Construction and Building Materials 93 (2015) 317325

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Durable design of reinforced concrete elements against corrosion

M. Shafqat Ali , Chenhui Ji, M. Saeed Mirza
Macdonald Engineering Building, Room 492, Department of Civil Engineering and Applied Mechanics, McGill University, 817 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal H3A0C3, Canada

h i g h l i g h t s
 Design for durability of reinforced concrete elements in corrosive environment.
 Time-dependent correlation between rebar corrosion and its bond strength degradation.
 Prediction of reduction of ultimate exural and shear strengths due to corrosion.
 Double development length needed for durability design at the end of 70 year service life.
 Decrease in exural and shear strengths by about 80% and 52%, respectively.

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 28 November 2014
Received in revised form 16 March 2015
Accepted 1 May 2015

Keywords:
Durability
Corrosion
Reinforced concrete
Service life
Mass loss

a b s t r a c t
This paper presents a practice-oriented method for design of exural concrete members for a given service life in an aggressive environment. A time-dependent correlation between rebar corrosion level in
terms of mass loss and its bond strength degradation at the steelconcrete interface, and the ultimate
exural and shear resistances of the reinforced concrete elements is evaluated using basic electrochemistry and empirical relationships. The design development length is determined based on the mass loss
prediction and the equation depicting loss of bond strength with mass loss due to corrosion. The results
show that the mass loss of rebars depends on several factors, such as the surface chloride concentration,
cover thickness to rebar and concrete permeability, rebar size and ratio of the concrete cover thickness to
the rebar diameter (c/db ratio). The model results predict the required development length at the end of
the service life of 70 years to be more than twice that obtained from conventional reinforced concrete
design. The proposed durability design procedure is illustrated with the help of a detailed design example. Analysis results show that because of corrosion the exural and shear strengths decrease by about
80% and 52%, respectively, after the service life of 70 years.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Over the past few decades, many concrete structures, subjected
to aggressive environments, have performed unsatisfactorily, and
had to be decommissioned well before the end of their design service life. Most national building codes require fulllment of the
requirements of the ultimate and the serviceability limit states,
and introduce resistance or capacity reduction factors to account
for the variation of material properties, member geometry and
details, lack of quality control in design and construction practices,
and load factors to consider the variations in applied loads.
However, any decrease in resistance or stiffness of the members
due to deterioration over the service life, because of aggressive
environmental inuences or other reasons, is not considered
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 514 398 6862.
E-mail address: muhammad.ali2@mcgill.ca (M.S. Ali).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.05.011
0950-0618/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

[3,11,15]. A typical example was the Dickson Bridge in Montreal,

which was constructed in 1959 and it was decommissioned in
1994. The anticipated design service life of the bridge was about
75 years, however, the bridge had to be decommissioned after a
service life of only 34 years. A detailed 3 year eld study on the
bridge showed that the inuence of the service environmental conditions, poor quality control in construction practices and materials contributed to the premature deterioration of the bridge
[4,18]. It follows from this and many other examples of unsatisfactory structures around the world that to obtain satisfactory performance, the structure must be designed explicitly to ensure its
safety and serviceability over the entire service life. This would
require adequate quality control during the design and construction phases, along with regular maintenance throughout the system service life [19,20,28].
Corrosion of steel reinforcement due to chlorides has been
noted to be the most signicant threat to the existing reinforced

318

M.S. Ali et al. / Construction and Building Materials 93 (2015) 317325

concrete structures, such as bridges and marine facilities exposed

to chloride-rich environments. The reinforcing steel in a concrete
beam can corrode to different deterioration levels, dened by its
mass loss. A correlation can be developed between the level of corrosion, cracking, bond strength at the steelconcrete interface, and
stiffness and strength of the structural element [8,12,13,17,21,22,
29,30,32,36]. A prediction model for rebar mass loss for different
levels of chloride ingress is developed based on corrosion electrochemistry initially proposed by Niu et al. [24,25]; this information
is used to calculate the required rebar development length based
on the prevailing concepts of bond and to calculate the exural
and shear capacities at a given service life. A framework is presented for the design of reinforced concrete exural members for
durability against corrosion of reinforcing steel.

2.1.1. Basic assumptions

The following assumption were made to model the corrosion
process:

2. Steel bar mass loss chloride-induced corrosion

The reinforcing steel bar mass loss is dened as the loss of the
metal relative to the original mass of the reinforcement. This
research program aims to establish a prediction model for the level
of corrosion of the steel rebars in the concrete due to chloride ion
ingress into the concrete.
2.1. Chloride ingress and reinforcing steel corrosion
Chloride ions from seawater, or deicing salt can penetrate
through the pores in the hydrated cement paste (hcp) to the interior of the concrete. The main factors inuencing the chloride
ingress into the concrete are the surface chloride concentration,
environmental conditions, such as humidity and temperature, concrete permeation properties and chloride binding capacity of the
pore walls, and the chemical reactions [2,6,23,28]. It is generally
agreed that chloride ions are transported totally, or partly in
water-lled pores by diffusion and/or by capillary absorption
mechanisms, depending on the prevailing exposure conditions.
The CEB [7] reported that limestone has chemical and physical
binding capacity for chloride ions, depending on the chloride concentration of the pore water. The chloride ions in the concrete can
exist either in the free or bound form. There also exists a dissolution equilibrium between bound and free chloride ions in the pore
water, and only the free chloride ions can participate in promoting
corrosion of the steel rebars. The complex interaction of physics
and chemistry of concrete, and the environmental conditions make
the entire transport process extremely complex, which cannot be
modeled accurately by a representative analytical model. Ficks
second law of diffusion is often used for the prediction of ionic diffusion through a porous medium and it has yielded acceptable
results; it assumes that the ingress of the chloride ions into the
concrete relies mainly on diffusion characteristics of the concrete,
and the chloride concentration at the concrete surface, but it is
modied to account for the chloride binding capacity at the pore
surface. The fundamental process of diffusion is represented by
the equation:

h
p i
C x:t C C0 C S  C C0  1  erf x= 2DC t

supply of oxygen and moisture is available to initiate and sustain

corrosion of steel bars. Sarja and Vesikari [31] reported a
two-step process of depassivation, followed by active corrosion
(Fig. 1): the initiation stage and the propagation stage [35].
During the initiation stage, steel gets depassivated; the chloride
ions react with the iron in the passive layer on the steel bar and
form soluble chlorides of iron which get diffused through the
cover, leaving the bare steel surface exposed to moisture and oxygen, leading to the formation of rust. Corrosion reactions continue
during the propagation stage and the corrosion rate is controlled
by the availability of oxygen (O2) and moisture, and the controlling
environmental parameters: temperature (T) and relative humidity
(RH).

1. The reinforcing steel corrosion occurs only after depassivation

of the rebar surface due to chloride ingress, with the chloride
level at the rebar surface equalling or exceeding the threshold
level.
2. The oxygen diffusion in concrete follows Ficks rst law of
diffusion.
3. Enough water is present in the hydrated cement paste for corrosion of rebars to occur when the environmental relative
humidity exceeds the critical level of humidity for corrosion.
It acts as an electrolyte with low resistivity.
3. Prediction of reinforcing steel corrosion in concrete
In chemical corrosion, a continuous oxide lm is formed on the
surface of the metal. Diffusion of oxygen through a lm during
metal oxidation occurs according to Ficks rst law. As the lm
thickness increases, diffusion rate decreases with time.
Assuming for simplicity that oxygen diffusion in concrete
occurs at a constant rate following Ficks rst law, the concentration gradient of oxygen in the lm (Fig. 2) is given by:

dCx=dx C 0  C OS =d1

where C(x) = oxygen concentration in the concrete at a distance x

from the free surface of the lm in the direction of diffusion
(mol/mm3); C 0 = oxygen concentration on the external concrete
surface, assumed to be 8:93  109 mol=mm3 ; C OS oxygen concentration on the surface of the concrete at its interface with the rebar
(mol/mm3); d1 = chloride ion ingress depth (mm), and x = distance
of the lm from the free surface in the direction of diffusion.

where Cx,t is the concentration of chlorides at a distance x from the

surface at time t, CCo is initial concentration of chlorides within the
concrete, Cs is concentration of chlorides at the concrete surface, erf
is the error function and Dc is the apparent coefcient of diffusion of
concrete for chlorides.
Although the high alkalinity (pH > 13) of the concrete cover provides a protective chemical barrier, against corrosion of steel reinforcement, the presence of chloride ions in concrete in excess of
the threshold level can cause depassivation of the layer of protective oxides and hydroxides of iron layer, provided that an adequate

Fig. 1. Corrosion model for steel in concrete, consisting of initiation and propagation stages [35].

319

M.S. Ali et al. / Construction and Building Materials 93 (2015) 317325

where dMs is mass of the corrosion products produced during time

interval ds (g), M is atomic mass of iron (55.8 g/mol) and na is electric charge of the iron ion. Because the corrosion products are a mixture of Fe2 O3 and Fe3 O4 ; the value of na is dependent on the
proportion of the two products. In the absence of appropriate experimental data, the two products can be assumed to have the same
mol value (na) of 2.8 [15]. Aa is the reinforcement surface area
where corrosion occurs at time s and ia (s) is the current in the anodic process which is equal to the current in the cathodic process [ia
(s)] since the corrosion process is controlled by the amount of oxygen available at the cathode [15].
The value of Aa for a unit length (1 mm) of the steel bar is given
by (Fig. 3):

Aa 2r arccos

Fig. 2. Diffusion of oxygen through a lm during metal oxidation [34].





r c  d1
db 2c  2d1
db arccos
mm2
r
db
9

Assuming a continuous oxide lm of thickness, d1, on the surface of reinforcement being corroded, the quantity of oxygen diffusing in the concrete, dn (in mols) is:

dn D0  A 

dCx
 dt
dx

3.1. Mass loss

where D0 is diffusion coefcient of concrete for oxygen (mm2/year),

A is surface area of the oxide lm on the steel rebar surface, through
which oxygen diffusion occurs (mm2), dCx=dx is concentration
gradient in mol/mm3/mm, and dt is diffusion period in years.
Niu et al. [26] developed the following empirical relationship
between the diffusion coefcient of oxygen into the concrete and
its compressive strength:
2

D0 0:0132:15=f cu  0:44 mm =sec

where f cu is the specied compressive strength of concrete obtained

from 150  150  150 mm cubes at an age of 28 days, where
0
0
f c 0:79f cu [33], and f c the specied compressive strength
obtained from 150 mm diameter by 300 mm high cylinders at an
age of 28 days.
Then, the rate of oxygen diffusion per unit area, J c s; at time, s,
is:

J c s

where d1, r, c and db are chloride ion ingress depth (mm), rebar
radius (mm), concrete cover thickness (mm) and rebar diameter
(mm), respectively.

dn
dCx
C 0  C OS
D0
D0
dx
A  dt
d1

Assuming that the oxidation reaction commences immediately,

instead of accumulating on the surface of reinforcement, Cos = 0, it
follows from Eq. (4) that:

J c s D0 C 0 =d1

When t < t0, the initiation time for corrosion according to Ficks
Second Law of Diffusion is given by the equation [31]:

h
 
i
1
C th C s 1  erf c= 2Dc t 0 2

where t0, Cth, Cs, and Dc are the time to initiation of corrosion
(years), critical chloride threshold level (%), chloride concentration
at the concrete surface (%) and chloride diffusion coefcient of the
concrete (m2/s), respectively, and erf x = error function = p2p 
R x t2
e dt.
0
From Eq. (10), the time t0 to initiation of corrosion is:

t0 c2 =4Dc erf

1

1  C th =C s 2

q0

12

For t 0 6 t < t1 ;
2

t1 c db =4Dc erf

1

1  C th =C s 2

where t 1 time when all of the reinforcement surface is corroded.

1

Therefore, according to Faradays Law, the mass of the corrosion

products produced between time s and (s ds) is:

db = 2r

F = Faradays constant 9:6486  104 C:mol

Substituting from Eq. (5) into Eq. (6) gives:

reinforcement diameter

assimilated at the cathode by one molecule of oxygen = 4,

d
chloride ingress depth

cover thickness

Cs

where ic s is the current density at the cathode at time s in



C
, Jc s = the rate of oxygen diffusion per unit
mm2 year


cross-sectional area at time s mmmol
2 year , n0 = the number of electrons

i a s
i c s
MAa ds
MAa ds
na F
na F

13

ic s J c s  n0  F

dM s

11

When t < t0, the percentage of mass loss due to reinforcement

corrosion:

The cathodic current of the reinforcement corrosion cell is a

linear function of the quantity of oxygen diffusing to the electrode,
giving:

ic s n0 FD0 C 0 =d1

10

cl -

concrete

corroded reinforcement

uncorroded reinforcement

8
Fig. 3. Area of steel bar exposed to corrosion.

320

M.S. Ali et al. / Construction and Building Materials 93 (2015) 317325

Also, the chloride ingress depth at time, s; is given by:

0:5

d1 2Dc s erf

1

1  C th =C s

14

From Eqs. (7) and (8), the mass loss, dM s ; for a unit length of the
steel rebar, is given by



ic s
n0 FD0 C 0 =d1
db 2c  2d1
ds  1
dM s
MAa ds
M  db cos1
na F
na F
db
n0 D0 C 0
M

1
2na Dc s0:5 erf 1  CCthS
!
1
db 2c  4Dc s0:5 erf 1  CCthS
1
ds  1
15
 db cos
db
For one mm length of the uncorroded rebar, with a density of
7.8  103 g/mm3, the mass M 0 is given by:
2

M 0 0:25pdb  7:8  103  1

16

The mass of the rebar corrosion products, M t ; is given by:

M t aP RH

dM s

17

t0

where a is correction coefcient for the mass of the rebar corrosion

products due to the oxygen solubility. Assuming that only oxygen
dissolved in water can take part in the corrosion reaction, then
a 0:028 (oxygen solubility in the water) can be used as the correction coefcient and PRH correction coefcient for the mass of the
rebar corrosion products due to the relative humidity [24,25].
Assuming that the steel reinforcement will corrode only when the
environmental relative humidity exceeds the critical relative
humidity for rebar corrosion, one obtains from Eqs. (14)(16):

dM s

n 0 D0 C 0
2na Dc s0:5 erf
 arccos

1


 M  db
1  CCthS

db 2c  4Dc s0:5 erf

1



1  CCthS

db

ds  1

18

Therefore, the percentage mass loss, q; at time t (t 0 6 t < t1 ) is

given by:

R
aPRH t0t dW s
Mt
 100% 1
 100%
M0
pD21  7:8  103

19

When t P t 1 ; Aa pdb and d1 c db :

M t aP RH

Z

t1

dM s

t0

t1

dM s


20

Here,
0

dM s

i c s
n0 FD0 C 0 =d1
n0 D0 C 0 db p
Mds  1
MAa ds
MAa ds
na F
na F
na c db
21

Therefore, the percentage mass loss for t P t1 ; is given by:

R

R
aPRH t0t dMs t1t dM0s
Mt
q
 100%
 100%
1
M0
pD21  7:8  103

22

Eq. (22) can be used to calculate the total percentage mass loss
of rebars embedded in concrete from the corrosion initiation time
to any stage of service life.
3.2. Input parameters
3.2.1. Notional surface chloride level
Diffusion of chlorides occurs because of the difference in the
chloride concentration between the outer concrete surface, and

Table 1
Surface chloride levels.
Location

Cs (by percentage of the

mass of cement)

Tidal and splash zone

Spray zone and marine atmospheric zone
Tunnel exposed to saline groundwater
Bridge deck (subjected to de-icing salt at an
average annual dosage rate of 250 g/m2)

56%
35%
34%
24%

that within the hydrated cement paste (hcp) pores. The surface
chloride level, Cs, depends not only on the environmental conditions, but also on the ability of the hydration products in the concrete with different compositions to adsorb chlorides on the pore
walls. The value of Cs is not always constant; however, over a long
time, the chloride source stabilizes to a near constant value in the
tidal zone, splash zone, underwater zone, bridge decks, tunnel
walls, etc. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the surface
chloride concentration remains constant over time for such structures. The surface chloride level Cs for marine structures, tunnels
and bridges decks can be assumed as shown in Table 1 [28].
3.2.2. Apparent diffusion coefcient
The value of the apparent diffusion coefcient depends on the
concrete composition, structure and distribution of pores in hcp,
degree of hydration and other environmental factors such as temperature [14,15]. Most published values of the apparent diffusion
coefcient are of the order of 1012 m2/s for Portland cement concrete [28], and 1013 m2/s for concrete mixtures with y ash and
ground granulated blast furnace slag. Siemes et al. [32]used a diffusion coefcient value of 1.5  1012 m2/s for dense Portland
cement concrete, 0.75  1012 m2/s for a concrete with high blast
furnace slag content cement and 0.3  1012 m2/s for a high quality
y ash cement concrete. Amleh [5] reported diffusion coefcient
values ranging from 0.934 to 8.65  1012 m2/s (coefcient of variation = 86%) in the severely deteriorated 34 year old Dickson
Bridge in Montreal; the high diffusion coefcient value was due
to the severity of the environment and physical exposure, and
inadequate concrete strength and cover thickness because of the
poor quality of workmanship. The value of the concrete diffusion
coefcient decreases with time, and when hydration is completed
after a certain period, the value of the diffusion coefcient becomes
nearly constant. Maage et al. [16] reported that the decrease in the
diffusion coefcient is given by:

Dt=D0 t 0 =ta

23

where the parameter a is determined by a regression analysis of

test results, which is summation of the parameters b and c, representing the effect of continuing hydration, and the pore blocking
effect at the surface layer of magnesium and potassium ion
exchange between sea water and concrete, respectively. D(t) and
D0 are diffusion coefcients at time t and t0, respectively.
3.2.3. Corrosion threshold level
The chloride threshold value, Cth, is the free chloride content
reaching the rebar surface that will cause depassivation of the protective layer on the steel surface. Also, when the chloride content
exceeds the threshold value, corrosion will normally initiate. For
design purposes, the threshold value should be selected in the
range appropriate for the associated risk of corrosion. Many standards require threshold value not higher than 0.4% (Cl) by the
mass of cement for reinforced concrete and 0.2% for prestressed
concrete [28].
From Eq. (11), the reinforcement corrosion initiation time, t 0 ; is
given by:

321

M.S. Ali et al. / Construction and Building Materials 93 (2015) 317325

1

24

140

The time, t1 ; for corrosion of the entire rebar surface is given by:

120

1  C th =C s

t 1 c db =4Dc erf

1

1  C th =C s

25

and the depth of the chloride ingress at time, s; is given by:

d1 2Dc s0:5 erf

1

1  C th =C s

26

90

Time (years)

70
60
50

0
25

30

35

40
45
50
55
60
Cover thickness (mm)

65

70

Fig. 5. Corrosion propagation time (t1) for 20 M bars.

135 Standard stirrup hook

c = 40mm

h/2

15M Stirrup

15M@200

460 mm

4-20M

Vs
= Vs1 + Vs2

Vs

40 mm

300 mm

(a)

(b)

Fig. 6. Beam cross-section: (a) Reinforcement detail (b) free body diagram for shear
analysis.

25
Cs=0.6%
Cs=0.7%
Cs=0.8%
Cs=0.9%
Cs=1%
Cs=2%
Cs=3%
Cs=4%
Cs=5%
Cs=6%

20

15

10

0
0

10

20

30

40
50
60
Time(year)

70

80

90

100

Fig. 7. Mass loss of 20 M rebar due to chloride-induced corrosion over 100 years
service life for different surface chloride concentrations (Cs).

Cs=1%
Cs=2%
Cs=3%
Cs=4%
Cs=5%
Cs=6%

80

60

20

Mass Loss(%)

To understand the effect of chloride concentration, concrete

cover thickness and rebar size on its mass loss during the service
life of a reinforced concrete element, a beam cross-section was
selected as shown in Fig. 6. For illustration purposes, this beam is
assumed to be designed for a service life of 100 years, reinforced
with 420 M bars, clear cover thickness = 40 mm; the concrete
compressive strength, fc = 30 MPa; steel yield strength
fy = 400 MPa. The beam is subjected to different surface chloride
levels varying from 0.6 to 6%, the corrosion threshold level is
assumed to be 0.4% (Cl) by mass of cement. Assume
Dc = 1.5  1012 m2/s.
The rebar mass loss due to chloride-induced corrosion can be
calculated using Eqs. (12), (19) and (22). Typical results for the
mass loss of a 20 M bar (bar diameter = 19.5 mm) for a service life
of 100 years are summarized in Fig. 7. The results show that, as
expected, the mass loss increases with time. Also, the mass loss
increases with an increase in the surface chloride level, with the
other parameter remaining constant. The results show that the
rebar mass loss could be as high as 10% within 50 years of its service life when the chloride concentration level is about 4%.
Fig. 7 also shows that when the chloride concentration on the
concrete surface is over 2% (the surface chloride level on the bridge
decks when subjected to de-icing salt at an annual dosage rate of
over 250 g/m2), the increase in the rebar mass loss decreases

80

40

Typical results for corrosion initiation time t0 and propagation

time t1 for a 20 M bar (bar diameter = 19.5 mm) for a service life of
100 years, concrete cover thicknesses varying from 25 mm to
75 mm and Cs = 1 to 6%, are calculated and are summarized in
Figs. 4 and 5, respectively. The time t1 for corrosion of the entire
rebar surface can be calculated using Eq. (25), assuming
Dc = 3.0  1013 m2/s for calculation purposes. If the concrete cover
is assumed to be 40 mm for exposure classes (C-1, C-2) in the CSA
Standard A23.304, the corrosion initiation time t0 would be less
than 10 years for surface chloride concentrations varying from 2 to
6% and propagation time t1 would be less than 20 years. As a
result of these conditions, the entire 20 M rebar surface would start
corroding within 30 years of its service life.
3.3. Rebar mass variation loss with concrete surface chloride density

Cs=1%
Cs=2%
Cs=3%
Cs=4%
Cs=5%
Cs=6%

100
Time (years)

t 0 c2 =4Dc erf

signicantly with any further increase in the surface chloride

levels. Therefore, surface chloride level of 2% is an important index
of potential damage due to chlorides in design for durability; however, at chloride level higher than 2%, the rebar corrosion is quite
severe.

40
30
20

3.4. Variability of reinforcement corrosion mass loss with concrete

cover thickness

10
0
25

30

35

40
45
50
55
Cover Thickness (mm)

60

65

Fig. 4. Corrosion initiation time (t0) for 20 M bars.

70

The mass loss for 20 M rebar due to corrosion over a service life
of 100 years, for concrete cover thickness varying from 25 mm to
75 mm (Dc 1:5  1012 m2 =s; C s 3% and C th 0:4%) by the

M.S. Ali et al. / Construction and Building Materials 93 (2015) 317325

3.5. Variations for rebar mass loss prediction

u q =q

27

where q is the mass loss from in-situ tests and q is the rebar mass
loss value obtained from controlled laboratory tests under similar
conditions.
Substituting Eq. (27) into Eqs. (12), (19) and (22), gives:
For t < t0,

C=25mm
C=30mm
C=35mm
C=40mm
C=45mm
C=50mm
C=55mm
C=60mm
C=65mm
C=70mm
C=75mm

30

Mass Loss(%)

25
20
15
10
5
0
0

10

20

30

40
50
60
Service Life

10

6
4
2
0

6
4
2
0

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Rebar Size (mm)

1.7 2.0 2.3 2.7 3.0 3.3 3.7 4.0 4.3 4.7
c/db Ratio

(a)

(b)

Fig. 9. (a) Relationship between rebar mass loss and rebar size for a service life of
100 years (b) relationship between rebar mass loss and ratio of concrete cover
thickness and rebar diameter (c/db ratio) at age of 100 years.

q 0
For t 0 6 t < t 1 ;

R
aPRH tt0 dMs
/Mt
q
 100%
 100%
1
M0
pd2b  7:8  103
4


28a

For t > t1 ;

R

Rt
t
0
a
P
dM

dM
RH
s
s
t
t
/M
0
1
t
q
 100%
 100%
1
M0
pd2b  7:8  103

28b

where

dMs

n0 D0 C 0
2na Dc s0:5 erf
 D1 arccos

1

1  CCthS

M

db 2c  4Dc s0:5 erf

db

1



1  CCthS

ds  1

28c

and

To validate the prediction model for rebar mass loss due to corrosion, more carefully planned laboratory work is needed along
with the data from long-term eld tests; coefcient, u, can be
introduced in the equations for evaluation of the rebar mass loss
to account for the variation between the eld corrosion behavior
of steel rebars from that in controlled laboratory tests.

35

10

Mass Loss(%)

mass of cement) is calculated using Eqs. (12), (19) and (22) and the
results are plotted in Fig. 8.
Fig. 8 shows that, if all other parameters remain constant, an
increase in the cover thickness of an appropriate quality (relative
impermeability) causes a signicant decrease in the rebar mass
loss. Therefore, the service life of a structural member can be
increased considerably by appropriately increasing the thickness
of the concrete cover [7], and by enhancing its quality in terms
of permeability of concrete. However, an excessive cover thickness
will increase the risk of its cracking, which can result in an increase
in chloride ingress and in an increased rebar mass loss and pitting
corrosion locally in the vicinity of the crack, which can also cause
loss of rebar ductility.
If the same beam is to be designed using different bar sizes, the
rebar mass loss can be similarly calculated (Fig. 9(a)) for bar sizes
ranging from 10 to 45 M. It can be noted that the percentage of
rebar mass loss decreases with an increase in the rebar diameter,
therefore, it is useful to select a larger bar size for an increased service life. It should be noted that the rebar mass loss increases with
a decrease in the ratio of concrete cover thickness to rebar diameter (c/db ratio) (Fig. 9(b)). The increase in the rebar mass loss due to
corrosion will greatly decrease the service life of the structure,
therefore, it is useful to select a larger c/db ratio for an increased
service life.
In summary, the mass loss of the embedded reinforcing bar
depends on many factors, such as the chloride density on the concrete surface, the concrete cover thickness and its permeability, the
reinforcing bar size and the ratio of the concrete cover thickness to
the rebar diameter. If the surface chloride level is over 2%, the rebar
in the concrete can be subjected to severe corrosion over a period
of 25 years. Increased concrete cover thickness and lower concrete
permeability can help to decrease the rebar mass loss.

Mass Loss(%)

322

70

80

90

100

Fig. 8. Variation of mass loss of 20 M steel rebar over a service life of 100 years for
different cover thicknesses.

dMs

n0 D0 C 0 db p
Mds  1
na c db

28d

The ACI Code-1963 and the earlier versions of CSA Standard

A23.3 emphasized exural bond, which was dened as the bond
stress (u) at the steelconcrete interface resisting the rate of
change of bending moment over a unit length of a beam which is
the shearing force at the cross-section; this bond stress u was
expressed as:

uV

.

jd

X 
0

29

where V is the shearing force at the section with an internal

P
moment resistance arm jd, and
0 is the perimeter of tension
rebars. The exural bond stress was omitted from the subsequent
ACI Codes and CSA A23.3 Standards and was replaced with design
requirements for the rebar development length, ld, calculated as
ld f y db =4u where fy is the yield strength of steel rebars, with diameter, db. Initially, the development length, ld, was based on the permissible bond stress values in the 1963 ACI Code [1]. To prevent
brittle failures in bar development lengths and splices, the required
development lengths were increased by a factor of 1.2. However,
these equations did not include parameters, such as the concrete
cover thickness, clear spacing between bars, and the effect of transverse reinforcement, which inuence the development length, or
the bond stress, u, at steel rebar-concrete interface. Orangun et al.
[27] analyzed the results of over 500 development and splice tests
and developed the following equation in Imperial units:

Atr f ytr
u
3c 50db
p 1:2

db
ls
500sdb
fc

30

M.S. Ali et al. / Construction and Building Materials 93 (2015) 317325

where ls is the splice length, Atr is the cross-sectional area of the

transverse reinforcement at spacing, s, on centers, with yield
strength, fytr, crossing the splitting crack.
The histogram of the ratio of the measured bond stress form the
500 tests to the value calculated using Eq. (30), demonstrated an
average value of around 1.0 with a relatively small coefcient of
variation.
With no splices or transverse reinforcement in Amlehs tests,
Eq. (30) reduces to

q
0
u A Bc=db f c

31

where A and B are constants determined from experimental data.

The measured bond stress value was observed to decrease linearly
with the rebar mass loss, which would modify Eq. (31) as:

q
0
u A Bc=db f c  DML

32

For the normal Portland cement concrete mixtures, without any

addition, the following empirical equations determined [5]:

q
0
u 0:35 0:3c=db f c  0:42ML for w=c ratio 0:32
33
q
0
u 0:35 0:3c=db f c  0:34ML for w=c ratio 0:42
34
where ML is the percentage of rebar mass loss due to corrosion.
4. Illustrative example
A reinforcement concrete beam is designed for a service life of
70 years, using concrete with compressive strength, fc = 30 MPa
(w/c ratio = 0.42, chloride diffusion coefcient Dc = 1.5 
1012 m2/s) and 420 M steel bars with a yield strength
fy = 400 MPa (Fig. 6). The beam is subjected to a surface chloride
concentrated of 3% and the corrosion threshold level (Cth) is
assumed to be 0.4% by the mass of cement. Assume 15 M stirrups
and a clear cover to the stirrup of 40 mm. Determine the design
development length for the corroded bars at the end of the 70 year
service life.
From Fig. 7, the rebar mass loss after 70 years, ML = 15%. Here,
the cover to the 20 M bar, c = 40 + 16  56 mm. Therefore, by combining Eq. (33)with required bond strength relation, the design
development length is:

q
0
ld:design 0:462  f y  db =0:35 0:3c=db 1:425f c  0:34ML
0:462  400  19:5=0:35 0:356=19:5
p
 1:425  30  0:34  15
1277mm 65db
In a corrosion free environment, this development length would
be 520 mm (= 26.6db) [9].
The ultimate moment resistance, M r ; is governed by the yield
force, T, in the tension reinforcement, provided that the bar development length is adequate.
As the steel bars continue to corrode, at some stage because
of deterioration at the steel rebar-concrete interface, the development resistance may not be adequate to cause the steel bars
to yield, in which case, the moment resistance will be dependent
on the maximum bond resistance generated along the bar
length.
Substituting Eq. (34) into Eq. (28a-d), the critical rebar mass loss
where the bond resistance governs the moment resistance is given
by:

MLcritical

323

q
0
0:35 0:3c=db 1:425f c  f y db =4ld =0:34
p
0:35 0:356=19:5 1:425  30  4001=
4  26:6=0:34  12%

When the mass loss exceeds (ML)critical, the force in the tension
reinforcement depends on the available bond resistance of the corroded bars, and for ML > 12%, it is given by:

T 4u  pdb ld

q
0
4  0:35 0:3c=db 1:425f c  0:34ML  pdb ld
p
4  0:35 0:356=19:5 1:425  30  0:34ML  p
 19:5  520
127:4  7:92  0:34ML kN

The moment resistance, Mr, of the beam with corroded bars is

given by

M T  d  a=2
0:127  7:92  0:34MLd  a=2 kN m

35

With a decrease in the value of T due to the rebar mass loss, the
section moment resistance will also decrease almost linearly.
However, if additional bar length is available beyond ld, the value
of Mr will be governed by the rebar tensile yield force, until the
critical mass loss is reached for the available development length.
The value of Mr will then decrease based on the reduced
cross-sectional area. This available rebar length can be represented
as ld/db to examine its effect on the value of Mr. The moment resistance of the beam cross-section was calculated for four different
development lengths minimum required development length
(ld,min = 26.6db), development length at critical mass loss (65db),
1.5  ld,min (=39.9db), 2  ld,min (=53.2db), and 3  ld,min (=80db) and
a summary of calculated moment resistances is presented in
Fig. 10.
Depending on the length of the bar available from the location
of the maximum bending moment to the point of contraexure,
the capacity of the beam can be evaluated for different levels of
corrosion after any period of exposure. A reverse process can be
used in design of a beam; for a given length of bar available for
development, and rebar corrosion level over a given period of time
in a given environment, the reduced rebar tensile strength and the
reduced Mr capacity can be calculated.
The results show that when the corrosion level is smaller than
the critical corrosion level, the rebars has adequate bond strength
with the concrete, and the exural strength will decrease slightly
as a result of an increase of corrosion level. When the corrosion
level exceeds the critical corrosion level in terms of mass loss,
which about 12% in this case, the exural strength will decrease
considerably because of debonding between the reinforcement
and the concrete.
4.1. Inuence of corrosion on shear strength
Corrosion of stirrups is generally more serious than the corrosion of the longitudinal reinforcement because the stirrups are
generally smaller in size and closer to the concrete surface than
the longitudinal reinforcement. Any brittle failure of the corroded
stirrups can be quite dangerous. Therefore, an appropriate model
for the inuence of stirrup corrosion on shear strength of reinforced concrete member needs to be developed.
Based on the simplied method for shear strength from the CSA
A23.304, the factored shear resistance can be determined using
the equation [10]:

Vr Vc VS

36

324

M.S. Ali et al. / Construction and Building Materials 93 (2015) 317325

Moment Resistance Reduction Ratio

1.20
26.6d
39.9d
53.2d
65d
80d

1.00

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00
0

8
10
12
Rebar Mass Loss (%)

14

16

18

Fig. 10. Reduction in moment resistance of beam due to corrosion for different development lengths (ld = 26.6db, 39.9db, 53.2db, 65db and 80db).

Shear Strength Reduction Ratio

1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
1

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Mass Loss (%)

Fig. 11. Variation of shear resistance at different corrosion levels for 15 M shear reinforcement during service life of 70 years.

where Vr, Vc, and Vs are the factored shear resistance provided by
the concrete section, factored shear resistance attributed to the concrete, and the factored shear resistance provided by the shear reinforcement, respectively.where

V c 0:18k/c

q
0
f c bw d

37

and

V s /s nV 0s

38

where n is the number of stirrups crossing an inclined crack which

is equal to = d.coth/s and Vs0 is tensile force develop in a stirrup,
which is a product of cross-sectional area Av and the stress fs in
the stirrup; h is an angle of inclination of diagonal compressive
stresses to the longitudinal axis of the member. Here, Av is the area
of shear reinforcement perpendicular to the axis of the member
within a distance s, which is spacing of shear reinforcement, measured parallel to the longitudinal axis of the member.
From Eq. (33), mass loss and required bond strength relation,
the design development length at yielding of stirrups is 413 mm:

p
ld:design 0:462  400  16=0:35 0:340=16 1:425  30
 0:3415 1413 mm
In a corrosion free environment this development length would
be 420 mm. With a standard 135 hook, the length of the attached
straight length to cause the hooked stirrup to yield is [9] is
292 mm:

q
p
0
ldh 100db = f c 100  16= 30 292 mm
However, the available length from the end of the hook to the
critical stirrup section (h/2) is 190 mm (Fig. 6(b)). Consequently,
the stirrup does not yield. The shear force resisted by a stirrup,
Vs, is governed by the tensile force, Vs0 , developed in the stirrup,
provided that the bar development length is adequate. In this case,
the tensile force, Vs0 , can be divided into the force resisted due to
the bond strength along the 190 mm length of the stirrup leg
(V 0s1 ) and the force resisted by the anchorage due to the hook
(V 0s2 ). Assuming that the stirrup continues to corrode, at some
stage, the resistance developed will continue to decrease. The
change in the shear resistance attributed to the concrete Vc due
to concrete deterioration is assumed to be relatively small, which
can be ignored. The shear strength is inuenced only by the corrosion deterioration of the shear reinforcement, and can be calculated using Eq. (36) and (38).
Substituting Eq. (34) into Eq. (28a-d), the critical stirrup mass
loss, which was about 10%, where the shear resistance (Vs0 ) governs
the shear resistance by the anchorage due to hook at the end (V 0s2 ).
With a decrease in the value of Vs0 due to the stirrup mass loss, the
section shear resistance will decrease almost linearly, until the
critical mass loss is reached for the available development length.
The value of Vs0 will then become equal to V 0s1 , which will then
decrease based on the reduced cross-sectional area. The factored

M.S. Ali et al. / Construction and Building Materials 93 (2015) 317325

shear resistances at different levels of stirrup mass loss due to corrosion are calculated and plotted in Fig. 11, which illustrates a considerable degradation of the shear resistance (about 52%) with the
mass loss of the stirrup reinforcement, which is more serious than
the degradation of the exural resistance due to corrosion of the
exural reinforcement (82%).
5. Summary and conclusions
The time-dependent behavior of the resistance of concrete
beams is predicted using basic electrochemistry and empirical
relationship for degradation of rebar strength, bond and stirrup
shear resistance. The results show that mass loss of reinforcing
bars embedded in concrete depends on many factors, such as the
surface chloride density, cover thickness and concrete permeability, reinforcing bar size and ratio of the concrete cover thickness
to the rebar diameter (c/db ratio). Increased concrete cover thickness and lower concrete permeability can help to decrease the
resulting mass loss.
A model for prediction of exural capacity of reinforced concrete beam at a given design service life shows that the embedment length of the reinforcement can inuence the
time-dependent exural behavior of reinforced concrete beams.
When the corrosion level exceeds the critical level, the exural
and shear strength decreases considerably because of the loss of
bond between the reinforcement and the concrete.
6. Future research
More experimental and analytical work is needed to consider
the effect of different parameters, such as reinforcing bar diameter,
type of loading, concrete cover thickness, concrete strength and
steel yield strength on the behavior of reinforced concrete beams
subjected to corrosion. Collection of long-term data on corrosion
of reinforced concrete beams and study of the deterioration of concrete structures due to the ingress of the various aggressive substances, especially chlorides, over a long time period are needed.
References
[1] ACI Committee 408. Bond under cyclic loading state of the art, ACI Mater J
(1991);88(6):669-673.
[2] ACI Committee 222R. Corrosion of metals in concrete, Report of the ACI
Committee 222, ACI manual of concrete practice 1994, Part l, Materials and
general properties of concrete. 1989. p. 222R-l222R-30.
[3] Al-Sulaimani GJ, Kaleemullah M, Basunbul IA, Rasheeduzzafar. Inuence of
corrosion and cracking on bond behavior and strength of reinforced concrete
members. ACI Struct J 1990;87:22030.
[4] Amleh L, Mirza MS. Corrosion response of a decommissioned deteriorated
bridge deck. J Perform Constructed Facil 2004;18(4):18594.
[5] Amleh L. Bond Deterioration of Reinforcing Steel in Concrete due to Corrosion,
[Ph.D. thesis], Montreal: Department of Civil Engineering and Applied
Mechanics, McGill University, 2000.
[6] Bob C. Probabilistic assessment of reinforcement corrosion in existing
structure, concrete repair, rehabilitation and protection. E & FN Spon; 1996.

325

[7] CEB Bulletin dinformation No. 182. Durable Concrete Structures, CEB Design
Guide, CEB; 1989.
[8] Choi YS, Yi S-T, Kim MY, Jung WY, Yang EI. Effect of corrosion method of the
reinforcing bar on bond characteristics in reinforced concrete specimens.
Constr Build Mater 2014;54:1809.
[9] Concrete design handbook. 3rd ed., Ottawa, Canada: Cement Association of
Canada; 2006.
[10] CSA Standard A23.3-04. Design of concrete structures. Mississauga, Ontario,
Canada: Canadian Standard Association; 2004.
[11] Fazio R. Flexural behaviour of corroded reinforced concrete beams [M.Eng.
thesis], Montreal: Department of Civil Engineering and Applied Mechanics,
McGill University; 1996.
[12] Han S-J, Lee DH, Kim KS, Seo S-Y, Moon J, Monteiro PJM. Degradation of
exural strength in reinforced concrete members caused by steel corrosion.
Constr Build Mater 2014;54:57283.
[13] Hui L, Li X. Experimental study and analysis of the properties of corroded
rebars. Ind Constr 1997;27(6):148.
[14] Ji C. Design of Reinforced Concrete Elements for Durability against Corrosion
[M.Eng. thesis], Montreal: Department of Civil Engineering and Applied
Mechanics, McGill University; 2003.
[15] Jin WL, Zhao YX. Durability of concrete structures. Beijing, China: Science
Press; 2002. 227 pp.
[16] Maage M, Helland S, Poulsen E, Vennesland , Carlsen J. Service life prediction
of existing concrete structures exposed to marine environment. Am Concr Inst
Mater J 1996;93(6):6028.
[17] Mangat PS, Molloy BT. Prediction of long term chloride concentration in
concrete. Mater Struct 1994;27:33846.
[18] Mirza M.S., Amleh L. A framework for durability design of bond deterioration
due to corrosion, Celebrating Concrete: People and Practice, University of
Dundee; 2003.
[19] Mirza MS. Durability and sustainability of infrastructure A state-of-the-art
report. Canadian J Civil Eng 2006;33(6).
[20] Mirza MS. Durability design of infrastructure and some related issues.
Canadian J Civil Eng 2006;33(6).
[21] Miyagawa T. Durability design and repair of concrete structures: chloride
corrosion of reinforcing steel and alkali-aggregate reaction. Mag Concr Res
1991;43(156).
[22] Moskin V, Ivanov F, Alekseyev S, Guzeyev E. Concrete and reinforced concrete
deterioration and protection. Moscow: Mir Publishers; 1983.
[23] Neville AM. Properties of concrete. Harlow: Longman; 1995.
[24] Niu DT, Wang LK, Wang QL. Prediction of steel corrosion extent in reinforced
concrete structures before producing corrosion cracks. Ind Constr
1996;26(4):810. Beijing, China.
[25] Niu DT, Wang LK, Wang QL. Prediction of steel corrosion extent in reinforced
concrete structures after corrosion cracking. Ind Constr 1996;26(4):113.
[26] Niu DT, Wang LK, Wang QL. Determination of the diffusion coefcient of
oxygen. Xian Univ Archit Technol 1995;4:103.
[27] Orangun CO, Jirsa JO, Breen JE. A reevaluation of test data on development
length and splices. ACI J 1977:11422.
[28] Richardson Mark G. Fundamentals of durable reinforced concrete. London and
New York, U.S.A: Spon Press; 2002.
[29] Rostam S. Design for durability: the great belt link. Aguado et al., editors.
Industrial applications. New York: Wiley; 1994.
[30] Rosenberg A, Hansson CM, Andrade C. Mechanisms of corrosion of steel in
concrete. Material science of concrete. Westerville, OH: American Ceramic
Society; 1989. pp. 285313.
[31] Sarja A, Vesikari E. Durability design of concrete structures, Report of RILEM
Technical Committee 130-CSL; 1996.
[32] Siemes T, Polder R, de Vries H. Design of concrete structures for durability.
HERON 1998;43(4):22744.
[33] Ten Z. Reinforced concrete elements. 2n ed. Beijing, China: Tsinghua
University Publishing Company; 1987.
[34] Tomashov ND. Theory of corrosion and protection of metals; the science of
corrosion. New York, U.S.A.: Macmillan Company; 1966.
[35] Tuutti K. Corrosion of steel in concrete, CBI Research Report no. 4.82, Swedish
Cement and Concrete Research Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; 1982.
[36] Zhao Y. Bond behavior and durability of reinforced concrete structures [Ph.D.
thesis], China: Department of Civil Engineering, Zhejiang University; 2001.