buildings

Article
Rehabilitation of Corrosion-Defected RC
Beam-Column Members Using Patch
Repair Technique
Nameer A. Alwash, Mohammed M. Kadhum and Ahmed M. Mahdi *
Department of Civil Engineering, Collage of Engineering, University of Babylon, Hillah 51001, Iraq;
namer_alwash@yahoo.com (N.A.A.); drmohalkafaji@gmail.com (M.M.K.)
* Correspondence: eng.amm2018@gmail.com; Tel.: +964-772-4730776




Received: 18 March 2019; Accepted: 24 April 2019; Published: 10 May 2019


Abstract: An experimental study was conducted to evaluate the efficiency of patch repair to
rehabilitate corrosion-defected reinforced concrete (RC) beam-column members when exposed to
bending moments and axial forces. Ten RC beam-column members were tested under combined
constant axial force and four-point transverse load up to failure. Two levels of the constant axial force
were applied at either 15 kN or 30 kN (i.e., 25% or 50% of the ultimate design load of the control
specimen). The accelerated corrosion process was used to get steel reinforcement corrosion inside the
concrete of three levels, 0% and approximately 5% and 20%, according to Faraday’s law. The patch
repair technique of cleaning or replacing corroded steel bars and replacing the damaged concrete
cover with new mortar was used in this study. The experimental results of the corrosion-defected
specimens showed a significant deterioration in the structural performance and the integrity by
reducing ultimate capacity, stiffness, serviceability, and ductility. Additionally, the effect of increasing
axial force was recorded clearly by reducing the adverse effect of corrosion, especially for defected
specimens with high corrosion level. The deterioration of corrosion reinforcement could be overcome
when using a patch repair technique, which restored the undamaged state and was shown clearly by
using a patch repair technique with replacing corroded steel bars.

Keywords: corrosion; rehabilitation; patch repair; axial force; beam-column member

1. Introduction
Structural rehabilitation has become an important technique that is necessary for improving and
enhancing the efficiency of repairing defected structural members. The deterioration of reinforced
concrete (RC) structures along with the contrast and the prices of repairing proceedings have encouraged
the introduction of innovative materials and new methods for structure rehabilitation. The most
common cause of premature material deterioration is when the structure is exposed to a harsh service
environment, and then reinforcement corrosion takes place. Corrosion is similar to cancer for the
reinforced concrete structure because it degrades reinforcement, which affects its strength and its
life span. Concrete is alkaline in nature with a pore solution that naturally passivizes embedded
reinforcing bars, and then protective oxide films of the high alkaline environment are produced.
Corrosion can take place when the passive film is removed or is locally damaged. Carbonation-induced
and chloride-induced corrosion of the reinforcements are the most common environmental impacts
that cause the failure of concrete structures. There are several major defects caused by corrosion,
such as early failure of the corroded steel bars due to a reduction in ductility and the area of the
cross sectional steel bars, which increases the volume of the bars from corrosion products, and then
steel-concrete interface bonding problems can occur [1]. The corrosion of the steel reinforcement affects

Buildings 2019, 9, 120; doi:10.3390/buildings9050120 www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings

Buildings 2019, 9, 120 2 of 15

the mechanical behavior of structures. There are several aspects affected by corrosion, such as, stiffness,
serviceability, ductility, and load-carrying capacity. The stiffness of a structure as well as the moment
and shear capacities are reduced due to a reduction of the cross section area of bars. Additionally,
the ductility, the serviceability and load-carrying capacity are affected by the change in rebar ductility
and the cracked concrete surrounding the corroded reinforcements.
There are several techniques for rehabilitation of the corrosion-defected reinforced concrete
members. Patch repair is one of the most common rehabilitation methods used to repair structural
deterioration. It is the most applicable and skillful technique for rehabilitation of corrosion-defected
reinforced concrete areas of existing structures. This rehabilitation technique deals with two levels of
corrosion; lower levels up to 15% are rehabilitated by cleaning the corroded steel bars, but the high
levels beyond 15% are rehabilitated by replacing corroded bars in respect to the overlap length [2].
With the improvement of modern science and technology, a radical change in structural
construction has been observed. The structural constructions of the 1800s are architecturally simple
and comprise fewer stories compared to this century’s structures. In the 1900s, slightly more complex
architectural parameters were introduced, and the structures became comparatively taller. Now,
it has become a challenge for structural and geotechnical engineers to meet the design needs when
considering the variation in shapes, vertical irregularities, safety against natural calamities such as
wind and earthquakes and economical facts. As the heights of the RC structures increase, they become
prone to severe action caused by an earthquake or the wind [3].
For these reasons, many researchers have conveyed great interest in studying high rise RC
structures and the effects of wind and earthquakes on its members. Structural elements used in
a building with many stories and large structures, such as flexural members, are under combined
transverse and axial loading. Reinforced concrete structural members that are subjected to combined
axial compression force and transverse flexural load at the same time are called “beam-column”
members, and they are mostly used in frame type structures. In this case, these beam-column members
are often subjected to lateral forces from wind and earthquake in addition to transverse loads.
Many researchers have shown the effects of corrosion and its degree on the mechanical properties
of steel reinforcement in addition to its effect on the behavior and the flexural strength of RC beams.
Al-musallam [4] showed the effects of steel reinforcement corrosion on the mechanical properties
of steel bars. He found that the ductility of corroded bars was decreased when corrosion levels
increased and steel bars with more than a 12.6% corrosion level indicated a brittle behavior. Mangat
P.S. and Elgarf M.S. [5] tested 111 RC beams to examine their flexural capacity after being exposed to
different levels of reinforcement corrosion by an accelerated corrosion process. They mentioned that
the deterioration in the bond strength of the steel-concrete interface was the main cause of decreasing
flexural strength. Carlos G. et al. [6] experimentally investigated the influence of fiber reinforcement
in the flexural behavior of corrosion-damaged reinforced concrete beams. They conducted that the
residual capacity of corroded beams increased for specimens with fiber reinforced concrete compared
with plain concrete, and fiber reinforced proved to be the most effective in preventing brittle failure.
Ballim Y. and Reid J. C. [7] experimentally studied the influence of corrosion reinforcement on the
serviceability state in terms of the deflection of RC beams. They measured the mid-span deflection
of specimens subjected to 34% and 23% of the design ultimate load and a period of 30 days of
simultaneous accelerated corrosion. Results showed that 6% of the mass of the steel was corroded and
beam deflection was increased by 40–70% compared with the control beam. Goitseone M. et al. [8]
carried out tests on nine RC beams subjected to four-point loading and corroded using an impressed
current to the deformed tensile steel bars and 5% NaCl solution with constant wetting cycles and two
different drying cycles. They showed that the ultimate moment capacity of the beams was reduced
linearly to the level of corrosion, thus for every 1% of corrosion level, there was a 0.7% reduction in the
ultimate capacity. Gu X.L. et al. [9] constructed twelve beams where three beams were corroded by the
natural corrosion process and others were corroded by an artificial corrosion process. They noted that
the load carrying capacity and the stiffness of the beams decreased with the increase in the corrosion
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 3 of 15

degree. Wenjun Z. et al. [10] experimentally investigated the behavior of corroded RC beams under
real chloride environment conditions. The long term corrosion process was used to represent the real
structural condition; thus the specimens were stored in a chloride environment for 26 years. The test
results showed that less ductility failure of the corroded bars was recorded, and the ultimate elongation
reduced more than 50% compared with the non-corroded steel bars. The mode of failure changed for
the corroded beams compared to the non-corroded one beams from shear failure to flexural failure due
to the large effect of corrosion on the flexural capacity rather than the shear capacity. Torres-Acosta et
al. [11] found that structural stiffness was reduced linearly with an increase in the level of corrosion.
Yafei M. et al. [12] investigated the effect of corrosion on the steel-concrete interface bond behavior.
They found that the corrosive influence on bond strength could be ignored when the corrosion loss was
less than 2.4% and that the bond behavior between the smooth bar and the concrete was more sensitive
to corrosion than that of the specimen with the deformed bar. Lijum H. et al. [13] experimentally
studied the behavior of RC ultra-high toughness cementitious composite beam. They indicated that
corrosion clearly affected the load carrying capacity, the deformation, the ductility and the flexural
crack patterns of the damaged specimens.
On the other side, there have been several studies on the rehabilitation techniques of RC members
with corroded steel reinforcement. Niloufar G. et al. [14] carried out an experimental test on five
post-tension corroded, deteriorated, and repaired RC beams. An electrolyte corrosion technique was
used to accelerate the reinforcement corrosion inside the concrete. All beams were pre-stressed with
two seven 7-wire, low-relaxation strands in addition to ordinary reinforcement with deformed main
and secondary bars. The level of corrosion was 15% as weight loss. A patch repair technique of cleaning
the corroded steel bars in addition to replacing the damaged concrete cover using new mortar was
used in this study. Results showed that using high performance concrete materials as a patch repair
without epoxy at the repair substrate interface could significantly restore the structural performance
of the deteriorated PT (Post Tension) beams. Garyfalia G. et al. [15] experimentally tested four RC
beams under corrosion damage. An acceleration corrosion process with wet/dry cycles was used to
get low, medium and high corrosion level. The cement-based repair mortar and two near surface
mounted (NSM) fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) laminates were applied to retrofit the deterioration
RC beam specimens. The study notes that the patch repair and the NSM strengthening enhanced
the load carrying capacity. Al-Saidy et al. [16] study consisted of an experimental program from ten
damaged/repaired reinforced concrete beams. Carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets were
used for the external strengthening of the corroded beams. Results showed that the strengthening
technique by CFRP sheet for corroded RC beams was capable of maintaining the load carrying capacity,
thus the strength of the beams that were damaged due to corrosion was restored to the control state
when they were strengthened with CFRP sheets. Almassri et al. [17] investigated the NSM (CFRP) rods
as a repair technique for the rehabilitation of defects in the RC beam members of buildings and as a way
of restoring the mechanical performance of corrosion-damaged beams. The test results showed that
the NSM technique was able to increase the ultimate load capacity of corroded beams and to slightly
increase the stiffness. Furthermore, the sufficient ductility could be restored. Rami H. Haddad [18]
experimentally investigated the effectiveness of using segmented or continuous U-warp CFRP sheets
to retrofit RC beams with corrosion damage. An acceleration corrosion process of dry/wet cycles was
used to accelerate corroded main tension bars. The test results showed a significant reduction in the
load carrying capacity of about 13% under the corrosion level of 8% (the average weight loss) compared
with the control non-corroded beams. Flexural performance of the corroded beams was tested as
the load capacity and the stiffness were increased by using the CFRP sheet. Huifeng Z. et al. [19]
conducted an experimental program on eight RC beams subjected to an accelerated corrosion process
and then rehabilitated with CFRP sheets. These beam specimens were divided into two groups, one
that was strengthened with CFRP sheets and one that was un-strengthened. The test results showed
that the flexural bearing capacity of the RC beams decreased as the corrosion level of the tensile bars
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 4 of 15

increased. The specimens strengthened with composite materials CFRP sheets gave a positive effect on
the load-carrying capacity and the flexural behavior.
Many researchers have studied the effects of corrosion on the behavior and the ultimate strength
of RC beams in addition to the studies on the rehabilitation techniques used for this purpose, but no
study was found on the experimental study of the structural behavior and ultimate strength of
defected/rehabilitated RC beam-column members exposed to bending moments and axial forces.
Therefore, the present study concentrated on the experimental investigation of load carrying capacity,
serviceability, stiffness, crack patterns, concrete strain, and ductility of RC beam-column members by
using a patch repair technique. In addition, the study shows the effects of increasing axial force on the
structural behavior and the ultimate strength of defected and defected/rehabilitated specimens.

2. Experimental Program

2.1. Specimen Details

The experimental work was conducted in the structural laboratory of the civil engineering
department of Al-Qadisiyah University. Ten RC beam-column members with a dimension of
160 × 200 × 1500 mm were tested under constant axial force and four-point transverse load up to
failure. The reinforcement details of beam-column members are shown in Figure 1. Two deformed
bars with 10 mm diameters and two other bars with 8 mm diameters were used for longitudinal
tension and compression reinforcement, respectively. For stirrups, a 6 mm diameter was used at a
spacing of 50 mm, except the middle third span of the member, where the spacing used was 100 mm.
The clear concrete cover was 20 mm on all sides of the specimen. The experimental study consisted
of two test groups, as illustrated in Table 1. Group (A) included the control (undamaged) specimen,
the corrosion-damaged specimens under low or high corrosion levels of 5% or 20%, respectively, and
the damaged/patch-rehabilitated specimens that underwent cleaning or replacement of corroded steel
bars and repaired the damaged concrete cover with new mortar. These specimens were tested under
an axial force of 15 kN in addition to the transverse applied load. Group (B) included the same set of
specimens but with an axial force of 30 kN.

Table 1. Designation and details of tested specimens.

Symbol of * Degree of Rehabilitation

Groups Axial Force (kN)
Specimens Corrosion (%) Technique
BC.C0 .RN .A15 0 Non 15
BC.C5 .RN .A15 5 Non 15
A BC.C20 .RN .A15 20 Non 15
BC.C5 .RCS .A15 5 cleaning corroded bars 15
BC.C20 .RRS .A15 20 replacing corroded bars 15
BC.C0 .RN .A30 0 Non 30
BC.C5 .RN .A30 5 Non 30
B BC.C20 .RN .A30 20 Non 30
BC.C5 .RCS .A30 5 cleaning corroded bars 30
BC.C20 .RRS .A30 20 replacing corroded bars 30
* Where: BC stands for beam-column, Ca stands for degree of corrosion (5% or 20%), Rb stands for rehabilitation
technique, CS stands for cleaning steel, RS stands for replacing steel, and Ac stands for axial force (either 15 kN or
30 kN).
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 5 of 15
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 15

Figure 1. Concrete
Figure geometry
1. Concrete geometryand
and reinforcement details
reinforcement details of of tested
tested specimen.
specimen.

2.2. Material Properties

2.2. Material Properties
The properties of the main tension bars were recorded as follows: 587 MPa as yield strength,
The properties of the main tension bars were recorded as follows: 587 MPa as yield strength, 678
678 MPa as rupture strength, and 19.4% as elongation. The reinforcement bars elastic modulus was
MPa as rupture strength, and 19.4% as elongation. The reinforcement bars elastic modulus was
assumed to be 2 × 1055 MPa. A mechanical concrete mixture machine was used to produce normal
assumed to be 2 × 10 MPa. A mechanical concrete mixture machine was used to produce normal
strength concrete for RC beam-column members, and all these members were cast at the same time
strength concrete for RC beam-column members, and all these members were cast at the same time
and had the same concrete quality. The calculated concrete compressive strength was 35 MPa based
and had the same concrete quality. The calculated concrete compressive strength was 35 MPa based
on cubic tests. The repair materials used in this study were from Sika productions as Sika Mono
on cubic tests. The repair materials used in this study were from Sika productions as Sika Mono Top-
Top-614 and Sikadur-32. The first one, a one-component modified cementitious repair mortar with a
614 and Sikadur-32. The first one, a one-component modified cementitious repair mortar with a
compressive strength of 35 MPa, a flexural strength of 10 MPa, and a layer thickness-up to 60 mm- was
compressive strength of 35 MPa, a flexural strength of 10 MPa, and a layer thickness-up to 60 mm-
used for the damaged concrete repair. The second one, two-components, solvent-free was used as a
was used for the damaged concrete repair. The second one, two-components, solvent-free was used
bonding agentagent
as a bonding in mortar or steel.
in mortar Sikadur-32
or steel. properties
Sikadur-32 are are
properties easyeasy
to apply, solvent-free,
to apply, unaffected
solvent-free, by
unaffected
moisture (corrosion
by moisture protection),
(corrosion and have
protection), anda have
high tensile
a highstrength
tensile 18-20 MPa18-20
strength and high
MPabond
and strength to
high bond
concrete of 3 MPa. They were used in this study to compensate for the decrease in bond strength
strength to concrete of 3 MPa. They were used in this study to compensate for the decrease in bond of the
corroded steel
strength of thebars and assteel
corroded bonding agents
bars and between agents
as bonding old concrete
between andold
new mortar.and new mortar.
concrete
2.3. Accelerated Corrosion Process
2.3. Accelerated Corrosion Process
An electrochemical process was used in this study to accelerate the corrosion of steel reinforcement
An electrochemical process was used in this study to accelerate the corrosion of steel
embedded inside the concrete. The corrosion was limited to critical flexural zone with a length, a width,
reinforcement embedded inside the concrete. The corrosion was limited to critical flexural zone with
and a height of 400 mm, 160 mm, and 40 mm, respectively. This limited region of the member was
a length, a width, and a height of 400 mm, 160 mm, and 40 mm, respectively. This limited region of
submerged in a plastic container with 5% concentrate of sodium chloride solution. Power supplies with
the member was submerged in a plastic container with 5% concentrate of sodium chloride solution.
adjustable voltage and a direct current (DC) of 700 mA were used for this process. The reinforcement
Power supplies with adjustable voltage and a direct current (DC) of 700 mA were used for this
cage was connected to the positive side and the stainless steel plate was connected to the negative side of
process. The reinforcement cage was connected to the positive side and the stainless steel plate was
the DC power supply. The desired degrees of corrosion were 5%, and 20% of the deformed bars, which
connected to the negative side of the DC power supply. The desired degrees of corrosion were 5%,
could occur in a period of 8 and 32 days, respectively according to Faraday’s law. The theoretical mass
and 20% of the deformed bars, which could occur in a period of 8 and 32 days, respectively according
of rust produced per unit of surface area could be determined based on Faraday’s law, as illustrated in
to Faraday’s law. The theoretical mass of rust produced per unit of surface area could be determined
Equation (1).
based on Faraday’s law, as illustrated in EquationW ×(1).
Iapp. × T
Mth = 𝐖 × 𝐈 (1)
F𝐚𝐩𝐩. × 𝐓
𝐌𝐭𝐡 = (1)
The actual mass of rust per unit of surface area was𝐅determined by a gravimetric test in accordance
with ASTM G1 [20],
The actual massas illustrated
of rust perin unit
Equation (2). area was determined by a gravimetric test in
of surface
accordance with ASTM G1 [20], as illustrated in Equation (2).
W −W
Mac = Wi − Wf (2)
M = ×D×L
π (2)
π×D×L
The degree of induced corrosion was also expressed in terms of the percentage mass loss (ρ)
calculated as shown in Equation (3).
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 6 of 15

Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15

The degree of induced corrosion was also expressed in terms of the percentage mass loss (ρ)
calculated as shown in Equation (3).
W −
W −WWf
ρρ =
= i ××100
100 (3)
(3)
Wi
W
The equivalent corrosion current density (Icorr. corr.)) could
could be
be determined
determined byby equating
equating Equation
Equation (1) (1)
and Equation
Equation(2), (2),assuming that
assuming thethe
that theoretical massmass
theoretical and the
andactual mass ofmass
the actual rust was equal
of rust was(i.e., Iapp.
equal
as = Icorr. ), as
= Icorr.I),app.
(i.e.,
ρ×w ×F
Iapp. = Icorr. = ρ × wi × F (4)
I ∙ = I ∙ = 100 × π × D × L × W × T (4)
100 × π × D × L × W × T
where Iapp. represents an electrical current applied (Amp/cm2 ), ρ is the degree of corrosion (%), wi is
where I ∙ represents an electrical current applied (Amp/cm2 , ρ is the degree of corrosion (%),
the initial mass of corroded bars (g), F is Faraday’s constant (F = 96,500 Amp × Sec), D is the original
w is the initial mass of corroded bars (g), F is Faraday’s constant (F = 96,500 Amp × Sec), D is the
diameter of corroded bars (cm), L is the length of corroded bars in the corrosion region (cm), W is the
original diameter of corroded bars (cm), L is the length of corroded bars in the corrosion region (cm),
equivalent weight of reinforcing steel, which represents the atomic weight of the iron element (Fe) to
W is the equivalent weight of reinforcing steel, which represents the atomic weight of the iron
its equivalent weight (W = 27.925 g).
element (Fe) to its equivalent weight (W = 27.925 g).
Equation (4) represents the simplified Faraday’s law formula and was used for calculating the
Equation (4) represents the simplified Faraday’s law formula and was used for calculating the
time required to get the t desired degrees of corrosion. Figure 2 shows the experimental setup of the
time required to get the t desired degrees of corrosion. Figure 2 shows the experimental setup of the
accelerated corrosion process.
accelerated corrosion process.

Figure
Figure2.2.Acceleration corrosionprocess.
Acceleration corrosion process.

2.4. Patch
2.4. Patch Repair
Repair Technique
Technique
The rehabilitation
The rehabilitation technique
technique used
used inin this
this study
study was
was patch
patch repair
repair byby cleaning
cleaning or or replacing
replacing thethe
corroded steel bars and repairing the damaged concrete with new mortar.
corroded steel bars and repairing the damaged concrete with new mortar. Firstly, we removed the Firstly, we removed the
damaged concrete
damaged concrete using
using manual
manual and
and mechanical
mechanical methods.
methods. An An angle
angle grinder,
grinder, aa claw
claw hammer,
hammer, and and aa
chisel were used to remove the defective concrete. Secondly, we cleaned
chisel were used to remove the defective concrete. Secondly, we cleaned the remaining undamaged the remaining undamaged
concrete surface by using an air blower;blower; this
this stage
stage was
was very
very important
important to toget
getstrong
strongsubstrate.
substrate.Thirdly,
Thirdly,
we evaluated the damage in steel reinforcement due to corrosion. For For the
the low
low corrosion
corrosion level
level of
of 5%,
5%,
the steel bars were cleaned from rust by a drill motor with a brush, as illustrated in Figure 3a. For the
high corrosion
corrosion level
level ofof 20%,
20%, the
the corroded
corrodedpart partof ofthe
thesteel
steelbar
barwas
wascut cutand
andremoved,
removed,then thenreplaced
replacedbybya
anew
newsteel bar
steel ofof
bar the
thesame
same diameter
diameter with
withconsideration
consideration to to
thethe
overlap
overlaplength, as as
length, illustrated
illustratedin Figure 3b.
in Figure
Fourthly, the sikadur-32 bonding agent and the protection material from the
3b. Fourthly, the sikadur-32 bonding agent and the protection material from the corrosion were used corrosion were used to
provide
to a bond
provide a bondbetween
between thethe
existing concrete
existing concreteandand
the new mortar
the new in addition
mortar to the
in addition tobond between
the bond steel
between
bars and
steel barsthe
andmortar. Finally,
the mortar. sikamonotop-614
Finally, sikamonotop-614(polymer modified
(polymer repair mortar)
modified was used
repair mortar) wasto used
replace
to
replace the damaged concrete layer. Good curing for the mortar was used to prevent shrinkage.3
the damaged concrete layer. Good curing for the mortar was used to prevent shrinkage. Figure
shows the
Figure sketchthe
3 shows of sketch
the patch repair
of the patchtechnique by cleaning
repair technique byorcleaning
replacing or the corroded
replacing thesteel bars. steel
corroded
bars.
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 15
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 15
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 7 of 15

(a)
(a)

(b)
(b)
Figure 3. Detail of the patch repair technique. (a) patch repair by cleaning corroded steel
Figure
bars;
Figure(b)3.Patch
3. Detailof
Detail of
thethe
repair bypatch
patch repair
replacing
repair technique.
corroded
technique. (a)repair
steel
(a) patch patchbyrepair
bars. cleaning bycorroded
cleaning corroded
steel bars; (b) steel
Patch
bars;
repair(b)
byPatch repair
replacing by replacing
corroded steel bars.corroded steel bars.
2.5. Test Setup
2.5.Test
2.5. TestSetup
Setup
A flexural test was performed for each beam-column member supported over a span of 1400
mm A A flexural
and flexural
under test was
was performed
constant
test axial forcefor
performed foreach
in eachbeam-column
addition to four-point
beam-column member supported
transverse
member load over
supported toa failure.
upover span
a spanof After
1400 mm
the
of 1400
and and
mm under
accelerated constant
corrosion
under constantaxial
process force
axial and in
force addition
the
in patch to to
repair
addition four-point
four-pointtransverse
technique, all specimens
transverse load up
were
load uptotofailure.
painted with
failure. After the
a white
After the
accelerated
color to observe
accelerated corrosion
corrosion process
the crack
process and the
development patch
and the patch and repair
marking.
repair technique,
A steel
technique, all specimens
allframe
specimenswith werewere painted
a hydraulic
paintedjack with a white
withofa 60-ton
white
colorto
capacity
color to observe
observe
was used the
the crack
incrack development
this study. A necessary
development and marking.
and marking.
modification AAsteel
steel frame
to this
frameframewith
with wasaahydraulic
hydraulic jackof
made by strengthening
jack of 60-ton
60-ton
capacity
the lower
capacity was used in
horizontal
was used in this
partstudy.
this of theAAframe
study. necessaryandmodification
necessary fixing a new
modification totothis frame
supporting
this frame was
frame
was made byby
with
made strengthening
a new hydraulic
strengthening the
lower
system
the horizontal
lower andhorizontalpart
new hydraulicof the frame
part ofcylinder and
the frame fixing
(700 bar,
and a new
500 kN
fixing supporting
a newmaximum frame
supporting force) with a new
capacity,
frame hydraulic
with for system
axialhydraulic
a new force, as
and new
shown
system in hydraulic
and Figure 4. cylinder (700 load
During cylinder
new hydraulic each bar,(700
500
stepkN themaximum
bar, corresponding
500 force) central
kN maximum capacity, for axial
force)vertical
capacity, force,
deflection,
for axialas the
showncrack
force, in
as
Figure
patterns,
shown 4. During
in and each load
the4.ultimate
Figure step
During capacity the corresponding
each loadwere step recorded. central vertical
A digitalcentral
the corresponding deflection,
image vertical the
correlation crack patterns,
(DIC) with
deflection, and
high
the crack
the ultimate
quality
patterns, andcapacity
digital camera
the were
(Nikon
ultimate recorded.
D7100,A
capacity digital
24.1
were image correlation
Megapixel)
recorded. and (DIC)
a computer
A digital imagewith
program highcalled
correlation quality GOM
(DIC) digital camera
Correlate
with high
(Nikondigital
version
quality D7100,
2017 were24.1used
camera Megapixel)
to measure
(Nikon and aconcrete
D7100, computer
24.1 program
strain.
Megapixel) andcalled GOM Correlate
a computer program version
called GOM2017 were used
Correlate
to measure concrete strain.
version 2017 were used to measure concrete strain.

Figure
Figure Sketchofofmodified
4. 4.Sketch modified testing
testingmachine.
machine.
Figure 4. Sketch of modified testing machine.
3. Experimental Results and Discussion
3. Experimental Results and Discussion
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 8 of 15

3. Experimental Results and Discussion

3.1. Actual Degree of Corrosion

Low level (5%) and high level (20%) corrosion degrees were considered in this study. To calculate
the actual degree of corrosion, we followed the steps of the ASTM G1. After testing all beam-column
members, the corroded reinforcement bars were cut and extracted from the limited region of corrosion.
Then, they were cleaned and re-weighted without any dust. The actual corrosion degree was calculated
based on Equation (5):
W − Wf
CD = i × 100 (5)
Wi
where Wi is the initial mass of the non-corroded bars (g) and Wf is the mass of the corroded bars after
cleaning the rust (g). The exact masses of the original and the corroded (after cleaning) steel bars with
the same lengths were measured, then the degrees of corrosion were calculated from Equation (5),
as illustrated in Table 2, and were found to be 5.5% and 20.7% at 8 days and 32 days, respectively.
This level of corrosion was close to the predicted corrosion from Faraday’s law.

Table 2. Desired and actual degree of corrosion of corroded steel bars.

Initial Mass of Final Mass of Desired Degree Actual Degree of

Non-Corroded Bar Wi, (g) Corroded Bar Wf, (g) of Corrosion (%) Corrosion CD , (%)
270 255 5 5.5
270 214 20 20.7

3.2. Load-Deflection Response and Cracking Pattern

At the early stages of loading, reinforced concrete beam-column specimens were free from any
cracks, except the corroded specimens that contained horizontal cracks due to corrosion. The amount
of displacement was very small because the stresses resulting from the applied loads were small at
this stage of loading. With an increase in the transverse applied load, the cracks began to appear.
The experimental results of the ultimate load and the service mid-span deflection for the tested
specimens are illustrated in Table 3. A comparison of the load-deflection responses for each group is
given in Figure 5.

Table 3. Ultimate load capacity and service deflection for tested specimens.

Symbol of Degree of Ultimate Load Mid-Span Service Allowable Deflection

Groups
Specimens Corrosion CD (%) PU , kN Deflection, mm ACI-318 [21], mm
BC.C0 .RN .A15 0 68 3.6 3.9
BC.C5 .RN .A15 5 64 4 3.9
A BC.C20 .RN .A15 20 43 5.1 3.9
BC.C5 .RCS .A15 5 65 3.8 3.9
BC.C20 .RRS .A15 20 67 3.7 3.9
BC.C0 .RN .A30 0 73 3.5 3.9
BC.C5 .RN .A30 5 70 3.9 3.9
B BC.C20 .RN .A30 20 48 4.5 3.9
BC.C5 .RCS .A30 5 71 3.7 3.9
BC.C20 .RRS .A30 20 72 3.6 3.9
Buildings 2019, 9,
Buildings 2019, 9, 120
x FOR PEER REVIEW 99 of
of 15
15
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 15
80
80 80
70
80
70
60
60 60
50

(kN)
(kN)
60
50

(kN)
(kN)

40

Load
Load

40 40

Load
Load

30
40

Applied
Applied

30 BC.C0.RN.A30
20

Applied
Applied

BC.C0.RN.A15
20 20 BC.C5.RN.A30
BC.C0.RN.A30
BC.C5.RN.A15
BC.C0.RN.A15 10 BC.C20.RN.A30
BC.C5.RN.A30
20 BC.C20.RN.A15
BC.C5.RN.A15 10 BC.C5.Rcs.A30
BC.C20.RN.A30
BC.C5.Rcs.A15
BC.C20.RN.A15 0
BC.C5.Rcs.A30
0 BC.C5.Rcs.A15 0 0 5 10 15 20
0 5 10 15 20
0 Deflection 0 5Deflection
10 (mm)
15 20
0 5 10 (mm)15 20
Deflection (mm) Deflection (mm)
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 5. Comparison of load deflection response for each group. (a) Group A; (b) Group
Figure
B. Figure 5. Comparison
5. Comparisonofofload loaddeflection response
deflection response forfor
eacheach group.
group. (a) Group
(a) Group A; (b)A; (b) Group
Group B.
B.
3.2.1.
3.2.1. Specimens
Specimens in in Group
Group A A
3.2.1.Five
Specimens in Group A
Fivespecimens
specimens(BC.C (BC.C 0 .R
0.RNN.A
.A1515,, BC.C
BC.C55.R .A15
.RNN.A , BC.C20.R
15, BC.C20
.RNN.A
.A1515 , BC.C5.R
, BC.C 5 .R .A.A
CSCS 15,15
, and
and BC.C
BC.C 20 .R
20.R RS.A
.A, 15
RS 15 as,
as shown
shown Five in Figure
in specimens
Figure 6) 6) weretested
(BC.C
were 0.Rtested
N.A15 ,under
under BC.Ca5.R aconstant
constant
N.A15, BC.C axial
axial20.R force
N.A15,of
force of 15 kN,
BC.C
15 kN,
5.RCSandand
.A15, weandgradually
we BC.C20.RRSapplied
gradually .A15, as
applied
transverse
shown
transverse load
in Figure
load upup to failure.
6) were Horizontal
testedHorizontal
to failure. corrosion
under a constant corrosioncracks
axial were appearing
forcewere
cracks of 15appearingbefore
kN, and we testing
before due
gradually to internal
testing applied
due to
pressure
transverse from
load
internal pressure theupcorrosion
from to the
failure.product.
Horizontal
corrosion First, corrosion
product. flexural cracks
cracks
First, flexural appeared
wereappeared
cracks in the middle
appearing in before third
the middle span
testingthird ofspan
due the
to
tension
internal face and
pressure started
from the to propagate
corrosion and
product. widen.
First, Then,
flexural inclined
cracks
of the tension face and started to propagate and widen. Then, inclined flexural shear cracks were flexural
appeared shear
in the cracks
middle werethird shown.
span
Aof flexural
the tension
shown. yielding
A flexural followed
faceyielding
and started by to
a concrete
followed propagate crushing
by a concreteand widen. failureThen,
crushing occurred
failure for all
inclined
occurred specimens
flexural
for allshear incracks
specimensthis group
inwere
this
except
shown. one
A defected
flexural specimen
yielding with
followed high
by a corrosion
concrete level,
crushing which
failure
group except one defected specimen with high corrosion level, which failed prematurely failure due failed
occurred prematurely
for all failure
specimens due
in to
this
agroup
ruptureexceptin the
one corroded
defected bars.
specimen A significant
with high reduction
corrosion in
level,the
to a rupture in the corroded bars. A significant reduction in the ultimate flexural strength and the ultimate
which failed flexural
prematurelystrength and
failure the
due
serviceability
to a rupture in
serviceability was therecorded
was corroded
recorded withwithan an
bars. increased
A significant
increased levelreduction
of corrosion
level degrees
in the
of corrosion in addition
ultimate
degrees flexural tostrength
in additiona lower to stiffness
aandlowerthe
in all stages
serviceability of load-deflection
was recorded response.
with an The load-carrying
increased level of capacity
corrosion
stiffness in all stages of load-deflection response. The load-carrying capacity of defected/rehabilitatedof defected/rehabilitated
degrees in addition specimens
to a lower
was restored
stiffness
specimens alltostages
in was about
restored 95.5%
of after cleaning
load-deflection
to about 95.5%response. steel
after barsThe
cleaning and to 98.5%
load-carrying
steel bars and aftertoreplacing
capacity
98.5% of steel bars with
defected/rehabilitated
after replacing respect
steel bars
to therespect
with control
specimens was specimen.
to restored
the control Serviceability
to about in terms
95.5%Serviceability
specimen. after of mid-span
cleaning insteel
terms deflection
barsofand wasdeflection
to 98.5%
mid-span restored to
after replacing therestored
was allowable
steel bars to
limit
with of American
respect to theconcrete
control institute
specimen. (ACI) code.
Serviceability
the allowable limit of American concrete institute (ACI) code. in terms of mid-span deflection was restored to
the allowable limit of American concrete institute (ACI) code.

Figure 6. Cracks
Figure pattern
6. Cracks patternand
andmode of failure
mode of failureofofspecimens
specimens in Group
in Group A. A.
Figure 6. Cracks pattern and mode of failure of specimens in Group A.
3.2.2. Specimens in Group B
3.2.2. Specimens in Group B
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 10 of 15

Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 15

3.2.2. Specimens in Group B
Five specimens
specimens (illustrated
(illustratedin inFigure
Figure7)7)wereweretested
testedunder
under a constant
a constant axial
axial force
force of kN,
of 30 30 kN,
andand
we
we gradually
gradually applied
applied transverse
transverse loading
loading upupto to failure.The
failure. Thecrack
crackpatterns
patternswere
weresimilar
similar toto those
those of the
previous group with more propagation of flexural crack. A flexural yielding followed followed by concrete
crushing
crushing failure occurred for all specimens in this group except one defected specimen with high
corrosion level,
level,which
whichfailed
failed prematurely
prematurely duedue to a rupture
to a rupture in the corroded
in the corroded bars. A significant
bars. A significant reduction
reduction
in ultimateinstrength
ultimateand strength and serviceability
serviceability was calculatedwas with
calculated withcorrosion
increased increaseddegrees
corrosion degrees in
in addition to
addition to lower
lower stiffness stiffness
in all stages inof all
thestages of the load-deflection
load-deflection response. The response. The load-carrying
load-carrying capacity of
capacity of deteriorated
deteriorated
specimens was specimens
restored to was restored
about 97.3%to about
after 97.3%steel
cleaning afterbars
cleaning
and to steel
98.6%bars
afterand to 98.6%
replacing the after
steel
replacing
bars with the steeltobars
respect with respect
the control to theIncontrol
specimen. specimen.
addition, In addition,
serviceability in termsserviceability
of mid-spanindeflection
terms of
mid-span
was restoreddeflection was restored
to the allowable limit oftothe
theACI
allowable
(AmericanlimitConcrete
of the ACI (American
Institute) Concrete Institute)
code. Compared with the
code. Compared with the specimens in Group A, the increase of the axial force was
specimens in Group A, the increase of the axial force was recorded to be a positive effect on the ultimate recorded to be a
positive
strength,effect on thedeflection
the service ultimate and
strength, the service
the stiffness, and deflection and evident
this effect was the stiffness,
in theand this effect was
corrosion-defected
evident
specimensin the corrosion-defected
by decreasing the adverse specimens
effect ofby decreasing the adverse effect of corrosion.
corrosion.

Figure
Figure 7. Cracking
7. Cracking patternsat
patterns at failure
failure for
forspecimens
specimensin in
Group B. B.
Group
3.3. Concrete Strain
3.3. Concrete Strain
An optical method using DIC was used for measuring concrete strain. It is a method that
An optical method using DIC was used for measuring concrete strain. It is a method that uses a
uses a mathematical correlation analysis to examine digital image data taken while samples are in
mathematical correlation analysis to examine digital image data taken while samples are in
mechanical tests. This technique involves capturing consecutive images with a digital camera during
mechanical tests. This technique involves capturing consecutive images with a digital camera during
the deformation period to evaluate the change in surface characteristics and understand the response
the deformation period to evaluate the change in surface characteristics and understand the response
of the specimen while it is subjected to incremental loads. The method begins with a picture before
of the specimen while it is subjected to incremental loads. The method begins with a picture before
loading (reference image), and then a series of pictures are taken during the deformation process
loading (reference image), and then a series of pictures are taken during the deformation process
(deformed images). The digital image correlation requires computer software and an appropriate
(deformed images). The digital image correlation requires computer software and an appropriate
digital camera. In this study, a computer program called “GOM Correlate” version 2017 was used to
digital camera. In this study, a computer program called “GOM Correlate” version 2017 was used to
calculate the concrete strain on the side face and along the depth of the mid span member by calculating
calculate the concrete strain on the side face and along the depth of the mid span member by
the differences between images by relating all pixels in the reference image with each of the distorted
calculating the differences between images by relating all pixels in the reference image with each of
images, ultimately achieving a distorted map distribution point.
the distorted images, ultimately achieving a distorted map distribution point.
3.3.1. Specimens in Group A
3.3.1. Specimens in Group A
The concrete strain for these specimens was measured at three points through the depth of the
mid The
spanconcrete strain section
of the critical for these specimensmoment).
(maximum was measured at three strain
The concrete pointswas
through the depth
recorded of the
in different
mid spanstages,
loading of theas
critical
shown section (maximum
in Figure 8, wheremoment). The concrete
the horizontal strainaxes
and vertical wasrepresent
recordedthe
in different
concrete
loading stages, as shown in Figure 8, where
strain and the section depth, respectively. the horizontal and vertical axes represent the concrete
strain and the section depth, respectively.
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 11 of 15
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 15

200 200 200

25 kN 25 kN 25 kN
180 180 180
50 kN 50 kN 40 kN
160 160 160
60 kN 60 kN
140 140 140
120 120 120
100 100 100
80 80 80
60 60 60
40 40 40
20 20 20
BC.C0.RN.A15 BC.C5.RN.A15 BC.C20.RN.A15
0 0 0
-0.01 0 0.01 0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02

200 200
25 kN 25 kN
180 180
40 kN 50 kN
160 160
60 kN 60 kN
140 140
120 120
100 100
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
BC.C5.RCS.A15 BC.C20.RRS.A15
0 0
-0.01 0 0.01 0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02

Figure
Figure8.8.Concrete
Concretestrain
strainfor
forspecimens
specimensininGroup
GroupA.
A.

TheThe results
results of concretestrain
of concrete strainfor
forthe
the tested
tested specimens
specimensshowed showed thatthat
the the
strain distribution
strain was was
distribution
approximately linear at low loads and became nonlinear at higher loads due to cracks in the concrete.
approximately linear at low loads and became nonlinear at higher loads due to cracks in the concrete.
The concrete strain in the tension zone for the corrosion-defected specimen increased clearly with
The concrete strain in the tension zone for the corrosion-defected specimen increased clearly with
corrosion levels compared to the control specimen due to the reduction in steel-concrete bond
corrosion levels
strength. Forcompared to the control specimen
the defected/rehabilitated specimen duewith to the reduction
a patch repair of in steel-concrete
cleaning steel bars,bond strength.
the test
For the
results recorded a slightly restored concrete strain in the tension zone compared with the defectedresults
defected/rehabilitated specimen with a patch repair of cleaning steel bars, the test
recorded a slightly
specimens due torestored concrete of
the replacement strain in the tension
the damaged concretezone compared
cover with newwith the defected
mortar, the cleaningspecimens
of
due the
to the
steelreplacement
bars, and theofuse
theofdamaged
the bondingconcrete
agent cover
materialwith new mortar,
to compensate thethe cleaningin of
reduction the steel
bond
bars,strength.
and theThe usedefected/rehabilitated
of the bonding agent specimen with atopatch
material repair of replacing
compensate steel bars
the reduction in recorded a
bond strength.
The completely restored concrete
defected/rehabilitated strain in
specimen the atension
with patchzone
repairto an undamaged
of replacing state.
steel Thisrecorded
bars was achieved by
a completely
replacing
restored the damaged
concrete strain in concrete cover
the tension withtonew
zone mortar, replacing
an undamaged state.the corroded
This steel barsby
was achieved and using the
replacing
the bonding agent material to compensate the reduction in bond strength.
damaged concrete cover with new mortar, replacing the corroded steel bars and using the bonding
agent material
3.3.2. to compensate
Specimens in Group B the reduction in bond strength.
Furthermore,
3.3.2. Specimens the concrete
in Group B strain for these specimens was recorded through section depth with
three points in the mid span of the specimens, as illustrated Figure 9.
Furthermore, the concrete strain for these specimens was recorded through section depth with
three points in the mid span of the specimens, as illustrated Figure 9.
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 15

200 200 200

25KN 25 kN 25 kN
Buildings 2019,
1809, 120 180 180 12 of 15
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER
60KNREVIEW 12 of 15
45 kN
60 kN
160 160 160
140 140 140
200 200 200
120 180 25KN 120 25 kN 120 25 kN
180 180
100 160 60KN 100 60 kN 100 45 kN
160 160
80 140 80
140 14080
60 120 60
120 12060
40 100 100
40 10040
20 80 2080 8020
60 BC.C0.RN.A30 60 BC.C5.RN.A30 60 BC.C20.RN.A30
0 0 0
-0.01 0 40 0.01 0.02 -0.01 400 0.01 0.02 -0.0140 0 0.01 0.02
20 20 20
BC.C0.RN.A30 BC.C5.RN.A30 BC.C20.RN.A30
200 0 200 0 0
-0.01 0 25 kN
0.01 0.02 -0.01 0 0.0125 kN0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02
180 180
60 kN 60 kN
160 200 160
200
25 kN 25 kN
140 180 140
180
60 kN 60 kN
120 160 120
160
100 140 140
100
80 120 120
80
100 100
60 60
80 80
40 40
60 60
20 20
40
BC.C 40 BC.C5.RCS.A30
20.RRS.A30
0 20 020
-0.01 0 BC.C20.RRS
0.01 .A30
0.02 -0.01 0 BC.C 5.RCS.A30
0.01 0.02
0 0
-0.01 0 0.01 0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02
Figure 9. Concrete strain for specimens in Group B.
Figure 9. Concrete strain for specimens in Group B.
Figure 9. Concrete strain for specimens in Group B.
3.4. Ductility
3.4. Ductility
3.4. Ductility
Ductility is described as the ability of a structural element to sustain inelastic deformation
without Ductility
significant
Ductility isloss
described
is described in as asability
resistance
the the [22].
ability of a structural
of aSafety is theelement
structural most element to sustain
important
to sustain inelastic
consideration
inelastic deformation
for the without
deformation design
without significant loss in resistance [22]. Safety is the most important consideration for the design
of structures.
significant lossAny type of brittle
in resistance failureisshould
[22]. Safety the most beimportant
avoided, since this could
consideration forlimit the warning
the design time
of structures.
of structures. Any type of brittle failure should be avoided, since this could limit the warning time
and
Anycause
type lives
of to
brittle be
failure endangered.
should be If the
avoided, structure
since thispossesses
could limitductile
the behavior,
warning
and cause lives to be endangered. If the structure possesses ductile behavior, it will be able to
time it will
and be
cause able
lives to
to
experience large
be endangered. Ifdeflections
the structure while still
possesses holding
ductile near
behavior,ultimate
it will loads.
be able Ductility
to has
experience
experience large deflections while still holding near ultimate loads. Ductility has generally been generally
large been
deflections
measuredstillby
whilemeasured a by
holdingratio
a nearcalled
ratio a ductility
ultimate
called loads.
a ductilityindex ororfactor
Ductility
index has (μ
factor ). The
generally
(μ ..). Thebeen
experimental
measured
experimental ductility
by a ratio
ductility index
index for fora
called
concrete
ductility beam-column
index
concrete or factormembers
beam-column (µduc. (control
). The
members ororpatch
experimental
(control repair)
repair) specimens
patchductility index forwas
specimens wascalculated
calculated
concrete according
beam-column
according to the
members
to the
deflection
(control oratpatch
theatultimate
deflection the
repair) load
ultimate divided
load
specimens divided
wasbyby
the deflection
the deflection
calculated at
at the equivalent
according equivalent yield
yield
to the deflection load
load [23],
[23],
at the as shown
asultimate
shown in
in load
Figure Figure
divided 10.
10.by the deflection at the equivalent yield load [23], as shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Determination procedure of the ductility index.

Buildings 2019, 9, 120 13 of 15

The ductility results in Table 4 display, a significant decrease in the ductility of the defected
specimens compared with the control. More decrease was recorded with high corrosion levels due to
the reduction of tensile strength and ductility of the steel bars. This was caused by the reduction in
diameter of the corroded steel bars and the reduction in bond strength, which was due to the rust effect
on the nature of the deformed surface of the corroded steel bars. For patch repair by cleaning steel bars,
a slight increase in ductility was noticed compared with the corresponding defected specimens. In the
case of patch repair by replacing steel bars, a significant increase in ductility was noticed compared
with the corresponding defected specimens, and these were restored to an undamaged state by using a
new steel reinforcement. The effect of increased axial force on ductility was recorded for the control,
the defected, and the defected/rehabilitated specimens.

Table 4. Ductility index of tested specimens.

Symbol of Ultimate Deflection, ∆u Yielding Deflection, ∆y Ductility Index

Groups
Specimens (mm) (mm) µduc. (∆u /∆y )
BC.C0 .RN .A15 17 6.5 2.6
BC.C5 .RN .A15 13 6.8 2.1
A BC.C20 .RN .A15 8 5.2 1.5
BC.C5 .RCS .A15 14 7 2.3
BC.C20 .RRS .A15 18 6.5 2.7
BC.C0 .RN .A30 16 5.9 2.7
BC.C5 .RN .A30 16 7 2.3
B BC.C20 .RN .A30 10 5.5 1.8
BC.C5 .RCS .A30 17 7.1 2.4
BC.C20 .RRS .A30 19 6.7 2.8

4. Conclusions
The main conclusions obtained from our experimental results are as follows:

• After a period eight days and thirty-two days of accelerated corrosion, real corrosion degrees of
5.5% and 20.7%, respectively, were evidenced, thus the predicted corrosion level of Faraday’s law
was suitable to find the corrosion period in the reinforced concrete under accelerated corrosion.
• Significant deteriorations in the ultimate strength, the serviceability and the ductility were recorded
due to the reduction in the mechanical properties of corroded steel bars, such as a reduction in the
tensile strength, the bond strength, and the ductility.
• Compared with the control specimens, there were significant reductions 6%, and 4% in the ultimate
flexural capacities for low corrosion levels and reductions of 37%, and 34% for high corrosion
levels under axial forces of 15 kN, and 30 kN, respectively.
• A significant deterioration in the serviceability limit state in terms of mid span deflection was
recorded and exceeded the allowable limit of the ACI code.
• A significant deterioration in the ductility was recorded, thus the ductility for specimens with
low corrosion levels was decreased by about 19% and 15%; for specimens with high corrosion
levels, the ductility was decreased by about 42% and 33%, compared with the control specimens
subjected under 15 kN and 30 kN of axial force, respectively.
• When applying patch repair techniques on the defected specimens, the problem of corrosion
reinforcement could be overcome with different levels of efficiency, which then enabled the
restoration of the structural integrity.
• By applying patch repair by cleaning steel bars for a specimen with a low-corrosion degree,
a significant amount of the load-bearing capacity could be restored.
• Patch repair by replacing steel bars for a specimen with a high-corrosion degree almost completely
restored the load-carrying capacity.
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 14 of 15

• Serviceability of the defected/rehabilitated steel bars after patch repair by cleaning or replacing
was restored to the allowable limit of ACI code.
• The concrete strain and the ductility were restored to undamaged states when using a patch repair
by replacing corroded steel bars.
• The increase of the axial force for the defected specimens was shown to reduce the adverse
effects of corrosion in regard to ultimate strength, stiffness, serviceability, and ductility of RC
beam-column members.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, N.A.A., M.M.K. and A.M.M.; methodology, A.M.M.; software, N.A.A.
and M.M.K.; validation, N.A.A., M.M.K. and A.M.M.; formal analysis, A.M.M.; investigation, A.M.M.; resources,
A.M.M.; data curation, A.M.M.; writing—original draft preparation, A.M.M.; writing—review and editing, N.A.A.,
M.M.K. and A.M.M.; visualization, A.M.M.; supervision, N.A.A. and M.M.K.; project administration, A.M.M.;
funding acquisition, A.M.M.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: The authors are thankful to all staff members of Civil Engineering Department and
Electrical Engineering Department/College of Engineering/University of Babylon in addition to Civil Engineering
Department/University of Al-Qadisiyah for their facilities and assistance throughout this study.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Al-Sulaimani, G.J.; Kaleemullah, M.; Bassunbul, I.A.; Rasheeduzzafar. Influence of corrosion and cracking
on bond behavior and strength of reinforced concrete members. ACI Struct. J. 1990, 87, 220–231.
2. Central Public Works Department Group. Rehabilitation and Retrofitting Methods, 1st ed.; Director General
(Works), Central Public Works Department, Government of India, Nirman Bhawan: New Delhi, India, 2002;
pp. 1–31.
3. Mahmud, S.; Samdani, A. Effect of building shape on the response to wind and earthquake. Int. J. Adv.
Struct. Geotech. Eng. 2015, 4, 232–236.
4. Abdullah, A.A. Test model for the first Canadian smart highway bridge. Constr. Build. Mater. 2001, 15,
361–368.
5. Mangat, P.S.; Elgarf, M.S. Flexural Strength of concrete beams with corroding reinforcement. ACI Struct. J.
1999, 96, 149–158.
6. Carlos, G.B.; Karin, L.; Ingemar, L. Investigation on the influence of fiber reinforcement on chloride induced
corrosion of RC structures. In Proceedings of the 11th Fib International Ph.D. Symposium in Civil Engineering,
Tokyo, Japan, 29–31 August 2016.
7. Ballim, Y.; Reid, J.C. Reinforcement corrosion and the deflection of RC beams-an experimental critique of
current test methods. Cem. Concr. Compos. J. 2003, 25, 625–632. [CrossRef]
8. Goitseone, M.; Mark, A.; Pilate, M. Variation of steel loss and its effect on the ultimate flexural capacity of RC
beams corroded and repaired under load. Constr. Build. Mater. 2010, 24, 1051–1059.
9. Gu, X.L.; Zhang, W.P.; Shang, D.F. Flexural Behavior of Corroded Reinforced Concrete Beams. In Proceedings
of the 12th Biennial International Conference on Engineering, Construction, and Operations in Challenging
Environments, Honolulu, HI, USA, 14–17 March 2010.
10. Zhu, W.; François, R.; Coronelli, D.; Cleland, D. Effect of corrosion of reinforcement on the mechanical
behaviour of highly corroded RC beams. Eng. Struct. J. 2013, 56, 544–554.
11. Torres-Acosta, A.; Fabela-Gallegos, M.; Munoz-Noval, A.; Vazquez-Vega, D.; Hernandez-Jimenez, T.;
Martinez-Madrid, M. Influence of corrosion on the structural performance of reinforced concrete beams.
Corrosion 2004, 60, 862–872. [CrossRef]
12. Ma, Y.; Guo, Z.; Wang, L.; Zhang, J. Experimental investigation of corrosion effect on bond behavior between
reinforcing bar and concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 152, 240–249. [CrossRef]
13. Hou, L.; Guo, S.; Zhou, B.; Chen, D.; Aslani, F. Bond-slip behavior of corroded reinforcement and ultra-high
toughness cementitious composite in flexural members. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 196, 185–194.
14. Niloufar, G.; Amir, M.; Mohammad, S. Flexural behavior of post tensioned beams damaged by reinforcement
corrosion before and after applying patch-repair. Am. J. Civ. Eng. Archit. 2016, 4, 171–180.
Buildings 2019, 9, 120 15 of 15

15. Garyfalia, T.; Theodoros, R.; Athanasios, K. Corroded RC beams at service load before and after patch repair
and strengthening with NSM CFRP strips. Buildings 2019, 9, 67.
16. Al-Saidy, A.H.; Al-Jabri, K.S. Effect of damaged concrete cover on the behavior of corroded concrete beams
repaired with CFRP sheets. Compos. Struct. 2011, 93, 1775–1786. [CrossRef]
17. Almassri, B.; Amjad, K.; Al Mahmoud, F.; François, R. Mechanical behaviour of corroded RC beams
strengthened by NSM CFRP rods. Compos. J. Part B 2014, 64, 97–107. [CrossRef]
18. Haddad, R.H. Hybrid repair configurations with CFRP composites for recovering structural performance of
steel-corroded beams. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 124, 508–518.
19. Zhang, H.; Wu, J.; Jin, F.; Zhang, C. Effect of corroded tension reinforcements on flexural performance of
reinforced recycled aggregate concrete beams strengthened with CFRP. J. Compos. Part B 2019, 162, 589–599.
20. ASTM G1. Standard Practice for Preparing, Cleaning, and Evaluating Corrosion Test Specimens; American Society
for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2003.
21. ACI Committee 318-14. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete; American Concrete Institute:
Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2014.
22. Newman, J.; Choo, B.S. Advanced Concrete Technology, 1st ed.; Elsevier Ltd.: London, UK, 1986; p. 616.
23. Park, R.; Paulay, T. Reinforced Concrete Structures; John Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1975; p. 769.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).