Authors
Francisco Javier Benito Saorín; Isabel Miñano Belmonte; Carlos Parra Costa; Carlos Rodríguez López; Manuel Valcuende Payá.
Abstract
The paper compares three ways to assess architectural concrete surface quality: (i) the manual Quality Surface Index (QSI) grouping pores by diameter, (ii) the visual CIB W29 template method, and (iii) digital image processing (ImageJ). Applied to three walls (M-1, M-2, M-3) at 3 m viewing distance, the three approaches delivered consistent rankings; e.g., ImageJ quantified pore-affected area as ~1.31% (M-1), 1.72% (M-2), and 2.75% (M-3). Results validate QSI and digital analysis as practical, more objective complements to CIB W29, enabling quick on-site verification and potential app-based workflows.
Type of publication
Journal paper.
Publisher
Sustainability (MDPI), 10(4):931; published 23 March 2018.
DOI
10.3390/su10040931.
