ACI MATERIALS JOURNAL

Title no. 107-M55

TECHNICAL PAPER

Suitability of Various Measurement Techniques for Assessing Corrosion in Cracked Concrete

by Mike B. Otieno, Mark G. Alexander, and Hans D. Beushausen
This paper presents a critical evaluation of results from three corrosion assessment methods used in an experimental study to investigate the influence of cracks on the rate of chloride-induced corrosion. The objective was to determine the suitability and reliability of the corrosion assessment methods for application in cracked concrete. Beam specimens (100 x 100 x 500 mm [3.9 x 3.9 x 19.7 in.]) with crack widths of 0.7 and 0.4 mm (0.028 and 0.016 in.), as well as incipient cracks, were made using two binder types (100% CEM I ordinary portland cement [OPC]) and 50/50 OPC/ slag blend), two water-binder ratios (w/b) (0.40 and 0.55) and a constant cover of 40 mm (1.6 in.) to steel reinforcing. The specimens were subjected to repeated cycles of 3-day wetting with 5% NaCl, and 4-day air drying for 32 weeks. Half-cell potential (HCP), resistivity (Wenner probe), and corrosion rate (coulostatic) measurements were taken at the end of each 3-day wetting period. Chloride conductivity tests were also performed on companion cube specimens at 28 and 90 days. No significant differences in resistivity values were noted between cracked and uncracked specimens, despite the fact that the corrosion rate increased with increasing crack width. The insensitivity of resistivity measurements to the presence of cracks was attributed to the fact that measurements were taken after every 3-day wetting period, when the specimens would have been saturated with salt solution. The chloride conductivity and resistivity measurements gave a similar indication of the corrosion rates. HCP and corrosion rate measurements showed a good correlation, and they gave a clear indication of corrosion in cracked reinforced concrete (RC) specimens, although for practical applications, HCP measurements need to be complemented with other corrosion assessment techniques. For the resistivity assessment techniquein addition to concrete quality and magnitude of resistivitycorrection factors are required to relate the resistivity of uncracked concrete to corrosion characteristics of cracked concrete. A methodology for the application of correction factors is proposed.
Keywords: chloride-induced corrosion; corrosion assessment; cracked concrete; nondestructive testing.

resistivity, half-cell potential, and coulostatic corrosion rate measurements), which helps to gauge their usefulness for assessing chloride-induced corrosion in cracked concrete. The results reported in this paper are part of a study.5 Concrete resistivity as corrosion indicator Resistivity is a geometry-independent material property that describes the electrical resistance of a material6 and is essentially related to the penetrability of fluids and movement of ions through porous materials such as concrete.7 It has a major influence on both the initiation and propagation of reinforcement corrosion.1,8,9 Recently, there has been an increase in the number of studies aimed at assessing the suitability of using the electrical resistivity of concrete to indirectly evaluate corrosion activity and hence predict the service life of RC structures.8,10,11 These studies have shown that resistivity has the potential of becoming a rapid durability indicator of concrete for both laboratory and field applications. For example, electrical resistivity (or its inverse, conductivity) has been used to determine corrosion rates in concrete12,13 and has the potential for assessing carbonation and chloride ingress.14 Other studies have shown that the corrosion rate is inversely proportional to concrete resistivity or directly proportional to its conductivity.15 More studies are still required to fully establish the merits and demerits of adopting concrete resistivity as a potential durability indicator. Studies such as the one presented in this paper will help to achieve this objective. No generally accepted rules exist for relating concrete resistivity to the corrosion rate. The link between the two is dependent on the specific concrete and must be established for every individual concrete because of the varying ion components within each concrete.8 The common procedure is to interpret the resistivity measurements to represent the likelihood or severity of corrosion activity using relationships such as the one proposed by Andrade and Alonso16 where >100 kcm (40 kin.) is a very low corrosion rate, 50 to 100 kcm (20 to 40 kin.) is a low-to-moderate corrosion rate, 10 to 50 kcm (4 to 20 kin.) is a moderate-to-high corrosion rate, and <10 kcm (4 kin.) is resistivity and is not the controlling parameter. A recent study by Scott and Alexander1 confirmed that concrete resistivity varies with binder typeother factors such as water-binder ratio (w/b) being constant. Blended cements generally have higher concrete resistivities compared to ordinary portland cement (OPC). Consequently, these authors stated that
ACI Materials Journal, V. 107, No. 5, September-October 2010. MS No. M-2009-121.R4 received December 7, 2009, and reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright 2010, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion including authors closure, if any, will be published in the July-August 2011 ACI Materials Journal if the discussion is received by April 1, 2011.

INTRODUCTION While nondestructive test (NDT) methods are useful for corrosion assessment in reinforced concrete (RC) structures, they may fail to accurately predict the behavior and/or performance of cracked RC structures. The influence of cracks on reinforcement corrosion in RC has received much attention and is documented in literature1-4 but is often ignored despite the fact that the majority of in-service concrete is cracked. There is limited literature on the use of NDT to assess corrosion in cracked concrete. Furthermore, the reliability of the results obtained from these test methods, especially for use as input parameters in service-life prediction models, is not guaranteed. Despite the disadvantages associated with these methods, they have proven to be indispensable for both laboratory and field applications mainly because they are relatively inexpensive, fast, and reasonably reliable. This paper compares the results of three NDT methods (concrete ACI Materials Journal/September-October 2010

481

ACI Student member Mike B. Otieno is a PhD Candidate at the University of Cape Town (UCT). He received his MSc (Eng) and BSc (Eng) degrees from UCT, Rondebosch, South Africa, and the University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya, respectively. His research interests include concrete durability, service-life prediction, and repair and rehabilitation of concrete structures. ACI member Mark G. Alexander is a Professor of civil engineering at UCT. He received his BSc (Eng), MSc (Eng), and PhD degrees from the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa. His research interests include cement and concrete materials, with experience in fundamental and applied research relating to design and construction. Hans D. Beushausen is a Senior Lecturer for Structural Engineering and Concrete Materials Technology. He received his PhD at UCT. His research interests include durability and repair of concrete and concrete structures.

Table 1Mixture proportions

Material, kg/m3 OPC Corex slag Sand Stone, 19 mm (0.75 in.) Water content w/b 28-day strength, MPa
*

100% OPC PC-40 PC-55 463 749 1040 185 0.40 50 (1.3*) 336 855 1040 185 0.55 32 (2.1*)

50/50 OPC/GGCS SL-40 SL-55 231 231 749 1040 185 0.40 52 (0.5*) 168 168 855 1040 185 0.55 33 (2.1*)

Influence of cracking on corrosion rate There is no general agreement on the influence of cracks on corrosion initiation and its propagation. The general consensus is that cracks can accelerate the rate of corrosion in RC structures and, hence, shorten their service life.1-3 In most instances, the corrosion of steel in cracked concrete is relatively localized, as opposed to being distributed over the steel surface area as in uncracked concrete. The common procedure with most test methods (such as LPR methods), however, is to obtain an averaged corrosion rate over the whole steel surface area. The ultimate outcome is an underestimation of the localized corrosion rate and presents a nonconservative residual service-life estimate of the RC structure. To overcome this problem, either more realistic NDT methods are required or an integrated approach to corrosion assessment analysis and interpretation of results from various test methods may be taken. Therefore, the need for relevant measurement techniques (and long-term experience) to facilitate accurate prediction of service life due to degradation by corrosion of steel in cracked concrete needs to be emphasized. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE There are various NDT techniques that can be used to either predict or quantify corrosion activity in RC structures. The results of these tests may be used as input parameters in service-life prediction models or in the development of repair and maintenance strategies of the structures. For a successful service-life prediction and development of these strategies, it is important that the data used is reliable in the sense that they portray a true picture of the condition or health of the RC structure. In this regard, factors such as the presence of cracks that may influence the corrosion assessment results must be taken into consideration. It is against this background that this paper presents a critical comparison of the results of various NDT techniques used in a study aimed at assessing the influence of cracking on corrosion. EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS The suitability of three corrosion assessment techniques (coulostatic corrosion rate measurement, concrete resistivity, and half-cell potential measurements) was evaluated using results from an experimental program designed to investigate the effects of cracking, reloading, and concrete quality (binder type and w/b) on chloride-induced corrosion propagation. The reader is referred to Reference 5 for more details on the study. The data presented herein are limited to the scope of this paper. Beam specimens (100 x 100 x 500 mm [3.9 x 3.9 x 19.7 in.]) with varying binder types and w/b were used. Four concrete mixtures were made using two w/b (0.40 and 0.55) and two binder types (OPC and 50/50 OPC/ ground-granulated Corex slag [GGCS]) (Table 1). (Corex slag is a byproduct of the direct reduction iron manufacturing process. It is a latent hydraulic binder containing the same oxides as ordinary blast-furnace slag and OPC, but in different proportions. It is also usually ground more finely [310 m2/kg (1514 ft2/lb) Blaine] than blast-furnace slag22). For each binder type, crack width, and w/b, three beam specimens were cast, resulting in a total of 48 specimens. The specimens comprised both uncracked and cracked beams. Crack widths were set at 0.7 and 0.4 mm (0.028 and 0.016 in.), as well as incipient cracks. Uncracked specimens were used as a reference. The incipient-cracked specimens were included to investigate the effect of very small crack widths in RC structures and how these affect corrosion ACI Materials Journal/September-October 2010

Standard deviation. Note: 1 kg/m3 = 0.0624 lb/ft3; 1 MPa = 0.145 ksi.

the corrosion rate in blended cement concretes is governed mainly by the high concrete resistivity, whereas in OPC concretes, it is governed by the availability of oxygen (that is, cathodic-controlled) and, consequently, by cover depth. The results of such studies must therefore be taken into consideration when interpreting resistivity results for different concrete types. It is also important to note that resistivity and corrosion rate are linked by permeability, which is dependent on the concrete and must be established for every individual concrete.11 Half-cell potential as corrosion indicator Half-cell potential measurement is an electrochemical corrosion assessment method (also referred to as open circuit or corrosion potential). It is one of the most widely used NDT methods for the assessment of corrosion in RC structures. The principle of this method is based on the potential difference between the reinforcement and a reference electrode in the form of a half cell.17 The technique is useful because it can be used to evaluate the probability of corrosion before damage is evident on the surface of an RC structure following guidelines such as those presented in ASTM C876-9118 (with respect to Ag/AgCl electrode), where > 106 mV (low [10%] risk of corrosion), 106 to 256 mV (indeterminate corrosion risk), < 256 mV (high [> 90%] risk of corrosion), and < 406 mV (severe corrosion). These limits must be applied carefully because while valid for laboratory specimens, they may not be applicable for field concretes.19 Corrosion rate measurement using LPR The linear polarization resistance (LPR) method is another NDT method used to assess corrosion in RC structures. LPR methods such as the coulostatic, galvanostatic, and potentiostatic techniques have been well developed over the years for both field and laboratory applications and are well covered in the literature.20,21 482

initiation and propagation. The 0.4 mm (0.016 in.) cracks were selected based on results of exposure tests and site inspections, which have shown that within a common range of crack widths (up to 0.4 mm [0.016 in.]23), the influence of transverse cracks on the corrosion rate of steel bars is relatively small.24 Therefore, 0.4 mm (0.016 in.) crack width is generally taken as the threshold crack width, below which corrosion may proceed similar to uncracked concrete. The 0.7 mm (0.028 in.) crack width was selected to simulate adverse crack widths, which are rarely encountered, but may pose a severe localized corrosion threat to the RC structure. High-yield, 10 mm (0.4 in.) diameter deformed steel reinforcement bars (fy 550 MPa [80 ksi]) were used, with a constant clear concrete cover of 40 mm (1.6 in.). Prior to casting, the bars were wire-brushed to remove mill scale. A wire was attached to one end, and both ends were epoxy-coated to provide an effective exposed surface area of approximately 94 cm2 (14.6 in.2). Just before casting, the bars were degreased with acetone. A 10 x 100 mm (0.4 x 4 in.) diameter long stainless steel bar was placed in each concrete beam during casting (Fig. 1) to act as a counter electrode for corrosion rate measurements using the coulostatic technique.20,25,26 A 1.0 mm (0.04 in.) thick x 10 mm (0.4 in.) deep polyvinyl chloride (PVC) notch-former was placed, transverse to the beam longitudinal axis, at the center of each beam during casting to induce a central crack during the precracking operation. Companion cube specimens measuring 100 x 100 x 100 mm (4 x 4 x 4 in.)were also cast during casting of the beam specimens for the purposes of obtaining the 28-day compressive strength and the 28- and 90-day chloride conductivity indexes. The specimens were cured under water (23 2C [73.4 35.6F]) for 28 days and air dried for 10 days before precracking under three-point flexural loading. The incipient cracks were produced by application of three-point loading until a crack was visually detected using a hand-held lens, followed by unloading. All of the incipient cracks closed after unloading and were only visible using a hand-held lens. The 0.4 and 0.7 mm (0.016 and 0.028 in.) crack widths were maintained using the loading rig shown in Fig. 1 and were corroded under sustained loads. The equivalent sustained steel stresses (as a percentage with respect to yield stress, fy 550 MPa [80 ksi]) in the (incipient crack, 0.4 and 0.7 mm [0.016 and 0.028 in.]) cracked specimens were as follows: PC-40 (24, 54, and 59), PC-55 (23, 52, and 55), SL-40 (24, 53, and 57), and SL-55 (22, 51, and 56). Crack widths were measured using a crack width microscope (magnification 40). Specimen monitoring The specimens were subjected to repeated cycles of 3-day ponding with a 5% NaCl solution followed by 4-day air drying for a period of 32 weeks. To help ensure that the crack widths remained constant, DEMEC studs were placed on the concrete surface across the crack. The distance between the studs was monitored weekly using a 100 mm (4 in.) DEMEC gauge. The loading rig was then used to adjust the crack widths (via the nuts) as required. The specimens were monitored weekly (at the end of the 3-day wetting period) for half-cell potentials, corrosion rate, and concrete resistivity. Corrosion rate measurements The coulostatic technique was used to monitor corrosion rate. This is a galvanostatic LPR technique, which measures the potential decay after a small fixed current (I) is applied to the reinforcing steel for a known duration in the order of ACI Materials Journal/September-October 2010

Fig. 1Experimental beam loading setup. (Note: All dimensions in mm; not to scale; 1 in. = 25.4 mm.) milliseconds. Corrosion rates are related to a time constant describing the potential decay (E) induced by a small potential (10 to 20 mV) disturbance that is caused by the applied current (I). The ratio of the change in potential to change in current (E/I) is called the polarization resistance (Rp) and is inversely proportional to the corrosion current, Icorr (modified from Stern and Geary25 to give the corrosion current density [corrosion rate], icorr), Eq. (1)
2 BCorrosion rate ( i corr ) = --------- ( A/cm ) AR p

(1)

where B is a constant parameter (Stern-Geary constant) varying between 26 and 52 mV depending on the corrosion state of the steel (that is, passive or active). A is the polarized surface area of the steel (A = Dl (cm2), where D is the diameter of the steel; and l is the polarized length of the steel). Corrosion rate measurements were taken at the end of every 3-day wetting period. The classification of measured corrosion rates as proposed by Rodriguez et al.17 where icorr < 0.1 A/cm2 (passive condition), 0.2 > icorr < 0.5 A/cm2 (1.3 to 3.2 A/in.2) (low to moderate), 0.5 > icorr < 1.0 A/cm2 (3.2 to 6.5 A/in.2) (moderate to high), and > 1.0 A/cm2 (6.5 A/in.2) (high corrosion rate). Resistivity measurements Resistivity measurements were taken on the saturated beam specimens at the end of every 3-day wetting period using a four-probe (Wenner) apparatus at a probe spacing of 50 mm (1.97 in.). The probe spacing (50 mm [1.97 in.]) was used based on results of laboratory studies by Gowers and Millard.27 Using this technique, the apparent resistivity () in cm may be expressed as (Eq. (2)) = 2aV ------------I (2)

where V is voltage drop (volts); I is applied current (amperes); and a is probe spacing (cm). The Wenner probes were placed across the crack, as shown in Fig. 2. 483

Table 2Average corrosion rates (icorr), chloride conductivity indexes, HCP, and resistivities
PC-40 PC-55 SL-40 SL-55 Uncracked Average icorr, weeks 26 to 31, A/cm2 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.10 (0.01*) (0.01*) (0.01*) (0.01*) 0.07 0.07 (0.02*) (0.01*) 0.26 0.41 (0.03*) (0.01*) 0.38 0.55 (0.01*) (0.01*) 0.25 0.34 (0.02*) (0.04*) 0.16 0.23 (0.02*) (0.01*) 148 (4*) 455 (28*) 517 (15*) 570 (18*) 43.4 (2.2*) 43.5 (2.0*) 43.0 (2.7*) 43.6 (2.3*) 114 (11*) 435 (18*) 525 (26*) 535 (9*) 39.5 (3.5*) 40.0 (3.2*) 41.0 (3.1*) 40.1 (3.3*)

(a)

Fig. 2Resistivity measurement. (Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm.)

(b)

Average CCI, mS/cm

Incipient- 0.14 0.31 cracked (0.01*) (0.01*) 0.36 0.78 0.4 mm cracked (0.01*) (0.01*) 0.69 0.93 0.7 mm cracked (0.03*) (0.03*) 1.05 1.50 28 day (0.08*) (0.21*) 0.86 0.83 90 day (0.02*) (0.04*) 185 259 Uncracked (16*) (14*) Incipient- 491 cracked (34*) 0.4 mm cracked 0.7 mm cracked Uncracked 527 (23*) 586 (12*) 508 (22*) 586 (35*) 625 (39*)

(c)

Average HCP, weeks 26 to 31, Ag/AgCl, mV

Fig. 3Schematic of chloride conductivity test.28

(d)

Average resistivity, weeks 26 to 31, kcm

15.3 9.0 (3.1*) (1.8*) 8.6 Incipient- 15.4 cracked (3.1*) (2.2*) 15.4 8.8 0.4 mm cracked (3.4*) (1.8*) 0.7 mm cracked 8.6 15.3 (3.0*) (2.2*)

Standard deviation. Note: 1 A/cm2 = 6.45 A/in.2; 1 mS/cm = 2.5 mS/in.; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.; 1 kcm = 0.4 kin.

where is the conductivity of the specimen (mS/cm); i is the current (mA); V is the voltage difference (V); t is the average thickness of specimen (cm); and A the cross-sectional area of the specimen (cm2). This test is considered a relevant durability parameter and is used as an index to characterize the intrinsic potential of the concrete to resist chloride ion penetration.29 The CCI tests were carried out at 28- and 90-day ages on companion cube specimens for each concrete mixture. Fig. 4Schematic of corrosion rate and HCP measurement. (Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm.) Chloride conductivity measurements The rapid chloride conductivity index (CCI) test28 was used in this study. This test measures the ionic flux (current) across a sample due to a 10 V potential difference (Fig. 3). Preconditioning of the concrete disc specimens (68 2 mm [1.2 0.08 in.] diameter and 30 2 mm [0.1 0.08 in.] thickness) obtained from companion cubes involves ovendrying at 50C (122F) for 7 days followed by vacuum saturation in a 5M NaCl solution for 1 hour 15 minutes, followed by soaking in a 5M NaCl solution for a further 18 1 hours to ensure a saturation equilibrium. The chloride conductivity is defined as (Eq. (3)) it = -----VA 484 (3) Half-cell potential measurement (HCP) This electrochemical method is widely used for the detection of the potential for steel reinforcement corrosion in RC. The principle of the method is based on the potential difference between the reinforcement and a reference electrode in the form of a half-cell.17,18 The technique can be used to evaluate the probability of reinforcement corrosion. HCP readings were taken simultaneously (at the end of every 3-day wetting period) during corrosion rate measurements using an Ag/AgCl reference electrode and registered in a data acquisition unit (Fig. 4). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Corrosion rate results Table 2(a) shows corrosion rates for the different binder types and crack widths averaged between weeks 26 and 31 when the corrosion rates were reasonably stable (refer to Fig. 5 to 8). The period was also carefully chosen to avoid the influence of reloading, which is outside the scope of this paper but is covered in detail in Reference 5. From the results ACI Materials Journal/September-October 2010

Fig. 5PC-40 moving average corrosion rates. (Note: 1 A/ cm2 = 6.45 A/in.2)

Fig. 7SL-40 moving average corrosion rates. (Note: 1 A/ cm2 = 6.45 A/in.2)

Fig. 6PC-55 moving average corrosion rates. (Note: 1 A/ cm2 = 6.45 A/in.2) obtained, it is clear that for a given crack width, corrosion rates generally decreased in the following order: PC-55 > PC-40 > SL-55 > SL-40 (Table 2 (a)). Therefore, both concrete quality (binder type and w/b) and crack width had an influence on the corrosion rates. These results show that for a given concrete quality (binder type and w/b), the corrosion rate increased with the increasing crack width in the following order: uncracked < incipient-cracked < 0.4 mm (0.016 in.) < 0.7 mm (0.028 in.). Contrary to previous studies23,24 suggesting that only transverse crack widths > 0.4 mm (0.016 in.) pose a corrosion risk in RC, this study has shown that it is not possible to have such a universal limiting/threshold crack width for all concrete types. Concrete quality (binder type and w/b) was found to be a major factor even in the presence of cracks and therefore must be taken into consideration. Other studies have shown that the concrete cover depth is also an important factor to be considered even in the presence of cracks.1 The greater sensitivity of the PC mixtures to cracking, in comparison with the SL mixtures, can also be noted from the results. Corrosion rate versus concrete resistivity For a given concrete quality (binder type and w/b), the corrosion rate increases with the increasing crack width (Table 2(a)); but the resistivity measured across the cracked specimens remained unchanged, that is, for a given binder type, there was no notable difference between the resistivity values of uncracked or cracked specimens (refer to Fig. 9 and 10). The resistivity measurements were taken at the end of the ACI Materials Journal/September-October 2010

Fig. 8SL-55 moving average corrosion rates. (Note: 1 A/cm2 = 6.45 A/in.2) 3-day wetting period (with 5% NaCl), which served as a preconditioning (presaturation) of the specimens and seems to have eliminated the sensitivity of the resistivity measurements to cracks because they were filled with the salt solution. This ensured continuous electrical connectivity across the crack. Resistivity results (3-point moving averagecalculated for any given 3-week period and plotted against the middle week) are given in Fig. 11, which shows that GGCS specimens have higher resistivities than corresponding OPC specimens. Generally, resistivity of all of the concretes increased with time, a phenomenon that is attributed to ongoing hydration, which results in a reduction in pore solution conductivity and additional microstructure densification.30 The GGCS and OPC concretes showed resistivities > 20 kcm and < 20 kcm, respectively, which, according to Andrade and Alonso,16 should result in relatively low and moderate corrosion rates, respectively. At this point, it is important to note that limits such as those proposed by Andrade and Alonso16 may not be applicable to cracked concrete. The percentage increases in average resistivity for the different concrete mixtures between the initial resistivity readings (at the beginning of the study) and at the end of the over the study period were 35%, 6%, 50%, and 48% for PC-40, PC-55, SL-40, and SL-55, respectively. The highest rates of increase in resistivity over the study period were exhibited by the slag specimens, and can be ascribed to the slower early-age hydration process in slag concrete relative to OPC concrete.31 Figure 12 presents the relationship between corrosion rates and average resistivity for the different binders and 485

Fig. 9PC-40 and PC-55 moving average resistivity. (Note: 1 kcm = 0.4 kin.; 1 mm = 0.394 in.)

Fig. 12Corrosion rate versus average concrete resistivity (weeks 26-31). (Note: 1 A/cm2 = 6.45 A/in.2; 1 mm = 0.394 in.) rates were inversely proportional to concrete resistivity, especially for icorr > 0.2 A/cm2 (1.3 A/in.2). As mentioned previously, it is notable that corrosion rates for slag specimens (having higher concrete resistivities) are lower than the corresponding OPC specimens (having lower concrete resistivities), regardless of whether or not cracks exist. The results also show that for a given concrete quality (and hence, binder type), concrete resistivity may have an influence on reinforcing bar corrosion rate, especially for blended cement concretes. For example, a 0.7 mm (0.028 in.) cracked specimen with the SL-55 mixture had a lower corrosion rate than the 0.4 mm (0.016 in.) cracked specimen with the PC-40 mixture. In general, this shows the dominating nature of high concrete resistivity in controlling corrosion rate, even in the presence of cracks for blended cements. A similar conclusion was reached by Scott and Alexander1 where only binder type was varied while the w/b was kept constant, contrary to varying both the binder type and w/b, as was done in this study. The high correlation coefficients (R2 > 0.5) between corrosion rate and concrete resistivity given in Fig. 12 must be interpreted in terms of expected corrosion rates in cracked concrete. While resistivity may serve as a good first indicator for (high) corrosion activity (in this case, for icorr > 0.2 A/cm2 [1.3 A/in.2]), the degree of corrosion is also very dependent on cracking in RC structures. Thus, what is required is a means of also allowing for the effects of cracking, for example, using correction factors that take the crack width into account. These can only be determined using sufficient data from long-term studies. In this study, considering the uncracked specimens, higher corrosion rates were observed in specimens with lower resistivities (PC specimens) and vice versa. However, the trend for cracked specimens was that, for a given concrete resistivity, the corrosion rate increased with increasing crack width (Fig. 12). A study by Scott and Alexander1 revealed that corrosion rates are not a function of resistivity alone, but they may also depend on limiting the availability of oxygen at the cathode, particularly when resistivity is fairly low. This points out the need for adequate cover in low-resistivity concretes. Scott and Alexander1 schematically presented these phenomena, as shown in Fig. 13(a) (where concrete binder types are designated as PC or SCM). The simultaneous ACI Materials Journal/September-October 2010

Fig. 10SL-40 and SL-55 moving average resistivity. (Note: 1 kcm = 0.4 kin.)

Fig. 11Moving average resistivity for both cracked and uncracked specimens. (Note: 1 kcm = 0.4 kin.) crack widths between weeks 26 and 31 when the corrosion rates were reasonably stable. From Fig. 11 and 12, it can be seen that there is a larger difference in the resistivities of the OPC specimens than in the slag specimens. This consequently suggests that the resistivity of slag concretes is less sensitive to changes in w/b, in this case from 0.40 to 0.55 (that is, a 37.5% increase). Figure 12 also shows that the corrosion 486

interaction between cover, resistivity, and oxygen availability governs the resulting corrosion rate. If the effect of cracking is to be included (that is, the increase in corrosion rate with increasing crack width), Fig. 13(a) has to be modified. This is illustrated schematically in Fig. 13(b), where the corrosion rate in uncracked concrete can be adjusted according to the maximum crack width present or allowed. Corrosion rate versus chloride conductivity The chloride conductivity index (CCI) serves as a durability prediction parameter in two ways. First, it is a direct measure of the resistance of the material to the movement of a charge. Its second function is to measure the susceptibility of the concrete to chloride ingress. Table 2(b) shows the 28- and 90-day CCI values for the various concrete mixtures. Generally, the CCI index values for the different concrete mixtures decreased with time, as observed in the 28- and 90-day values in the following order: PC-55 > PC-40 > SL55 > SL-40. This can be attributed to ongoing binder hydration and matrix densification. The exception to this trend was in the PC-40 and PC-55 concrete mixtures where, though the 90-day CCI values were lower than the 28-day values, the PC-55 CCI value was lower than that for PC-40. This is contrary to what was expected and further studies may be required to verify this. The 90-day CCI results were therefore excluded from further analysis and discussions. The relationship between 28-day CCI values, average corrosion rates between weeks 26 and 31 (reasonably stable corrosion rates), crack width, and binder type is presented in Fig. 14. Similar to the resistivity, it is clear that irrespective of binder type and w/b, a good correlation exists (R2 0.6) between the 28-day CCI and corrosion rate for both the cracked and uncracked specimens; but the relationship is stronger at higher corrosion rates (in this case, icorr > 0.2 A/cm2 [1.3 A/in.2]). Cracking also appears to have a stronger effect on corrosion rate than CCI. Irrespective of the CCI value, however, the corrosion rate for a given binder type increases with increasing crack width; that is, in the presence of cracks, a low CCI value may indicate a high chloride resistance, but the additional effect of crack width is also important. The CCI tests were performed on companion cube specimens and not on cracked specimens. Therefore, although this test provides very important indications of the expected durability performance of concrete in the service environment, it may not similarly predict the durability performance of cracked concrete in the absence of accounting for the influence of cracking. Corrosion rate versus HCPs Table 2(c) shows HCPs for the different binder types and crack widths averaged between weeks 26 and 31 to ensure consistency with the period over which the corrosion rates and concrete resistivities were considered. Moving average HCP trends during the study period are presented in Fig. 15 to 18. According to ASTM C876-91, if the HCP measured is lower (more negative) than 256 mV (Ag/AgCl), there is a 90% probability that the reinforcement is actively corroding. For a given binder, the cracked specimens show more negative corrosion potentials than the uncracked specimens, indicating correspondingly higher corrosion rates. The low HCP (more negative than 256 mV) results also show that the 0.4 and 0.7 mm (0.016 and 0.028 in.) cracked specimens started to actively corrode almost instantly, as opposed to the uncracked and incipient cracked specimens. This is consistent with the corrosion rate ACI Materials Journal/September-October 2010

Fig. 13Schematic of relationship between corrosion rate, O2 availability, and resistivity, to account for crack width. (Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm; PC is ordinary portland cement and SCM is supplementary cementitious materials.)

Fig. 1428-day CCI versus corrosion rate (weeks 26-31). (Note: 1 A/cm2 = 6.45 A/in.2)

Fig. 15PC-40 HCPs. results presented previously. The results also show that at the start of active corrosion (icorr > 0.1 A/cm2 [0.65 A/in.2]) in the incipient cracked specimens of PC-40, PC-55, SL-40, and SL-55 concretes, the respective potential values were 268, 262, 261, and 266 mV Ag/AgCl. These values are slightly higher than the stipulated ASTMs potential threshold of 256 mV Ag/AgCl, but this difference (maximum 4%) is negligible. It is also notable from the HCP results that the uncracked slag specimens had more negative early HCPs than the incipient-cracked ones. This may be attributed to the reducing environment caused by the presence of sulfides and thiosulfates (with oxygen-reducing characteristics) in slag 487

Fig. 16PC-55 HCPs.

Fig. 19Corrosion rate versus HCP: all binder types and crack widths. (Note: 1 A/cm2 = 6.45 A/in.2) and (c)). Similar to concrete resistivity results, it can be noted from the HCP results (Table 2(c)) that, for a given crack condition, there was no significant (and consistent) difference between the average HCP values of blended cement concretes (SL-40 versus SL-55, up to only 2%) compared to PC concretes (PC-40 versus PC-55) where the difference was up to 29%. Figure 19 is a plot of all the HCP data points and the corresponding corrosion rates for all of the specimens (cracked and uncracked). The trend line obtained and the resulting R2 value of 0.8 confirms the correlation between the HCP and corrosion rate measurements in this study. The relationship between the corrosion rate and HCPs obtained in this study, however, may only be applicable to the experimental setup used. Consequently, HCP measurements must be complemented by other methods, because although reliable relationships between potential and corrosion rate can be found in the laboratory for well-conditioned experiments, such relationships cannot be generalized because wide variations in the corrosion rate are possible in a narrow range of potentials. These observations stress the fact that HCP measurements need to be supplemented with other corrosion assessment techniques such as LPR, as was done in this study. The link between HCP and corrosion rate is concrete resistivity. Both depend on the ease of ion movement in the concrete, which is reflected in resistivity. As mentioned previously, however, both respond differently to changes in the same variables. CONCLUSIONS 1. The reliance on only one NDT method to assess corrosion in cracked concrete may not be adequate. An integrated approach with respect to data collection (that is, corrosion assessment methods), analysis, and interpretation is vital if a reliable diagnosis and prognosis of corrosion in cracked RC structures is to be achieved. Corrosion assessments performed in the laboratory on sound uncracked concrete specimens, ignoring the fact that in-service RC structures are often cracked, may not accurately describe the actual performance of RC structures. 2. Depending on the degree of saturation of cracked concrete, concrete resistivity may not be sufficient in itself to predict corrosion risk level. Despite the high (R2 > 0.5) values of correlation coefficient between the corrosion rate and concrete resistivity obtained in this study, concrete resistivity was not sufficient in itself to predict corrosion rates in the cracked specimens. Resistivity and binder type, however, can serve as a good first indicator for corrosion activity (risk levels) ACI Materials Journal/September-October 2010

Fig. 17SL-40 HCPs.

Fig. 18SL-55 HCPs. concretes,1 resulting in oxygen deficiency at the steel level. The formation of the passive protective layer on the steel surface requires adequate dissolved oxygen which, in the case of slag concretes, is consumed in the oxidation of sulfides to thiosulfates and ultimately sulfates. The effect is to decrease the dissolved oxygen concentration, thereby delaying the formation of the passive protective layer on the steel surface. It is important to note that there is no general correlation between the corrosion rate and HCP,21 because both parameters respond differently to the same variables, particularly moisture (or oxygen availability), temperature, and concrete resistivity. Despite this, the HCP versus corrosion rate trends (Fig. 15 to 19) in this study were found to be consistent with those of corrosion rates in both uncracked and cracked specimens (Table 2(a) 488

in RC structures. What is required is a means of allowing for the effects of cracking; that is, correlations are required between the predicted uncracked concrete performance and actual long-term performance of the cracked RC structure. With sufficient data from long-term studies, correlations between corrosion rate and resistivity for both uncracked and cracked concrete (of various crack widths) can be established. 3. Corrosion rate measurements using the coulostatic technique, for example, give a clear indication of the corrosion activity in the RC structure and can therefore be reliably used for corrosion assessment in both cracked and uncracked concrete. 4. Even though HCP measurements appear to be consistent with the observed corrosion rates in this study, they must be complemented by other methods for practical application. This is because although reliable relationships between corrosion potential and corrosion rate can be found in the laboratory for well-established conditions, such relationships cannot be generalized because wide variations in the corrosion rate are possible in a narrow range of potentials. 5. Contrary to other studies suggesting that only crack widths >0.4 mm (0.016 in.) pose a corrosion risk in RC, this study has shown that it is not possible to have such a universal limiting/threshold crack width for all concrete types. Concrete quality (binder type and w/b) is a major factor even in the presence of cracks and, therefore, must be taken into consideration when setting corrosion-related crack width limits. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge the support of the Concrete Materials and Structural Integrity Research Group (CSIRG) in the Department of Civil Engineering, University of Cape Town, South Africa.

REFERENCES
1. Scott, A. N., and Alexander, M. G., The Influence of Binder Type, Cracking and Cover on Corrosion Rates of Steel in Chloride-Contaminated Concrete, Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 59, No. 7, 2007, pp. 495-505. 2. Bentur, A.; Diamond, S.; and Berke, N., Steel Corrosion in ConcreteFundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice, E&FN Spon, London, UK, 1997, pp. 41-43. 3. Otieno, M. B., Corrosion Propagation in Cracked and Uncracked Concrete, masters dissertation, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa, 2008. 4. Beeby, A., Cracking, Cover and Corrosion of Reinforcement, Concrete International, V. 5, No. 2, Feb. 1983, pp. 35-40. 5. Otieno, M. B.; Alexander, M. G.; and Beushausen, H. D., Corrosion in Cracked and Uncracked Concrete Influence of Crack Width, Concrete Quality and Crack Re-Opening, Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 62, No. 6, pp. 393-404. 6. RILEM TC154-EMC, Electrochemical Techniques for Measuring Metallic Corrosion Recommendation: Half-Cell Potential MeasurementsPotential Mapping on Reinforced Concrete Structures, Materials and Structures, V. 36, 2003, pp. 461-471. 7. Marta, K.-K., and Jezierski, W., Evaluation of Concrete Resistance to Chloride Ion Penetration by Means of Electrical Resistivity Monitoring, Journal of Engineering Management, V. 11, No. 2, 2005, pp. 109-114. 8. Silva, B. J.; Jalali, S.; and Ferreira, R. M., Estimating Electrical Resistivity Based on Early Age Measurements, Proceedings of the International RILEM Workshop on Performance Based Evaluation and Indicators for Concrete Durability, Madrid, Spain, Mar. 19-21, 2006, pp. 45-54. 9. Sengul, O., and Gjorv, O. E., Effect of Embedded Steel on Electrical Resistivity Measurements on Concrete Structures, ACI Materials Journal, V. 106, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 2009, pp. 11-18.

10. Andrade, C., and Gonzalez, J. A., Relation between Concrete Resistivity and Corrosion Rate of Reinforcements in Carbonated Mortar Made with Several Cement Types, Cement and Concrete Research, V. 18, 1998, pp. 687-698. 11. Sengul, O., and Gjrv, O. E., Electrical Resistivity Measurements for Quality Control during Concrete Construction, ACI Materials Journal, V. 105, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2008, pp. 541-547. 12. Alonso, C.; Andrade, C.; and Gonzlez, J. A., Relation between Resistivity and Corrosion Rate of Reinforcements in Carbonated Mortar Made with Several Cement Types, Cement and Concrete Research, V. 18, No. 5, 1988, pp. 687-698. 13. Millard, S. G.; Ghassemi, M. H.; Bungey, J. H.; and Jafar, M. I., Assessing the Electrical Resistivity of Concrete Structures for Corrosion Durability Studies, Third International Symposium Corrosion of Reinforcement in Concrete, C. L. Page, K. W. J. Treadway, and P. B. Bamforth, eds., London, UK, 1990, pp 303-313. 14. Moray, D. N.; Jones, M. R.; Sivakumar, K.; and Harrison, T. A., Sensitivity of Electrode Contact Solutions and Contact Pressure in Assessing Electrical Resistivity of Concrete, Materials and Structures, V. 41, 2008, pp. 621-632. 15. Hunkeler, F., Corrosion in Reinforced Concrete Structures, B. Hans, ed., Woodhead Publishing Limited, England, 2005, pp. 1-45. 16. Andrade, C., and Alonso, C., Corrosion Rate Monitoring in the Laboratory and On-Site, Construction and Building Materials, V. 10, No. 5, 1996, pp. 315-328. 17. Rodriguez, P., Ramirez and Bonzalez, E. J. A., Methods for Studying Corrosion in Reinforced Concrete, Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 46, No. 167, 1994, pp. 81-90. 18. ASTM C876-91, Standard Test Method for Half-Cell Potentials of Uncoated Reinforcing Steel in Concrete, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1999, 6 pp. 19. Andrade, C.; Gulikers, J.; Polder, R.; and Raupach, M., Half-Cell Potential MeasurementsPotential Mapping on Reinforced Concrete Structures, Materials and Structures, V. 36, 2003, pp. 461-471. 20. Glass, G. K., An Assessment of the Coulostatic Method Applied to the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete, Corrosion Science, V. 37, No. 4, 1995, pp. 597-605. 21. Broomfield, J. P., Corrosion of Steel in Concrete: Understanding, Investigation and Repair, E&FN Spon, London, UK, 1997, 264 pp. 22. Mackechnie, J. R.; Alexander, M. G.; and Jaufeerally, H., Structural and Durability Properties of Concrete Made with Slag, Research Monograph No. 6, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa, 2003, 30 pp. 23. Schiessl, P., Corrosion of Steel in Concrete, Report of the Technical Committee 60-CSC RILEM, Chapman and Hall Ltd., London, UK, 1988, 65 pp. 24. CEB-FIP MODEL CODE 1990: Design Code, 1992, Comit Euro-International du Bton and Fdration International de Precontainte, Thomas Telford. 25. Stern, M., and Geary, A. L., Electrochemical Polarization I: Theoretical Analysis of Shape of Polarization Curves, Journal of Electrochemistry Society, V. 104, 1957, pp. 56-63. 26. Hassanein, A.; Glass, G.; and Buenfeld, N., The Use of Small Electrochemcial Perturbations to Assess the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete, NDT and E International, V. 31, No. 4, 1998, pp. 265-272. 27. Gowers, K. R., and Millard, S. G., Measurement of Concrete Resistivity for Assessment of Corrosion Severity of Steel Using Wenner Technique, ACI Materials Journal, V. 96, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1999, pp. 536-542. 28. Streicher, P. E., and Alexander, M. G., A Chloride Conduction Test for Concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, V. 25, No. 6, 1995, pp. 1284-1294. 29. Alexander, M. G.; Ballim, Y.; and Stanish, K., A Framework for Use of Durability Indexes in Performance-Based Design and Specifications for Reinforced Concrete Structures, Materials and Structures, V. 41, No. 5, 2008, pp. 921-936. 30. Hope, B. B.; Ip, A. K.; and Manning, D. G., Corrosion and Electrical Impedance in Concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, V. 15, No. 3, 1985, pp. 525-534. 31. Whiting, D. A., and Nagi, M. A., Electrical Resistivity of ConcreteA Literature Review, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, IL, 2003, 56 pp.

ACI Materials Journal/September-October 2010

489