1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete

15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

16 COMPARISON OF AASHTO T-277

(ELECTRICAL) AND AASHTO
T-259 (90D PONDING) RESULTS
by C. ANDRADE* and D. WHITING**
* Instituto de Ciencias de la Construction "Eduardo Torroja", Madrid, Spain
** Construction Technology Laboratories, Skokie, Illinois, USA

SUMMARY

Several concrete types based in OPC or containing polymers have been submitted to
AASHTO methods T-277 (Rapid Chloride Permeability Test) and T-259 (90 days
ponding). Chloride profiles recorded after completion of both test types are compared and
analyzed by means of the application of Nerst-Plank or Nernst-Einstein equations. It is
shown that there is a relationship for conventional concretes, between coefficients
calculated fiom chloride concentration gradients produced, either by long-term ponding or
by accelerated ingress of chloride into the specimens. However, the Diffusion Coefficient
calculated fiom any of the migration equations yields lower values than those obtained from
longer-term ponding, although relative ranking of concrete types is the same. These
differences may be the consequence of the short testing time of the AASHTO T-277
procedure as well as the relatively high voltage used. These circumstances induce a surface
chloride concentration lower than in the case of natural difision (90 days ponding). Large
differences are computed when the concrete is too impermeable as is the case of polymer
concretes.

INTRODUCTION

With the aim of comparing concretes of various compositions with respect to their relative
resistance against chloride penetration, in the late 1970's a technique for determining the
relative permeability of concretes to chloride ions was developed under contract to the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The method was later standardized by the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) as
AASHTO T 277 [l] and in 1993 a revised version was standardized by ASTM as C 1202
[2]. Both methods rely on measurement of the amount of electrical charge passing through
a saturated 100 mm diameter slice of concrete 50 mm thick during a 6 hour test period
under an applied potential of 60 Vdc. The initial development report [3] noted that the test
was primarily qualitative in nature and should be used only to rank concretes in terms of
their relative ability to permit ingress of chloride ions and not to predict the quantitative
amount of chloride which could pass into the concrete. However, the test has been used,
especially in the USA, for specification purposes, using the data presented in the original
report to construct limits of acceptance based on amount of charge passed (in coulombs)
over the six hour test period. Variants of the test developed by Zhang, et. al [4] and
Detwiler, et.al [S] have also been proposed. Because of this,considerable criticism of the

135

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

test has recently occurred in both the U.S. [6] and Europe [7].

Recent work [8] has been carried out with the aim of clarifjring the hndamental meaning
of this test and to contribute to the understanding of the processes occurring when an
electrical field is applied to the concrete, such as occurs during cathodic protection, chloride
removal or realkalization. In the cited study Nernst-Plank and Nernst-Einstein equations
were used to calculate difhsion coefficients from a migration test (AASHTO T 277) either
in steady-state [8] or non-steady-state conditions [9]. Therefore, it appears feasible to
calculate chloride diffsuion coefficients (D values) from chloride profiles or from electrical
resistivity of the concrete.

The objective of the study described in this paper was to determine the relationships
between diffision coefficients calculated fiom electrical parameters of the AASHTO test
and calculated fiom the profiles of chloride actually entering the concrete under short-term
(i.e. using 60 Vdc potential) and long-term (90 day ponding) exposures. As the authors had
access to the original data used in the AASHTO T 277 test development, it was felt that
this would be especially pertinent to current discussions relating to significance and use of
the AASJATO procedure as well as to suggest modifications that may improve its suitability
as a predictive indicator of chloride penetration into concrete.

EXPERIMENTAL

Materials

Eight types of concrete were selected for this comparative study (see Table 1). Three were
conventional concretes (CON6, CON4, CON32) with water-to-cement (wlc) ratios ranging
fiom 0.6 to 0.32. The other five concrete types were modified by addition of different types
of polymers and special treatments.

All concretes, with the exception of the single polymer concrete (PC) mixture, were
produced with ASTM C 150 Type I portland cement. Coarse aggregate was a dense,
crushed limestone. Fine aggregate was a natural siliceous sand. Polymer modifier used in
the latex-modified concrete (LMC) was a 48% aqueous emulsion of styrene-butadiene
latex. Beads of a 75:25 blend of parailin and montan wax were used in the internally sealed
concrete (ISC).

An air-entraining agent based on neutralized Vinsol resin was used in all concretes except
the LMC and ISC mixes. A lignin-based water reducer was used in the low wlc ratio
concrete. The PC mix was produced with a polyester monomer binder and minus 2 mm
silica sand in proportion of 20:80 by mass. A methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) accelerator was
used at 2 percent by weight of resin binder. The polymer impregnated concrete (PIC) was
produced using a methyl methacrylate (MMA)/trimethyl propylyl tri methacrylate
(TMPTMA) monomer mix in proportion of 95:5 by mass. The monomer system was
catalyzed with 1% benzoyl peroxide initiator.

136

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

Mix proportions for all concretes produced for this study are given in Table 1.

From each concrete mix a series of slabs 600 X 300 X 150 mm in dimension were cast. Two
of these were plain concrete slabs, one of which was used for 90 day ponding tests and the
other for extraction of cores for AASHTO T 277 testing.

Test procedures

- Aashto T 277
Test slices 50 mm thick were removed fiom the top of each 100 mm diameter core taken
from the concrete slabs. The slices were allowed to air dry for 1 hour, then prepared for
test in accordance with the standard AASHTO method [l]. Just prior to test, the electrical
resistance of the specimen was measured using a 100 Hz AC soil resistance meter
applied across the screen electrodes within the test cell (Figures 1 and 2). Upon conclusion
of test the resistance of each specimen was again measured using the AC meter m.
Each test specimen was then sealed in a thick polyethylene bag and transferred to a freezer
maintained at - 18" C in order to prevent further migration of chloride ion within the
specimens until slices could be obtained for analysis of chloride gradients.

Each 50 mm X 100 mm test specimen was rapidly transferred to a water-cooled diamond

saw and a nominal 6 mm thick slice obtained from the top surface. Slices were removed
until each specimen had been sectioned into 5 slices. Slices were fractured in a jaw crusher,
then ground to pass a 150 pm sieve. The resulting powder samples were analyzed for total
chloride ion in accordance with AASHTO T 260.

- Aashto T 259 (90-day ponding)

Slabs companion to those from which the 100 mm cores were obtained were ponded with
a 3 percent solution of sodium chloride for a period of 90 days. At the end of this period
powder samples were obtained by drilling at the following increments: 0-10 mm, 10-16
mm, 16-22 mm, 22-29 mm, and 29-41 mm. Powder samples were analyzed for total
chloride ion.

Calculation of diffusion coefficients

Three theoretical procedures have been used to calculate diision coefficients: 1) the fitting
of equation [4] into the chloride profiles obtained either in the AASHTO T 277 (60V) test
or fiom the 90 d ponding test; 2) by introducing resistivity values; or 3) fiom charge passed
(coulombs) introduced into the Nernst-Einstein equation.

- From Chloride Profiles

The fitting of chloride profiles into equation [4] was camed out by regression analysis. The

137

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

computer program allows the simultaneous calculation of surface concentration C, and D

values. These D values are the "apparent" diffision coefficients, D, as they represent
effects both of diffision and of interaction of chloride ions with the cement matrix [l01

- From Nerst-Einstein Equation (AC Resistivity)

As shown by Andrade [S], by using this equation only effective diffusion coefficients, Deff,
can be calculated, as the equation holds only for ions d i s i i g under steady-state conditions
with no reaction [10]. The equation used is:

The coulombs passed during the 6 h of the AASHTO test may be converted into a "mean"
electrical current value by dividing the coulombs by the time (21,600 seconds). The 60 V
applied are then divided by this mean calculated current to obtain a mean resistance. Finally,
resistivity is obtained using the cell geometry parameters given in (2).

K, being the AC electrical resistance measured before (R,,,,d

the 60 V AASHTO test.

The resistivity value is then introduced in [l] in order to calculate D,, Therefore, the
following D,, are otained:

Coulombs (A.sg) P @.cm) D,, (cm2/sec)

In addition to these three theoretical parameters, an empirical approach suggested by Berke

[l l] has also been used. Berke's equations are:

From coulombs D= 0.0 103 X 1o - ~

From resistivity D= 54.6~1 0-8p-'.'

RESULTS

Results of AASHTO T 277 testing are shown in Table 2. In addition to the amount of
charge passed through the slices over the 6-hour test period, the electrical resistance of each
specimen before and after test was also recorded.

138

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

Chloride contents of the drill samples taken fiom the 90-day ponding slabs after completion
of the test are shown in Table 3. Significant amounts of chloride have diffused into the
specimens over the 90-day period of test. In a number of the test concretes, chloride ions
were detected at depths more than half-way through the test slice. For all concretes large
amounts of chloride were detected within the first 3 to 5 mm of the surface, indicating that
even highly impermeable concretes are not able to keep chloride from penetrating into the
near-surface skin under the conditions of the ponding test.

Chloride contents of slices taken fiom the AASHTO T 277 test specimens are shown in
Table 4. No data were obtained from the PC specimen. For comparative purposes, the
chloride profiles resulting from 90 day pondiig and the 60 V test are shown in Figure 3. For
two of the sets in Table 4 (CON6 and ISC-A), chloride content at the second sampling
increment is greater than from the first slice. This may be attributed to depletion of the
chloride concentration in the test cell reservoir as the test proceeded, such that the amount
of chloride entering the cell was reduced over the period of test.

In general, it can be seen fi-om Figure 3 that for ordinary concretes the profiles reached are
of similar shapes for both tests. This is especially true when the sampling interval closest
to the surface is disregarded. For polymeric concretes (LMC and ISC-A), agreement
between chloride profiles for the two tests is reasonably good. However, for the PIC mix
there is a significant difference between the two profiles, that arising from the 60 V test
being anomalously "flat". For PC no profiles were obtained from the 60 V test specimens,
so no comparisons can be made.

Values of C, calculated from chloride profiles in both tests are compared in Figure 4, which
shows that the C, achieved in the 60 V test are much smaller for ordinary, latex-modified,
and internally sealed concretes. That is, in spite of the fact that the profiles seem similar, the
more rapid 60 V test apparently does not allow sufficient time for a similar degree of
chloride interaction with the concrete.

Calculated Diffusion Coefficients

The data developed in the original FHWA test program [l21 presented in Tables 3 and 4
were used to calculate diffusion constants in accordance with the expressions previously
developed in Section 4 of this paper. Results are presented in Table 5 and Figure 5 . As
no chloride concentration profiles were obtained for the PC mix specimen subsequent to
the AASHTO T 277 test, no apparent diffusion constants were calculated in this case.

It is evident from table and figure 5 that D,, is always greater than D, ,, indicating that
the 60 V test does not absolutely reproduce the 90-day ponding test, as was already seen
in Figure 4. However, in terms of relative ranking the comparison is more optimistic.
Accordingly, rankings from 90 day D values compare favorably to those fi-om the rest of
the derived diffusion coefficients shown in Table 5, except for the case of those obtained
fiom 60 V profiles. For this last method of calculation, some anomalies are produced due
the flatness of the ISC and PIC chloride profiles. For these two concretes, the D, values

139

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

calculated from the 60 V profiles are too high.

DISCUSSION

Comparison Between Different Methods of Calculation of D Values

Several methods of calculation of the D values have been presented in Table 5. In order
to compare them, the differencesbetween what have been termed D, and D,, should be
clarified.

An apparentD )(, value has been attributed [10][8] to the value obtained in a non-steady
state experiment such as 90-day ponding, where chloride binding is occurring
siiultaneouslly with diision. On the other hand, an effective (D), value is obtained when
the experiment is performed under steady-state condition in concretes already saturated
with chlorides, therefore no binding is developed during diffision. Usually D,,, is greater
than D,,. From the results shown in Table 5, only D values calculated from the Einstein
equation (resistivity values) yield D,, In the other methods D, is calculated.

For any given concrete, the values obtained using Berke's equations (from coulombs, Q,
or resistivity, &d do not agree. This discrepancy may be attributed to a possible error
in the curve fitting used to derive the initial equations. While the values obtained appear
reasonable, the fact that the equations are empirical, make them less attractive than the use
of profile fitting or the Einstein equation.

Comparison Between 90-Day Ponding and 60 V Tests

However, the fact that (C, D,) are greater than (C,, D,) ,.
Quite good similitude of chloride profiles obtained from 90 d and 60 V tests was found.
, indicates that that the 60
V test is either too short, or the voltage too high, to fblly reproduce the 90 day test. In a
previous paper [9] it was found that a voltage drop of 12 V and a testing time of one week,
were able to reproduce profiles of ponding periods of one year.

In addition to the short duration of the 60 V test, two other reasons may help explain the
differences between the profile shapes of the 90 d and 60 V tests:

1) If the testing time is too short, the binding or reaction of chlorides with the cement
matrix may be less than in longer-term tests.

2) The D value may be an inverse function of the chloride concentration, D= f (l/C,).

Therefore, if one wishes to obtain similar absolute D values from 90 day and electrical
migration tests, the test duration and voltage have to be optimized in order to minimize the
development of other mechanisms such as absence of binding, or enhancement of the
dependence of D values on chloride concentration.

140

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

This optimization is especially critical in concretes made with polymers, as it is seen in

Table 5 that they may exhibit anomalous behaviour, which indicates different mechanisms
of chloride penetration in these concrete. Such differences may be due to "skin" effects or
non-constant D values.

CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions that can be drawn from present study include the following:

1. Migration concepts explain and just@ the application of a voltage drop across the
concrete in order to accelerate the passage of chloride ions.

2. Chloride Diffusion coefficients calculated by means of curve fitting of Migration

Coefficient @mig) into chloride profiles, have agreed quite well with those obtained
from Nernst-Einstein equation applied to the coulomb's or resistivity's results.

3. The Difision Coefficients calculated from the AASHTO T-259 (ponding) test are
higher to those obtained from the AASHTO T-277, which has been attributed to the
higher surface concentrations (CS) achieved in the natural ponding test. However, the
concrete ranking is similar in both test types.

4. AASHTO T-277 should be modified in order to better model and predict real
conditions: Either migration concepts are applied in order to calculate Diffusion
Coefficients or simple concrete resistivity values are measured and introduced into
Nernst-Einstein equation.

REFERENCES

1. AASHTO T 277-93, 'Standard Method of Test for Electrical Indication of Concrete's

Ability to Resist Chloride', American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Standard Specifications for Transportation
Materials and Methods of Sampling and Testing, Sixteenth Edition, 1993, Part 11-
TEsts, Washigston, DC, pp. 876-88 1.
2. ASTM C 1202-94, 'Standard Test Method for Electrical Indication of Concrete's
Ability to Resist Chloride Ion Penetration', American Society for Testing and
Materials, 1994 Book of ASTM Standards, Volume 04.02-Concrete and Aggregates,
Philadelphia, PA, 1994, pp. 620-625.
3. Whiting, D. 'Rapid Determination of the Chloride Permeability of Concrete',
FHWAIRD-8 11119, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 1981, 174 pp.
4. Zhang, M.H. and Gjorv, O.E., 'Permeability of High-Strenght Lightweight Concrete',
ACI J 88 (1991) pp. 463-469.
5. Detwiler, R.J., Kjellsen, K.O., and Gjorv, O.E., 'Resistance to Chloride Intrusion of
Concrete Cured at Different Temperatures', ACI J. 88 (1991), pp. 19-24.

141

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

6. Pfeifer, D.W., McDonald, D.B., and Krauss, P.D., 'The Rapid Chloride Permeability
Test and Its Correlation to the 90-day Ponding Test', PC1 J, no 1 (1994) pp. 38-47.
7. Arup, H., Sorensen, B., Frederiksen, J., and Thaulow, N., 'The Rapid Chloride
Permeation Test- An Assessment', CORROSIONl93, paper no 334, March 7-12, 1993,
New Orleans, Louisiana.
8. C. Andrade, 'Calculation of chloride diffision coefficients in concrete from ionic
migration measurements' Cement and Concrete Research, 23, 724-742 (1993).
9. C. Andrade, M.A Sanjuh, A. Recuero and 0. Rio 'Calculation of chloride diffusivity
in concrete fiom migration experiments in non-steady-state conditions' Cement and
Concrete Research, 24, 1214-1228 (1994).
10. -
A. Atkinson, A.K. Nickerson The diffision of ions through water saturated cmeent'
Journal of Materials Science 19.3068-3078 (1984).
11 N.S. Berke, M.C. Hicks 'Estimating the life cycle of reinforced Concrete decks and
marine piles using laboratory diffusion and corrosion data' Corrosion forms and
control of infiaestructure, ASTM STP 1137, V. Chacker Ed. ASTM, Philadelphia,
207-23 1 (1992).
12. Whiting, D. 'In-Situ Measurement of the Permeability of Concrete to Chloride Ions',
In-situ Nondestructive Testing of Concrete, ACI SP-82, American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, Michigan, 1984, pp. 501-524.

142

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

Table 1 Mix proportions and characteristics of fresh concretes used in the study
I

Mixture Type Cement Water Additive (S) Slump Air

(kg m-') @g m-) @g m*') . (mm) Content
("/.l m

CON6 w/c=O.60 390 234 - 198 8.0

CON4 w/c=O.40 390 156 - 50 7.9
CON32 wIc4.32 490 160 WRA-1.1 0 6.7
LMC latex modified 390 94 SBR latex - 182 7.7
58
ISC internally sealed 390 216 wax beads - 86 3.7
71
PC polym- resin - - catalyst- - --
20 % wlw 0.4 % wlw
PIC polym~ 390 195 PMMA - 81 5.2
impregnated 5% w/w

Table 2 Results of AASHTO T 277 testing on slices obtained from cores

sealed-heated
ISC internally 43 10 455 320
sealed-
unheated
PC polymer 0 >l@ 5 X 10'
PIC polymer 35 56 000 23 000
impregnated

143

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France
Table 3 Chloride contents of slices obtained fiom 90-day ponding specimens

144

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

Table 4 Chloride contents of slices obtained from AASHTO T277 specimens

145

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

Table 5 Values of resistivity, p,surface concentration C, and diffusivity, D, for the different test types.
I

FROM Cl-PROFILES EINSTEIN EQUATION BERKE EQUATIONS

DM ~ l 0 ' ~ c r n ~ l s Dca X 10" cm2/s D xl~-~crn~/s
.PP
Ponding 60 V Coulombs FROM FROM
R~~~~
AASHTO P(KQ.CM) KQ.CM Q RINT

CON6 C 0.552 0.258 Q 4570 P 9.3 4.16 12 5.74

D" 24.56 9 D 6.53 D 3.13 7.01

CON4 CS 0.75 0.30 Q 1540 P 16.02 10.81 4.9 3.31

D 7.90 4.32 D 2.20 D 1.82 2.70

CON32 CS 0.47 0.26 1 Q 1170 P 19.224 15.14 3.89 2.75

D 4.20 0.95 D 0.67 D 1.51 1.92

LMC CS 0.59 0.233 Q 613 P 41.65 24.83 2.26 1.26

D 3.44 0.3 D 0.87 D 0.7 1.17

ISC CS 0.082 0.068 Q 1330 P 20.02 12.89 4.33 2.64

D 6.26 122.5 D 1.37 D 1,45 2.26

ISC-A CS 0.51 0.245 Q 4310 P 7.29 5.12 11.63 7.34

D 18.34 13.1 D 4.40 D 4.00 5.70

PC CS 0.079 - Q P > 106 5x 10'

D 10.74 D D <0.0001 0.00074

PIC CS 0.22 0.008 Q 35 P 897.1 368.46 0.204 0.057

D 6.46 523 D 0.036 D 0.032 0.079

146
 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

Figure 1. Cell used in AASHTO test. Electrical resistance measurements.

Two units req8d.

Glue join screen

unit to cell

tI
I
I

Mesh soldered
between shims

147
Figure of the cell.
(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France
 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

%CL- total
0.6 -1 o 90 days
m GO Volts

CON 4

C O N 32 -
LMC

Figure 3. profiles from 90 d and 60 V tests.

148

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France

 1st RILEM workshop on Chloride Penetration into Concrete
15-18 october 1995, St Rémy lès Chevreuse, France

line of
/
equality /
Y
/
/ C 0 ~ 3 2m
/ *m =*
/ LMC -

Figure 4. Values of CS from 60 V versus CS 90 d calculated from chloride

profiles.

ISC PIC

0 6OVdc
0 Einstein in
Einstein fin
0 Berke Q
X Coulombs

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2 0 22 24 26
PONDING Dap X 10'@cm2/s

Figure 5. 149 calculated from different sources.

(c) 1995 RILEM, Cachan, France