

14

21

28

35

42

49

56 63

70

77

84

91

98 lOS

Tlmo (days)

Figure 6. Strength development for C35 data.

Figure 5. Strength development for C30 data.

390

3 .7412.ln(t)+3 .3036

Uck= 14 MPa )
Uck = 16 MPa )
: C 20 Uck = 20 MPa )
: C 25 UCk = 25 MPa )
:C30 Uck =30 MPa)
: C35 Uck = 35 MPa )
: CI4

4 . 1581.ln(t)+6.8143

(1.a)
(1 .b)
(1 .c)
(1 .d)
(1 .e)
(1 .f)

: CI6

5.8598.ln(t)+7.1771
5.0117.ln(t)+12 .877
6.1236.ln(t)+11 .766
12 .5470 . ln(t)+0 .7151

By using the logarithmic functions enumerated in Equations (1 .a-f), the percent strength
development normalized with the approximated 28-day compressive strength for each concrete class
has been evaluated as shown in Figure 7.

i.CI2. '

Consequently, the equivalent 28-day compressive strength,

evaluated for the (h class of

concrete and at the relevant age of testing , t lest ' is expressed as below, Equation (2) .

fci. fci(1 =28)

fci (t=lreJ

(2)

Strength Development Normalized with

Approximated 28day Strength (%)

. .. ... . C14
- C16

--C20
--C25
--C30

----C35

"

Time(~)

28

21

Figure 7. Strength development attitude (%) .

5. Development of the model

The equivalent 28-day compressive strength values of each data on f Ci are evaluated for the
distinct concrete classes by adapting Equation (2). The calculated mean fem;' standard deviation,
S xc, ' coefficient of variation, COV, and the percent deviation from f ck for the ith class of concrete are
tabulated in Table 4. The percent deviation from fek might be regarded to represent a margin for the
quality of structural concrete produced on site.

Concrete Class

Mean (MPa)

C14
15.820
C16
20.705
C20
26.696
29.578
C25
32.171
C30
42.535
C35
Weighted Average:

Standard Deviation (MPa)

COV

4.984
6.584
7.271
5.966
5.874
6.832
6.794

0.315
0.318
0.272
0.202
0.183
0.161

Percent Deviation
[1-(fcm/fck)]x100
13.000
29.406
33.480
18.312
7.237
21.529
28.143

Table 4. Obtained mean, standard deviation, COY and percent deviation for distinct concrete classes.

It can be verified from Table 4 that distinct values of standard deviation and percent deviation
from the characteristic compressive strength varies from 4.98 MPa to 7.27 MPa and 13.00 % to 33.48

391

%, respectively. On the other hand , to arrive with a generalized mathematical definition for in-situ
concrete compressive strength and to simplify the ongoing process, following assumptions have been
made.
i. Standard deviation from the mean compressive strength will not differ for different concrete
classes under perfectly simi lar conditions.
ii. Percent deviation from the characteristic compressive strength will not differ for different
concrete classes under perfectly similar conditions.

In this respect, the generalized values of standard deviation, S xe' and the percent deviation from
the characteristic value are evaluated by taking the weighted averages of corresponding distinct
values by preserving the total number of specimens tested for each concrete class as shown in Table
4. In light of these, the expected value of in-situ concrete compressive strength, E{/J , and the
generalized standard deviation for the relevant building population in terms of
Equation (3) , where,

are defined by

CD is the coefficient of percent deviation from the characteristic strength value.

E (Ie )= C D f ek
S xc = 6.794
CD

Simply, S xc and

l ek

CD

(MPa)
(MPa )

(3)

=1 .28143

are evaluated as given below, Equations (4) and (5) , where n si is the total

number of tested specimens for the i

CD

1h

class of concrete.

L~ ' EVem ,)
3563

(4)

f ek

(5)

s xc ="~
S xc,
~ 3563
Although the coefficient
standard deviation values of

CD has itself a variation , regarding this issue would led to different

I e for each concrete class, as I e =CDI Ck ' under constant values of

l ek; VAR(/e)=VAR{cD)/ek 2 . As this consumption will

not be compatible with the initial assumption

that was made for a unique standard deviation value in generalized concrete compressive strength
distribution, it is not considered in further.

Ie is modeled
Ie :LN{1.28143 l ek ,6.794) in MPa,
Consequently,

as

logarithmic

where;

0 < Ie < 00 .

normal

random

variable

such

that;

The lognormal mean , A.e , and standard

deviation , ~e ' are given in Equations (6) and (7) below:

(6)

In(I+~J
fek
Ae = In (1.28143

1 ( 1 + -28.11
f ek )- zln
- 2
fek

(7)

Hence, the probability density function (PDF) of the general model for

I e in

terms of

l ek

is given

by Equation (8) .

(8)

The proposed model is shown in Figure 8 below. It can be verified that the probability distribution
function is right-skewed. Additionally, it shall be mentioned that the proposed density function can only
be used for the existing buildings in North Cyprus, unless it is calibrated adequately for other
purposes.

392

Logarithmic Normal Distrihution Model for

Uncertainty in Concrete Com presslve Strength

...

-- - -I - -

- t- -t-- ----

fc

ac' S,

t----;~-t -~-

ac' S,

Com pre S S i ve SIre n g t h ( M P a )

Figure 8. Proposed mathematical model for

Ie.

In above illustration, a e is the constant that identifies the bounds of standard deviation during the
sampling process that would be handled before the modeling phase of the material behavior and
analysis.
The reasons of selecting a lognormal distribution for the modelling of Ie are summarized below:
i.

The value of random variable

Ie is positive, 0 < Ie< 00 .

ii.

Alternatively, adapting a Gaussian normal distribution may not be appropriate for concrete
classes having low characteristic compressive strength values (especially for C14) with
the specified standard deviation.
iii. In order to consider implicitly the strength variations of concrete with the change of time.
The proposed model for Ie has been compared with the measured field data for various
characteristic strength values within the bounds of one-standard deviation from their 28-day mean
compressive strengths, l em' as shown in Figure 9. It can be verified that the proposed model fits
better for normal strength concrete classes than higher strength concrete classes. In case the normal
strength concrete classes are the most favorable ones in design of low-to-mid rise RC buildings those
covering the widest range in North Cyprus.
fe modet : fem

50

I ...

.. 30

Q.

t .

50

<0

= 1.28143 fek st.dev = 6.794 MPa

Propose d model with bounds of

,~,o~ . .r. ;'".m'"~~r'""'"T

r 1 ... ..

20

1.-

,0

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

J.4

36

38

Characteristic Compreslive Silangth (MPa)

Figure 9. Comparison of proposed model with the field data for different concrete classes.

6. Determination of bounds of random sampling (Value of a e )

Ie' it might be unrealistic to encounter the extreme

distribution while sampling is handled. Therefore, the possible Ie values to

Regarding the proposed stochastic model for

values of the prescribed

be sampled for the building population should be restricted within a proper bound before analysis,
which would also be appropriate for the observed conditions from various construction sites. In this

393

respect, it is aimed to limit the bounds of random sampling for

each turn of the analysis, where the value of

ae

Ie

within the range of

" a e S xc"

in

is to be evaluated from the field data.

The data gathered from the materials laboratory of Eastern Mediterranean University have been
utilized to determine the value of

ae .

For this purpose, some measures have been repeated over

data f or each construction site separately. The deviation of calculated mean concrete compressive
strength,

lem' for each site from the proposed expectation value, 1.28143 Irk' by considering distinct

concrete classes have been evaluated. In order to observe the dispersion of this deviation from the
proposed ideal mean, the calculated difference has been normalized with the proposed standard
deviation of 6.794 MPa as expressed in Equation (9). This value is termed as
individual construction site. Thus, the various values of

a ei

a ei

which is for an

for each constriction site have been

evaluated and reflected on Figure 10 as the measured dispersions from the proposed ideal mean
considering the distinct concrete classes.

ci

-1.28143

em;

Ick

(9)

6.794

As a result, it can be verified that the individual values of aci varies between 2 with a
calculated maximum of "1.971", Figure 10. Hence, the general a e value is proposed to be taken as

2 in which it also preserves the field data. Properly, the bounds of the proposed lognormal
distribution for

Ie

in random sampling process are enhanced to be 2 S xc

Dispersion ot

Oel

...

trom the Proposed Ideal fv1ean

~==~
i

;
r-~~r----+------~----~------------_I

-,

-2

-3 -.--f.- .. -iii -- - ....:iii--------2 S- - -.. --:iii... ...---. :is --- - -

CharscterisUc Corrpresslve Strength

(~)

Figure 10. Dispersion of a ci from the proposed ideal mean for different concrete classes.

7. Conclusions
In this paper, it is aimed to develop a mathematical model for the probability distribution of in-situ
concrete compressive strength, which would be reasonable for the existing RC building stock in North
Cyprus. For this purpose, 14-year records of tested specimens those were obtained from 82 different
construction sites around the region are utilized. An expression for the equivalent 28-day compressive
strength is exposed in order to extend the range of data to be considered in deriving the stochastic
model. In this respect, logarithmic relations are adapted those reflecting the trend of compressive
strength versus time for distinct concrete classes. Consequently, the in-situ compressive strength of
concrete is modelled as a lognormal random variable having the mean value in terms of characteristic
strength,

1.28143.fek' and the standard deviation of 6.794 M Pa. It is observed that the proposed

ideal mean for the in-situ compressive strength satisfies the minimum required compressive strength
at the field obligated by the relevant standard, [6], for lek 2: 14 MPa. Furthermore, the proposed value
of generalized standard deviation is c lose to the value obtained previously by [4]. Finally, available
records from the various construction sites are reassessed in order to identify the bounds of random
sampling over the implemented probability density function. The results figured out that the most
compatible margin is about 2 standard deviation. Thus, it is expected that the presented model
would provide a reliable tool for further seismic fragility assessment of the RC building population in
North Cyprus under the verified condition of structural concrete produced on site.

394

References
[1] Ozbilen, M., "Inadequate Applications of Construction Industry in North Cyprus and
Recommendations", MSc Thesis, Eastern Mediterranean University, North Cyprus, 2004 .
[2] FEMA 273, "Handbook for the Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings - NEHRP', Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Washington D.C., 1997.
[3] FEMA 356, "Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings", American
Society of Civil Engineers - Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington D.C., 2000.
[4] Celik, T., "Quality of Concrete in TRNC", Proceedings of the 1 51 Congress on Concrete,
KTMMOB, Nicosia, 1990.
[5] TS 19, "Portland Cements", Institute of Turkish Standards, Ankara, 1978.
[6] TS 11222, "Concrete - Ready Mixed Concrete ", Institute of Turkish Standards, Ankara, 1994.
[7] TS 500, "Requirements for Design and Construction of Reinforced Concrete Structures "
Institute of Turkish Standards, Ankara, 2000.
[8] TS 2940, "Methods of Sampling Fresh Concrete", Institute of Turkish Standards, Ankara, 1978.
[9] TS 3114, "Determination of Compressive Strength of Concrete Specimens ", Institute of Turkish
Standards, Ankara, 1990.
[10] TS 3068, "Making and Curing Concrete Test Specimens in the Laboratory ", Institute of Turkish
Standards, Ankara, 1978.
[11] Neville, A.M., "Properties of Concrete", Fourth Edition, Prentice Hall, England, 2002 .

395