Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-018-0546-5

Detection of Delaminations in Sunlight-Unexposed Concrete Elements

of Bridges Using Infrared Thermography
Joaquin Humberto Aquino Rocha1 · Yêda Vieira Póvoas1 · Cynthia Firmino Santos1

Received: 9 January 2018 / Accepted: 28 November 2018 / Published online: 1 December 2018
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
Infrared thermography is a non-destructive test used in the inspection of structures. However, its use for bridge inspection is
still under development and in many cases its application may be limited to bridge sections exposed to direct sunlight. This
study aims to evaluate infrared thermography test for the detection of delaminations in different types of concrete not exposed
directly to sunlight. The experimental methodology uses two concrete specimens with water/cement ratios (w/c) equal to 0.5
and 0.6, through the insertion of polystyrene plates of different thicknesses (3, 6 and 12 mm) and depths (25, 50 and 75 mm),
in order to simulate defects within the concrete and evaluate the capacity of infrared thermography to detect them. The results
show that detection is possible, but limited to short periods of time. In relation to the concrete quality, defects were more easily
detected in the test specimen with lower w/c ratio. It can be said that the nearer to the surface and larger the delamination, the
easier it is to detect. Also, the better the quality of the concrete, the more effective the technique becomes.

Keywords Infrared thermography · Passive thermal imaging · Concrete · Bridge inspection

1 Introduction information, which may vary according to the inspector’s

Bridges are structures vulnerable to deterioration, especially
the elements of their superstructure, as they must support
traffic loads and resist aggressive environmental conditions
[1, 2]. Corrosion is the principal mechanism of bridge deteri-
oration; the formation of iron oxide leads to the expansion of
steel reinforcements. Corrosion generates tensile stress in the
concrete, causing splits, cracks, and loosening. It degrades
the functionality of the structure and, in many cases, threatens
the safety of users [3–6]. Detection of corrosion at its early
stages may reduce and prevent major consequences; how-
ever, there are long intervals between bridge maintenance and
inspection programs, which can hamper the timely detection
of pathological manifestations in the structures [7].
Bridge inspection is normally performed through tradi-
tional methods such as visual inspection, hammering, and
chain dragging, and sometimes, destructive tests, such as the
extraction of concrete cores, are carried out [8–10]. However,
visual inspection only provides qualitative and subjective
B Joaquin Humberto Aquino Rocha
jhar_pec@poli.br
1 Universidade de Pernambuco, R. Benfica 455, Recife, PE
CEP 50720-001, Brazil
experience, and may not detect delaminations that are hid-
den within the concrete [11]. The hammer and chain drag
methods require qualified inspectors and direct contact with
the structure and are very time-consuming [12]. The destruc-
tive tests can provide detailed information, but only at a single
point. In many cases, in addition to causing the disruption of
service, they can adversely affect the properties of the struc-
ture [4, 13].
Several non-destructive tests have been developed for
bridge inspection [14], and they include impact-echo,
infrared thermography, ground penetrating radar, and ultra-
sonic test [11]. Several authors have investigated the advan-
tages and limitations of these methods by laboratory and field
tests to evaluate their practicality and applicability [15–17].
However, many of these techniques are labor-intensive and
require the inspector to be close to the structure, which may
require interdiction of the bridge to perform the tests [4, 12].
These problems can be overcome using IRT because the
method can be used at a distance. It does not require direct
contact with the structure, removing the need to block traffic,
and it can be used to analyze large areas in real-time. More-
over, it requires simple equipment, only a thermographic
camera in most cases [18, 19]. In addition, much progress has
been made in recent years in the field of reinforced concrete

123
8 Page 2 of 12
bridge inspection because of the continuous development of
technologies and tools that automate the processes of inspec-
tion and data analysis, making them more efficient [2, 20–24].
The IRT test is performed by measuring the infrared
radiation emitted from the surface of an object using a
thermographic camera and subsequently representing it as
a thermal image. Defects such as delaminations and voids
within the concrete elements of bridges affect the heat trans-
fer of the concrete and are manifested as thermal contrasts
on the surface, which can be detected in the thermal images.
These thermal differences allow for the identification of
damaged areas at risk of detachment, and they can help to
prioritize and schedule detailed inspections or, in more sig-
nificant cases, repairs [6, 25, 26].
Despite the advantages and applicability of the test, ther-
mography has some limitations: it cannot detect the depth
of the defects in the concrete (passive thermography). The
results are highly sensitive to the onsite environmental condi-
tions, and most studies in the literature were performed under
conditions of constant sun exposure throughout the day [5,
8, 9, 12] or with external heat sources (active thermography)
[27, 28]. Considering this, the objective of this study is to
evaluate the ability of the IRT test in detecting delaminations
in concrete elements not exposed to sunlight, while consid-
ering different qualities of concrete and defects located at
different depths. The study involves an experiment on the
detectability of defects, and the effects of ambient temper-
ature and relative humidity are considered. The appropriate
conditions and effective schedules for the inspection of these
defects are explored in order to reduce the uncertainties of
the IRT method and expand its applications to different con-
ditions.
2 Bibliographic Review
Radiation, conduction, and convection are the principal
mechanisms by which heat can be transferred to concretes.
Radiation is defined as the transfer of heat by means of elec-
tromagnetic waves [6]. Conduction is the ability of a material
to allow heat to flow within its interior during a specific
period [1]. Convection is the transfer of heat from one place
to another through a moving fluid. Although radiant energy
is the parameter that can be measured by a thermographic
camera, the thermal conductivity inside the concrete and the
convection of heat from the air to the concrete influence what
appears in the thermograms [29].
In bridge elements that are exposed to direct sunlight, the
concrete absorbs heat transmitted by the thermal radiation
of the sun. A convective heat transfer between the envi-
ronment and the concrete also occurs. These mechanisms
result in thermal gradients on the surface of the concrete
as a result of internal defects such as delaminations. This
123
Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8
is because delaminations interrupt the transfer of heat, pro-
ducing temperature differentials between the surface of the
intact concrete and the defective concrete [7]. The heating
of concrete through solar radiation produces greater thermal
contrasts than that simply caused by convection, as in the
case of sections not exposed to sunlight [6].
Two modes of IRT—active mode and passive mode—can
be used for bridge inspection, but the latter is usually adopted.
In passive thermography, the structure is under sunlight and
the defective areas present a different temperature than the
surroundings [30]. This undoubtedly limits the test to only a
few sections of the bridge, such as the superstructure, which
are in direct contact with solar radiation. Moreover, in the
sections unexposed to sunlight, heat is transferred between
the concrete and the environment, and thus, thermal gradi-
ents also occur between the damaged and intact areas [12];
however, the thermal gradient is reduced because the heat
transfer depends only on convection, unlike in the sections
directly exposed to the sun.
In the literature, there are several studies on the detection
of delaminations in reinforced concrete bridges with IRT.
Some investigations were carried out through direct inspec-
tion of bridges [4, 29, 31] and others by creating artificial
defects of different sizes and depths in the concretes to be
detected [1, 12, 16, 32].
Several investigations have shown that the size of the
delamination defects affects the depth up to which they can
be detected [4, 8, 16]. Washer, Fenwick, and Bolleni [26]
found defects of 30 × 30 cm at a depth of 7.6 cm. Kee et al.
[4] detected defects of 61 × 61 cm at a depth of 6.35 cm.
Hiasa et al. [8] detected delaminations of 10.2 × 10.2 cm
at 2.54 cm depth at different driving speeds. In more recent
works, Tran et al. [28] found defects of 10 × 10 cm and 3 ×
3 cm at depths of 3 cm and 1 cm, respectively. Hiasa et al.
[32] studied delaminations of 10.2 × 10.2 cm at depths of
1.27 and 2.54 cm. These investigations show that the larger
and more superficial the defect, the more detectable it is using
IRT. Based on the results of several authors, Cotič et al. [33]
proposed a relationship involving the depth of defect (z) and
dimension of defect (D), concluding that when z/D is less
than or equal to 0.9, the defect can be detected. Additionally,
Farrag et al. [1] proposed a similar relationship involving the
short dimension of the defect (r) and depth of the defect from
a surface (D); if r/D is greater than 1, detection is possible.
Although the estimation of defect depth may be a limitation
of IRT, methods have been proposed for estimating this value
using active thermography [34].
3 Materials and Methods
To evaluate the ability of thermography to detect delami-
nations in concretes, two 50 × 50 cm specimens with a
Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8 Page 3 of 12 8

Table 1 Specifications of
Delamination Concrete specimen 1 (CS-1) Concrete specimen 2 (CS-2)
simulated delaminations
w/c  0.6 w/c  0.5

Depth (mm) Thickness (mm) Depth (mm) Thickness (mm)

D1 25 3 25 3
D2 25 6 25 6
D3 25 12 25 12
D4 50 3 50 3
D5 50 6 50 6
D6 50 12 50 12
D7 50 3 75 3
D8 50 6 75 6
D9 50 12 75 12

10 cm

10 cm

10 cm
5 cm

5 cm

5 cm

thickness of 10 cm were molded. The size of the specimens
were determined so as to represent an exposed surface of
the concretes from which surface defects could be observed.
Each test body was created with different water/cement (w/c)
ratios, 0.6 and 0.5, to analyze the influence of this charac-
teristic on detection. The proportion of cement:gravel:sand
used was 1:2.8:2.6, and the cement content of 1 m3 of the
concrete mixture was 360 kg. The cement used was CPII Z-
32, which corresponds to the Pozzolan-modified Portland of
ASTM C 595 [35]. The gravel had a maximum diameter of
19 mm, and the grain size distribution for both gravel and
sand were in accordance with the limits for concrete aggre-
gates indicated in the standard NBR 7211 [36]. To evaluate
the technological limitations of detection as regards the depth
and thickness of defects in concrete bridges, delaminations
were simulated inside the concrete; nine polystyrene plates
of 10 × 10 cm with different thicknesses were used for each
test specimen and were at various depths and positions, as
specified in Table 1 and Fig. 1.
The concreting of the specimens was carried out in four
layers of 2.5 cm. Pieces of 7.5 cm, 5.0, and 2.5 depths were
placed in the first, second, and third, layers, respectively.
The depth of the polystyrene sheets was controlled by rulers,
which were placed at ends of the plates and removed after
completion of the concreting.
An FLIR E60 camera was positioned 1 m away from the
specimens as shown in Fig. 2. The camera has a thermal
sensitivity of less than 0.05 °C, a resolution of 320 × 240
pixels and can handle a temperature range of − 20 °C to
650 °C. The infrared camera was calibrated by the manufac-
turer 2 months before the tests following recommendations in
the user’s manual, and calibrations must be done every year
[37]. The thermograms were captured at intervals of 30 min
over a period of 14 h from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. to analyze the
behavior of the concrete surface throughout the day and deter-
mine the best time to inspect for delaminations. Parameters
such as emissivity and reflected temperature were deter-
5 cm
5 cm
10 cm
5 cm
10 cm 50 cm
5 cm
10 cm
5 cm
50 cm
Fig. 1 Position of the delaminations in the 10 cm thick concrete speci-
men
mined in every thermogram during the monitoring period.
The infrared camera and the optics were kept away from
direct sunlight as well as other sources of heat to measure
temperature more accurately.
Ambient temperature (°C) and relative humidity (%) data,
which was automatically determined by the camera, was also
supplied to compensate for the effects of several different
radiation sources. These parameters were also collected to
observe their influence on the thermal behavior of the defects.
The test specimens were molded at the University of
Pernambuco, Brazil, following the specifications and rec-
ommendations of NBR 12655 [38]. During the process, four
cylindrical specimens of 10 cm diameter and 20 cm height
were also molded for each w/c ratio using the procedure
established in NBR 5739 to determine the 28-day compres-
sive strength of the concrete [39]. Table 2 shows the results of

123
8 Page 4 of 12 Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8

Fig. 2 Position of the camera to perform the test: a CS-1 and b CS-2

Table 2 Compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens for the test did not allow for direct solar radiation (Fig. 3a).
Cylindrical concrete 28-day compressive strength This section can represent parts of the bridge not exposed to
specimens (MPa) the sun, such as the substructure. Here heat transfer occurs
mostly by convection. It also occurs by heat radiation from
w/c  0.6 w/c  0.5
surrounding structures (nearby buildings and the floor) and
CCS-1 24.6 30.6 the atmosphere and by reflection of solar radiation; these
CCS-2 23.6 33.2 contribute approximately 30%–40% of the total heat trans-
CCS-3 27.3 31.5 fer and varies according to the date, hours of the day, and
CCS-4 25.6 33.2 atmospheric conditions. Because analysis is restricted to the
Average 25.3 32.1 surface of the exposed concrete, a wooden scaffolding was
Standard deviation 1.58 1.29 maintained to reduce the edge effects.
Average density 2198 2394 Figure 3b shows the thermogram of the test bodies; the
(kg/m3 ) observable defects are shown as a thermal contrast between
the area of the intact concrete and that of the delaminations. In
the thermogram, the yellow and blue colors represent warm
the compressive strength tests on the cylindrical specimens and cool areas, respectively. In addition to the qualitative
(CS). information of the thermograms, the thermal contrast, T,
After 28 days of curing in a wet chamber, the specimens defined by Eq. (1), was used for the detection of defects and
with delaminations were taken out of the laboratory. The free their subsequent analysis.
moisture contents in the concrete specimens CS-1 and CS-
2 were 3.97% and 3.18%, respectively. The section chosen T  TD − TC . (1)

Fig. 3 Position of concrete

specimens: a digital
photography; b thermogram

123
Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8 Page 5 of 12 8

Here, TD is the surface temperature of the delamination or

void, and TC is the temperature of the intact concrete.
The contrast was calculated for each delamination by
considering an area of 6 × 6 pixels within the delamination-
affected area and within the intact concrete area, as shown
in Fig. 3b. The intact concrete point was the same for all
nine plates and was chosen within the area outside the influ-
ence of the defects and edges of the test body. This process
allows a quantitative analysis of the results to be performed
to determine the variation in thermal contrasts throughout the
duration of monitoring and to identify adequate periods of
detection; it would also help determine the influence of the
ambient temperature and relative humidity on the thermal
contrasts.
The monitoring spanned 20 days and was conducted in
July 2017 at times of favorable weather, i.e., without rain or Fig. 4 Behaviors of the delaminations and the intact concrete tempera-
cloudy conditions, and during the test times, the specimens tures for CS-1
were not wet. The reproducibility of the data was proved.

4 Results and Discussion

4.1 Thickness and Depth of Delaminations

The results presented in this section are from one day of

testing, making it possible to generalize the typical behavior
of daily monitoring under ideal environmental conditions for
the development of detectable contrasts.
In Figs. 4 and 5, the behaviors of the delaminations and
the intact concrete temperatures in relation to the time of
data collection, as well as the ambient temperature and rel-
ative humidity, are presented. The results are presented as
smoothed curves for better presentation. The locations of the
CS-1 delamination (w/c ratio  0.6) are shown in Fig. 4. Only
delaminations located at a depth of 25 mm (D1, D2, and D3)
were visible during the testing time. Figure 5 presents the
results corresponding to CS-2 (w/c ratio  0.5) for the delam-
inations at depths of 25 mm (D1, D2, and D3) and 50 mm (D4,
D5, and D6). A difference was observed between the detec-
tion of delaminations for both specimens. For CS-1, only
33% (3/9) were detected, while for CS-2, 67% (6/9) were
detected. This was due to the difference in the w/c ratio; a
higher w/c ratio may lead to higher porosity, decreasing mass
density, which consequently affects diffusivity; this reduces
the visible gradients observed with the thermographic cam-
era. [40].
For both specimens, with increase in the ambient temper-
ature and decrease in the relative humidity, the temperature
of the concrete delaminations increased. The highest values
for delaminations and concrete temperatures were recorded
when the ambient temperature and relative humidity were
maximum and minimum, respectively, at approximately
between 1:00 and 2:00 p.m. Throughout this time, the tem-
Fig. 5 Behaviors of the delaminations and the intact concrete tempera-
tures for CS-2
perature of the intact concrete remained lower than the
temperature of the delaminations in both specimens, indi-
cating the development of positive thermal contrasts. As the
ambient temperature decreased in the afternoon, the temper-
ature of the delaminations and the concrete also decreased;
however, the relative humidity increased. During the night,
after 6:00 p.m., a reverse of the behavior observed during
the day occurred: the temperature of the concrete was higher
than the temperature of the delaminations, creating negative
thermal contrasts.
In both specimens, the maximum temperatures of the
delaminations occurred at approximately 12:30 p.m., day-
time, when the ambient temperature was highest, and after
which the cooling period began. However, the largest ther-
mal contrasts were produced at 10:30 a.m., as seen in Figs. 6
and 7 in Chapter 4.3.

123
8 Page 6 of 12
Fig. 6 Thermal contrasts between the delamination and concrete for
CS-1
Fig. 7 Thermal contrasts between the delamination and concrete for
CS-2
This behavior can be explained by the heating of the con-
crete. During the day, the ambient temperature increased and
reached the surface of the concrete, heating it through con-
vection and the reflection of solar radiation on other objects.
The heat on the surface was transferred through the concrete,
heating it. However, this transfer was reduced when the heat
reached the delamination, which had a thermal conductivity
different from that of the concrete. The closer the delamina-
tion was to the surface, the faster the concrete above it heated
up due to its smaller volume. For deeper delaminations, a
larger volume would be heated by the same amount of heat
transferred from the environment. This is why the tempera-
tures of the more superficial delaminations at CS-1 (25 mm
deep) and CS-2 (25 mm and 50 mm deep) were higher,
and therefore, the radiations emitted from the surfaces above
them were higher and were captured by the camera as ther-
mal contrasts on the surface. The deeper delaminations may
have minimal radiation difference that cannot be captured
and visualized in thermograms. In addition, the equipment
may also influence the detectability of defects.
In both specimens, during the night hours, the temperature
of the defects and the ambient temperature tended toward
equilibrium, which was more noticeable at 9:00 p.m., as
shown in Figs. 4 and 5. This is mainly due to the cooling cycle
that occurs during the night, where the ambient temperature
123
Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8
is reduced and the temperature of the concrete, which was
heated during the day, tends to equilibrate with the ambient
temperature, avoiding the development of thermal contrasts,
as described by Washer [6]. In this process, relative humidity,
which is high at night, also saturates the concrete; therefore,
the concrete has a lower temperature due to the thermal inertia
of the water, which absorbs more of thermal energy without
a significant alteration of the thermodynamic state.
Considering the thickness of the delamination, the delami-
nations of greater thickness became hotter during the day and
cooler at night when compared to other less-thick delam-
inations at the same depth, even when the differences in
thickness were minimal. The 12 mm thick delaminations
were visible in D3 (25 mm deep) in CS-1 and in D3 and
D6 (25 mm and 50 mm deep, respectively) in CS-2.
The thickness of the delamination influenced the results
because the delamination (polystyrene) allowed only a very
limited transfer of heat (thermal conductivity of approxi-
mately 0.028 W/m·ºC) to the concrete. A greater thickness
implies a greater difficulty in transferring heat to the con-
crete below the delamination, and thus, more heat is retained
in the volume above; therefore, D3 was hotter than D2 and
D1 in CS-1 throughout the day. In CS-2, D3 and D6 were the
hottest for depths of 25 mm and 50 mm, respectively.
At night, the opposite occurred. Radiation exchange con-
tributed close to 30% of the total heat transfer, and the
delaminations became cooler than the surrounding concrete.
This was mainly due to the temperature balance of the heated
concrete with low ambient temperature during the day and to
a lesser extent, to the reflected temperature of other objects
near the concrete. In this case, the areas above the more
superficial delaminations reached equilibrium with the envi-
ronment more quickly because they were less thick than
the intact concrete and the deeper delaminations, creating
negative temperature contrasts. Like during the day, delami-
nations were observable at the 25 mm depth in CS-1 and up
to 50 mm in CS-2.
Although the ambient temperature was the main source of
thermal gradients on the concrete surface, the relative humid-
ity also played a role in the thermal contrast. For lower values
of relative humidity, greater thermal contrasts developed, and
this occurred approximately from noon to 2:00 p.m. On the
other hand, when the relative humidity values were higher,
the thermal contrasts were smaller, and this occurred during
the night from 7:00 p.m. to around 9:00 p.m. It was observed
that the relative humidity influenced the heat transfer pro-
cess in the concrete. As expected, the heat flow was faster
in a humid atmosphere than in a dry atmosphere, increas-
ing the thermal gradient between the exterior surfaces and
the concrete core [26, 28]; however, this occurred mainly at
night when the condensation in the concrete improved the
convective heat transfer, which was low due to the small dif-
ference between the ambient temperature and the concrete.
Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8
On the other hand, during the afternoon hours, evaporation
occurred due to the high environmental temperatures and the
reflection of solar radiation, preventing the relative humidity
from influencing the concrete surface.
The relative humidity played an important role in the
detection of delaminations in both CS-1 and CS-2 because it
increased and reduced the moisture content of the concrete
through the absorption and desorption processes, respec-
tively, which affected several properties of the concrete such
as diffusivity and thermal conductivity [41–43]. Cement-
based materials generally have type-II sigmoidal sorption
isotherms according to the BET classification [44, 45].
Increased relative humidity increased the equilibrium mois-
ture content between the concrete and air, improving the
thermal conductivity of the concrete. However, when the
ambient temperature increased, the equilibrium moisture
content was lower, indicating that during periods of higher
temperatures, there were less adsorption and absorption of
water in the concrete. Moist air penetrates into concretes
faster than dry air, creating a more efficient convective heat
transfer between the concrete and the environment, resulting
in a thermal gradient, even if the solar energy source is not
present [26]. In this case, there are thermal contrasts at night
with a high degree of relative humidity, whereas during the
day, relative humidity is lower. Considering this, it can be
concluded that the ambient temperature was mostly respon-
sible for the thermal contrasts in the morning and part of the
afternoon, whereas the relative humidity contributed mostly
to the process at night by increasing the moisture content of
the concrete and, therefore, the rate of heat transfer.
4.2 Water/Cement Ratio
In both specimens, defects at a depth of 25 mm were
detectable throughout most of the day because they reacted
rapidly to changing conditions, becoming hotter than the sur-
rounding concrete, which in this case was thin; therefore, the
heat was concentrated in a small area and rapid heating (and
rapid cooling at night) was provoked. Delaminations at a
depth of 50 mm were only detected in CS-2, and delamina-
tions at a depth of 75 mm were not detected at all during the
test.
The w/c ratio influenced the detection of defects with IRT
since most delaminations detected were in CS-2, which had
a w/c ratio of 0.5, compared to CS-1, which had a w/c ratio of
0.6. As Al-Hadharmi et al. [46] and Farrag et al. [1] reported,
this behavior is due to the porosity and density of the concrete
(Table 2): Denser concrete has higher thermal conductivity,
and therefore, more detailed results appeared in the thermo-
grams. This explains the existence of more easily detectable
gradients in CS-2 compared to CS-1, which, due to its com-
position and lower density, was more porous and had a higher
degree of heterogeneity; these properties impede heat flow
Page 7 of 12 8
in the interior of the concrete, interrupting the formation of
detectable thermal contrasts on the concrete surface.
The detectability of delamination defects depends on the
heat exchange and its temporal behavior, the geometry of
the defects, the thermal resolution of the IR camera, and the
thermal properties of the material. However, as described in
the results, visible gradients were observed up to a depth
of 50 mm at CS-2, which had a compressive strength of
32 MPa. At CS-1, with a compressive strength of 25 MPa,
the results were only visible up to a depth of 25 mm. Com-
pressive strength is a direct consequence of the w/c ratio
and other properties, such as density and porosity [47]. The
results show that an indirect relationship exists between the
compressive strength of the concrete and the maximum depth
of detection of the delamination; this corresponds with the
trend found in the results of other investigations [1, 9, 13, 16,
48], regardless of whether the investigations were performed
in conditions of sun exposure or not.
4.3 Time Periods and Inspection Considerations
Figures 6 and 7 show the thermal contrasts of the delam-
ination temperature and the concrete for CS-1 and CS-2
during daylight hours. For better visualization and presenta-
tion of the results, the curves have been smoothed. It can be
observed that the more superficial and the greater the thick-
ness of the delamination, the greater the thermal gradient.
Considering the monitoring time, the behavior of delami-
nations can be divided into four distinct periods. The first
occurred during the early morning hours, when the gradient
was practically zero, and delaminations were not visible. The
second occurred between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m., when the
gradient reached its maximum, and the delaminations were
completely visible. During the third period, between 3:00
and 6:00 p.m., the thermal gradient had a positive-to-negative
inversion; the detection of delaminations became ineffective
in this period due to the poor visualization of defects in the
thermograms. In CS-1, the thermal gradient of D3 was the
first to go below zero and become negative, at approximately
5:00 p.m., and those of D1 and D2 at around 6:00 p.m. In
CS-2, the thermal gradient of D3 went below zero to become
negative at 5:00 p.m., and those of the other delaminations at
around 6:00 and 7:00 p.m., with the exception of D4, whose
thermal gradient reached zero at 5: 00 p.m. and remained
there. Finally, the fourth period occurred at night, after 7:00
p.m., where a negative contrast was observed, and the delam-
inations were visible again, although to a lesser extent and
with lower values than the thermal gradients during the day.
The thermal contrast developed during the time of the
experiment was small, approximately 1 °C. However, to
develop higher values, other sources of thermal excitation
could be used through active IRT, as proposed by other
authors.
123
8 Page 8 of 12
Fig. 8 Thermograms at 7:00 a.m.: a CS-1; b CS-2
Fig. 9 Thermograms at 1:00 p.m.: a CS-1; b CS-2
Fig. 10 Thermograms at 5:00 p.m.: a CS-1; b CS-2
Fig. 11 Thermograms at 8:00 p.m.: a CS-1; b CS-2
To better visualize this behavior, Fig. 8 shows the thermo-
gram captured at 7:00 a.m., representing the behavior during
the first period, where no delaminations were visible. Figure 9
shows the thermogram captured at 1:00 p.m. in the second
period, where the maximum gradients occurred. Figure 10
shows the third period when the thermal gradient changed,
with a thermogram taken at 5:00 p.m., in which no defects
were visible. Finally, Fig. 11 shows a thermogram captured at
8:00 p.m., showing the fourth period, where negative thermal
gradients were observed. Figures 9 and 11 show that D5 suf-
fered a small displacement from its position during molding
in relation to that shown in Fig. 1; however, the depth of each
delamination was verified during the construction process.
123
Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8
From Figs. 6 and 7, it can be noted that contrast values
greater than 0.4 °C during the day and 0.2 °C at night allow for
the adequate detection of the delamination. Although D4788-
03 [29] minimally establishes 0.5 °C of thermal differential,
and Farrag, Yehia, and Qadduomi [1] consider values above
0.8 °C; moreover, it has been found that detection can be
performed at lower values, with contrasts perceived between
0.2 °C and 0.3 °C, as indicated by Clark, McCann and Forde
[18], as well as 0.2 °C, as indicated by Watase et al. [12]. To
quantitatively evaluate the results, the signal-to-noise ratio
of the defects visualized in the figures was calculated. This
quantification is based on the definition of the defective area
and the reference area and is expressed as Eq. (2).
 
 De f μ − Re f μ 
S N R  20 log10 . (2)
Re f σ
Here, Defμ is the arithmetic mean of the pixels of the defec-
tive area, Refμ is the arithmetic mean of the pixels of the
reference area, and Refσ is the standard deviation of the pix-
els of the reference area.
The results of the SNR are presented in Table 3. The SNR
values were null for the hours of 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. as there was
no detection in the thermograms; for 1 p.m. the visible defects
in the thermograms presented values greater than 3; however,
by 8 p.m. only some detachments had an SNR greater than
2, indicating that delaminations were detected with greater
accuracy during the day.
As revealed in this chapter, the best period to carry out
inspections in sections not exposed to the sun is the sec-
ond period (10 a.m. to 14 p.m.), specifically at noon, since
the highest values of the thermal gradient were developed
and the defects were better defined in the thermograms. The
night period may also be considered, but may have some lim-
itations due to the low values of thermal contrasts. However,
under these conditions, the ambient temperature, which is the
main cause of thermal gradients, must be considered. During
the test, it was observed that certain day-night differences
in ambient temperature were required for the development
of thermal gradients in the concrete. A minimum difference
of 5.4 °C allows for the detection of delaminations in the
concrete. Table 4 provides the differences in ambient tem-
perature for the 20 days of the test, in addition to the climatic
conditions of the days.
In this study, the focus is on the results from day 10, where
the smallest temperature difference occurred; the days where
the difference was greater showed higher values of thermal
contrasts, regardless of the climatic conditions of the day.
Greater differences in ambient temperature during the day
allow for the development of greater thermal contrasts, as
indicated in Washer [6].
It was verified that thermography is strongly influenced
by environmental conditions. When the application is pas-
Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8 Page 9 of 12 8

Table 3 Signal-to-noise ratio

Time CP1 CP2
values
D1 D2 D3 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6

7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13:00 3.51 3.97 4.34 3.88 4.04 4.29 3.09 3.51 3.78
17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20:00 1.07 1.92 2.78 1.09 2.01 2.81 0.39 0.84 0.97

Table 4 Differences in ambient

Days of the Relative humidity (%) Temperature (°C) Weather
temperature
test conditions
Maximum Maximum Maximum Minimum Difference

1 45 68 32.8 27.4 6.1 Clear sky

2 43 71 31.5 25.8 5.7 Clear sky
3 41 70 34.3 26.5 7.8 Clear sky
4 41 64 33.6 27.1 6.5 Clear sky
5 42 65 37.6 28.2 9.4 Clear sky
6 45 69 34.5 26.4 8.1 Cloudy night
7 44 71 33.5 27.4 6.1 Clear sky
8 48 78 33.2 26.5 6.7 Clear sky
9 47 72 36.5 28.1 8.4 Clear sky
10 43 62 31.4 26.2 5.2 Clear sky
11 41 68 34.3 26.2 8.1 Clear sky
12 45 72 32.9 25.8 7.1 Clear sky
13 41 69 35.6 27.1 8.5 Clear sky
14 42 64 37.1 28.4 8.7 Cloudy night
15 44 66 35.2 27.3 7.9 Clear sky
16 41 66 32.1 26.5 5.6 Cloudy day
17 45 68 31.8 25.6 6.2 Cloudy day
18 46 70 33.8 26.9 6.9 Clear sky
19 48 66 34.7 27.3 7.4 Clear sky
20 41 67 32.3 26.7 5.6 Cloudy night

sive—as most frequently used for bridge inspections—and
the concrete elements are unexposed to direct sunlight, the
ability to obtain thermograms is affected [5, 6]. However,
it must be noted that the site chosen for the tests, i.e., the
municipality of Recife-PE, presents adequate environmental
conditions for the development of gradients in the concrete.
Here, IRT made the delaminations visible both during the
day and night.
As investigated, the detection of the depth and size of
the delaminations represents a limitation of IRT [7]. In the
present study, delaminations of the same size were used at dif-
ferent depths and thicknesses. The maximum depth reached
by the thermogram was 50 mm, for a 3 mm thick delami-
nation, represented by CS-2 D4. It is important to consider
that the area of the studied delaminations (10 × 10 cm) con-
stitutes a high percentage of the surface when compared to
others in the literature, and the larger the area of the delami-
nation, the more accurate is the detection in the thermograms.
Delaminations of much smaller areas would not probably be
accurately displayed in the thermograms.
The detection of defects (delaminations and voids) using
IRT on concrete surfaces involves observing the differences
in radiation emitted by the surface of the structure, which
can provide information on the existence of potential defects;
however, details about the nature of such defects or irregu-
larities are limited. In the case of bridges, delaminations and
voids can be linked to corrosion products or building defects.
The existence of temperature gradients is an important ref-
erence for the detection of defects in concrete with a high
confidence level.
The results obtained are corroborated by those of other
non-destructive techniques, such as ground penetrating radar,
ultrasonic tests, and impact-echo [2, 4, 9, 49].
Undoubtedly, the simulated delaminations in CS-1 and
CS-2 provide a model of the behavior of a defect in con-
cretes, and the thermal contrast found may be much larger

123
8 Page 10 of 12
than that of a real or natural delamination at a similar depth
[6]. The data and results show that the change in ambient
temperature and other environmental parameters results in
the development of thermal gradients in the concrete, which
help to detect and locate hidden damages. If reinforcement
steel were present above the delaminations, the results within
the time the defects visualization would vary, since steel has
greater thermal conductivity than concrete; therefore, the
heat flow would be faster when passing through the steel
material, but it would be limited in the delamination. On the
other hand, if reinforcement were present below the delami-
nations, the results would not vary from those shown in this
study, considering that corrosion would be the main cause of
these defects.
The detection of thermal gradient in the specimens does
not necessarily indicate that a real or natural delamination
would be observable in the same proportions and with the
same values. The thermal contrast would likely present dif-
ferent values for the same conditions and the same depth, but
its appearance in the thermogram would be a good indica-
tion of the presence of a defect. Because the contrast values
under these conditions may be minimal, the camera used
should have a thermal sensitivity lower than 0.1 °C.
5 Conclusions
In this research, a quantitative and qualitative experimental
study was performed to analyze the detection of delamina-
tions in concrete unexposed to direct sunlight through IRT.
It was demonstrated that the technique is adequate, even
when the ambient temperature is the only heat source. For
analysis, two specimens of different qualities were molded
with polystyrene plates inserted as delaminations. Moreover,
parameters such as ambient temperature, relative humidity,
depth, and thickness of delaminations were considered. The
results present the general behavior of delaminations and
their influence on the surface of the concrete with regard to
the development of detectable thermal contrasts.
Inspection with IRT can be effective in detecting delami-
nations or voids. The closer to the surface the defects are, the
easier it is to detect them. However, without exposure of the
structure to the sun, the inspection time is reduced to short
periods.
The variation in the w/c ratio and its impacts on the den-
sity, thermal conductivity, and heat capacity of the concrete
influence the detection of defects. In the detection of delam-
inations, the concrete with a lower w/c ratio showed the
best results due to its higher density. The results show that
the higher the concrete quality, the more effective the IRT
is.
The experimental results can probably be very differ-
ent from results obtained from real structures inspection,
123
Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8
considering the different environmental conditions and char-
acteristics that the concrete of the inspected structure is
subjected to. Nonetheless, the detection of visible thermal
contrasts in the thermograms accurately indicates the pres-
ence of defects in the concretes.
Infrared thermography is a suitable tool for bridge inspec-
tion because it is more reliable than solely visual inspection.
It provides more information, and its application is not
restricted to sections of the bridge exposed to the sun; more-
over, it also applies to the sections without contact with solar
radiation. However, many factors, such as the quality of the
concrete and the environmental conditions of the inspection
site, must be considered.
Although this technique allows for the location of defects,
it is unable to detect their depth. Further investigations using
other non-destructive tests may be necessary for better char-
acterization of the defects.
Acknowledgements To CAPES (Coordination of Improvement of
Higher Level Personnel) for the financial support.
References
1. Farrag, S., Yehia, S., Qaddoumi, N.: Investigation of mix-variation
effect on defect-detection ability using infrared thermography as
a nondestructive evaluation technique. J Bridge Eng. 21, 1–15
(2016). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000779
2. Vemuri, S., Atadero, A.: Case study on rapid scanning techniques
for concrete bridge decks with asphalt overlay: ground-penetrating
radar and infrared thermography. Pract. Period. Struct. Des.
Const. 22, 1–8 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-
5576.0000313
3. Nawy, E.G.: Concrete Construction Engineering Handbook, 2nd
edn. CRC Press, Upper Saddle River (2008). ISBN 978-0-849-
37492-0
4. Oh, T., Kee, S., Arndt, R., Popovics, J., Zhu, J.: Comparison of NDT
methods for assessment of a concrete bridge deck. J. Eng. Mech-
ASCE 193, 305–314 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.
1943-7889.0000441
5. Washer, G., Fenwick, R., Bolleni, N.: Effects of solar loading
on infrared imaging of subsurface features in concrete. J. Bridge
Eng. 15, 384–390 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.
1943-5592.0000117
6. Washer, G.: Advances in the use of thermographic imaging for the
condition assessment of bridges. Bridge Struct. 8, 81–90 (2012).
https://doi.org/10.3233/BRS-2012-0041
7. Hiasa S (2016) Investigation of infrared thermography for sub-
surface damage detection of concrete structures. Dissertation,
University of Central Florida
8. Hiasa, S., Catbas, F.N., Matsumoto, M., Mitani, K.: Monitoring
concrete bridge decks using infrared thermography with high speed
vehicle. Struct. Monit. Maint. 3, 277–296 (2016)
9. Kee, S., Oh, T., Popovics, J., Arndt, R., Zhu, J.: Nondestructive
bridge deck testing with air-coupled impact-echo and infrared ther-
mography. J. Bridge Eng. 17, 928–939 (2012). https://doi.org/10.
1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000350
10. Vemuri S (2016) Evaluation of rapid scanning techniques for
inspecting concrete bridge decks with asphalt overlay. Disserta-
tion, Colorado State University
Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8
11. Rehman, S.K., Ibrahim, Z., Memon, S.A., Jameel, M.: Nondestruc-
tive test methods for concrete bridges: a review. Constr. Build.
Mater. 107, 58–86 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.
2015.12.011
12. Watase, A., Birgul, R., Hiasa, S., Matsumoto, M., Mitani, K.,
Catbas, F.N.: Practical identification of favorable time windows
for infrared thermography for concrete bridge evaluation. Con-
str. Build. Mater. 101, 1016–1030 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2015.10.156
13. Alfredo-Cruz, R.A., Quintero-Ortiz, L.A., Galán-Pinilla, C.A.,
Espinosa-García, E.J.: Evaluación de técnicas no destructivas en
elementos de concreto para puentes. Rev. Fac. Ing. 24, 83–96
(2015)
14. Scott, M., Rezaizadeh, A., Delahaza, A., Santos, C., Moore, M.,
Graybeal, B., Washer, G.: A comparison of nondestructive evalua-
tion methods for bridge deck assessment. NDT&E Int. 36, 245–255
(2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0963-8695(02)00061-0
15. Abudayyeh, O., Abdel-Qader, I., Nabulsi, S., Weber, J.: Using
non-destructive technologies and methods in bridge management
systems. J. Urban Tech. 11, 63–76 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1080/
1063073042000341989
16. Yehia, S., Abudayyeh, O., Nabulsi, S., Abdelqader, I.: Detection of
Common Defects in Concrete Bridge Decks Using Nondestructive
Evaluation Techniques. J. Bridge Eng. 12, 215–225 (2007)
17. Forde, M.C.: International practice using NDE for the inspection of
concrete and masonry arch bridges. Bridge Struct. 6, 25–34 (2010).
https://doi.org/10.3233/BRS-2010-004
18. Clark, M., Mccann, D., Forde, M.C.: Application of infrared ther-
mography to the non-destructive testing of concrete and masonry
bridges. NDT&E Int. 36, 265–275 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0963-8695(02)00060-9
19. Vaghefi, K., Oats, R., Harris, D., Ahlborn, T., Brooks, C., Endsley,
K., Roussi, C., Shuchman, R., Burns, J., Dobson, R.: Evaluation
of commercially available remote sensors for highway bridge con-
dition assessment. J. Bridge Eng. 17, 886–895 (2012). https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000303
20. Bagavathiappan, S., Lahiri, B., Saravanan, T., Philip, J.: Infrared
thermography for condition monitoring: a review. Infrared Phys.
Technol. 60, 35–55 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infrared.
2013.03.006
21. Dabous, S., Yaghi, S., Alkass, S., Moselhi, O.: Concrete bridge deck
condition assessment using IR Thermography and Ground Pene-
trating Radar technologies. Automat. Constr. 74, 340–354 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.04.006
22. Ellenberg, A., Kontsos, A., Moon, F., Bartoli, I.: Bridge Deck
delamination identification from unmanned aerial vehicle infrared
imagery. Automat. Constr. 72, 155–165 (2016). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.autcon.2016.08.024
23. Hiasa, S., Birgul, R., Catbas, N.: A data processing methodology
for infrared thermography images of concrete bridges. Comput.
Struct. 190, 205–218 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.
2017.05.011
24. Rocha, J.H.A., Póvoas, Y.V.: Infrared thermography as a non-
destructive test for the inspection of reinforced concrete bridges: a
review of the state of the art. Rev. ALCONPAT 7, 200–2014 (2017)
25. Manning, D.G., Holt, F.B.: Detecting delaminations in concrete
Bridge Decks. Concr. Int. 2, 34–42 (1980)
26. Washer, G., Fenwick, R., Bolleni, N.: Development of Hand-held
Thermographic Inspection Technologies, 1st edn. MODOT, Jeffer-
son City (2009)
27. Baek, S., Xue, W., Feng, M.Q.: Nondestructive corrosion detec-
tion in RC through integrated heat induction and IR thermography.
J. Nondestruct Eval. 31, 181–190 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10921-012-0133-0
28. Tran, Q.H., Han, D., Kang, C., Haldar, A., Huh, J.: Effects of
ambient temperature and relative humidity on subsurface defect
Page 11 of 12 8
detection in concrete structures by active thermal imaging. Sen-
sors 17, 1–18 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3390/s17081718
29. Vaghefi, K., Ahlborn, T., Harris, D.K., Brooks, C.: Combined imag-
ing technologies for concrete bridge deck condition assessment.
J. Perform. Constr. Fac. 29, 1–8 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000465
30. ASTM: D4788–03: standard test method for detecting delam-
inations in bridge decks using infrared thermography. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken (2013)
31. Hiasa, S., Catbas, N., Matsumoto, M., Mitani, K.: Considerations
and issues in the utilization of infrared thermography for concrete
bridge inspection at normal driving speeds. J. Bridge Eng. 22, 1–11
(2017). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001124
32. Hiasa, S., Birgul, R., Matsumoto, M., Catbas, N.: Experimental and
numerical studies for suitable infrared thermography implementa-
tion on concrete bridge decks. Measurement 121, 144–159 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2018.02.019
33. Cotič, P., Kolarič, D., Bokan Bosiljkov, V., Bosiljkov, V., Jagličić,
Z.: Determination of the applicability and limits of void and
delamination detection in concrete structures using infrared ther-
mography. NDT&E Int. 74, 87–93 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ndteint.2015.05.003
34. Vavilov, V.: Pulsed thermal NDT of materials: back to the basics.
Nondestruct. Test. Eval. 22, 177–197 (2007). https://doi.org/10.
1080/10589750701448407
35. ASTM: C595 / C595 M-17, Standard Specification for Blended
Hydraulic Cements. ASTM International, West Conshohocken
(2017)
36. ABNT: NBR 7211: Agregado Para Concreto. ABNT, Rio de
Janeiro (2009)
37. FLIR: User’s Manual FLIR Exx Series, 1st edn. FLIR, Wilsonville
(2014)
38. ABNT: NBR 12655: Concreto de Cimento Portland – Preparo,
controle e recebimento. ABNT, Rio de Janeiro (2015)
39. ABNT: NBR 5739: Concreto-Ensaio de compressão de corpos-de-
prova cilíndricos. ABNT, Rio de Janeiro (2007)
40. Marshall, A.L.: The thermal properties of concrete. Build-
ing Science 7, 167–174 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-
3628(72)90022-9
41. Xi, Y., Bažant, Z.P., Jennings, H.M.: Moisture diffusion in cementi-
tious materials Adsorption isotherms. Adv. Cem. Mater. 1, 248–257
(1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/1065-7355(94)90033-7
42. Taoukil, D., El bouardi, A., Sick, F., Mimet, A., Ezbakhe, H.,
Ajzoul, T.: Moisture content influence on the thermal conductivity
and diffusivity of wood-concrete composite. Constr. Build. Mater.
48, 104–115 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.
06.067
43. Gomes, M.G., Flores-Colen, I., Manga, L.M., Soares, A., Brito,
J.: The influence of moisture content on the thermal conductivity
of external mortars. Constr. Build. Mater. 135, 279–286 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.12.166
44. Abdelhamid, M., Mihoubi, D., Sghaier, J., Bellagi, A.: Water sorp-
tion isotherms and thermodynamic characteristics of hardened
cement paste and mortar. Transport Porous Med. 113, 283–301
(2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-016-0694-y
45. Burgh, J., Foster, S.: Influence of temperature on water vapour
sorption isotherms and kinetics of hardened cement paste and con-
crete. Cem. Concr. Res. 92, 37–55 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.cemconres.2016.11.006
46. Al-hadharmi, L.M., Maslehuddin, M., Shameem, M., Ali, M.:
Assessing concrete density using infrared thermographic (IRT)
images. Infrared Phys. Technol. 55, 442–448 (2012). https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.infrared.2012.04.004
47. Mehta, K.P., Monteiro, P.: Concrete: Microstructure, Properties,
and Materials, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2012). ISBN
978-0-071-79787-0
123
8 Page 12 of 12 Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation (2019) 38:8

48. Maierhofer, C., Arndt, R., Rollig, M.: Influence of concrete 49. Aggelis, D., Kordatos, E., Soulioti, D., Matikas, T.: Combined use
properties on the detection of voids with impulse-thermography. of thermography and ultrasound for the characterization of sub-
Infrared Phys. Technol. 49, 213–217 (2007). https://doi.org/10. surface cracks in concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 24, 1888–1897
1016/j.infrared.2006.06.007 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.04.014

123