Comparison of Reinforced Concrete Technologies wrt Life

Corrosion of Rebars
Prof. A.S.Khanna,
Retd. IIT Bombay, Powai, Mumbai
Chairman SSPC India

Introduction

Reinforcement of steel in concrete enhances the tensile strength of the concrete and also helps it
in sustaining it from seismic activity. The most common material choice for reinforcement has
been found to be steel. There are millions of buildings, structures, bridges made using this
combination of steel reinforcement in concrete. In nineties, there was a sudden increase in the
deterioration of RCC buildings, especially in the nearby coastal zones or cities with high
humidity and pollution. There were initially a few trial methods of modifying steel composition
by adding elements such as Cu, Zn and/or Ni and secondly by doing a liquid cement coating over
steel bars. Both of these methods were not very effective. Thus a series of systematic
methodology was proposed :

1. Using TMT bars – thermo mechanically treated bars

2. Using CRS bars – by adding a small concentration up to 2.40% of corrosion protection
elements such as Cu, Zn, Ti and Mo
3. Using CECRI Technology of polymer composite coating (CPCC)
4. Liquid Paint coatings
5. Fusion Bond Epoxy coatings
6. Use of Inhibitor Chemicals and/or Volatile Corrosion inhibitors.
7. Galvanized Steel coatings and CGR ( Continuous Galvanised Rebars)
8. Stainless Steels rebars
9. FRP Rebars

TMT bars are being wrongly projected as corrosion protection technology, which actually is not.
The thermo-mechanical treatment (TMT) only gives a 5-10 micron of martensitic hard layer
which has no direct relation to corrosion protection. It is simply a hard layer which protects the
rebar from damage during handling.

Use of CRS- Corrosion resistant steels is half backed technology which is again being wrongly
imposed as corrosion resistant steel by just adding 1.5-2.4 wt.% of some elements such as Cr, Ni,
Cu and Mo. Experience has shown that such modification enhances life just by 1 to 1½ times,
and therefore not suitable to provide long durable structure lasting more than even 30 years or
so. This partial modifications initially shows lower corrosion rate but in long run it is harmful as
shown in a study ( Fig. 1), which shows how an inadequate concentration of alloying elements
helps initially to lower corrosion but enhances corrosion at a later date ( lower curve) and where
the concrete is already having some chlorides, there is no effect at all ( upper curve)

Fig. 1 Effect of certain elements on the corrosion of steel rebar which initially appears to protect
but in long run deteriorates the corrosion.

CPCC is not a technology for large scale high volume rebar requirement project. Moreover, it
exploits only a very small concept of addition of a few % of acrylic resin in the cement water
mixture. The technology does not assure a quality process for a large production of rebar nor it
assures a long term protection as acrylic is relatively a low corrosion resistant resin.

As far as coated steels using liquid paint is concerned, it is again not a viable technology for big
buildings and structure as it is a batch and discontinuous process. Further the coating cracks on
bending.

Fusion Bond Epoxy which is applied hot, over comes the cracking on bending and thus provides,
perhaps one of the best coated rebar with all excellent properties required for a concrete structure
and can provide long durable life of 75 - 100 years or more. It was accepted as a Technology by
ministry of Highways in 1997, and till date has more than 900 structures been coated and till
today there is no distress reported on any structure nor any rehabilitation has taken place on any
structure. The amount of chloride required to initiate corrosion in the epoxy coated reinforcing
steel was found to be 7.28 lb/yd3 or 4.6 times that of the uncoated reinforcing steel. Though, this
technology has drawbacks such as handling problem and lower bond strength with concrete, but
experience has shown that no noticeable section loss or build-up of corrosion product had
occurred in such bars. Thus, it is expected to get a life of more than 100 years using FBE
technology

Use of Zinc based galvanised rebar can be other choice. This is also a good technology which
overcomes the drawbacks of FBE that is breaking during handling. Other advantage of
Galvanized bars is that they give dual protection to the re-bar. Barrier protection and Cathodic
protection. Using a Galvanized bar, it is possible to get a life of more than 100 years. CGR bars
is also a galvanised bar which is made by a modified hot melt dip process in a continuous
manner. However, one of the problems is definitely the initial depletion of zinc sacrificial layer
in fresh concrete as the tricalcium aluminate in concrete reacts with zinc to form calcium zincate
salt and hydrogen gas. This has to be taken care of as it may results in reduced bond strength,
increase of porosity of cement. Repair of galvanised rebar is difficult process as it is cold applied
process require highly skilled work.

Certain chemical compounds such Calcium nitrite and many more when added in Concrete
cover, delay the movement of moisture and pollutants to reach the steel/concrete interface and
thus delaying the initiation of corrosion process at rebar. In the same way, certain specific
chemicals such as volatile chemicals such as DICHAN can help not only do the inhibition but
also they have tendency to move to the steel surface and create a temporary corrosion layer. This
technology is more utilized as an addition technology to Coatings and CRS/TMT or for repair
and rehabilitation of RCC structure. Organic corrosion inhibitors were ineffective in preventing
steel corrosion when their concentrations were too low. The corrosion inhibitors can provide
adequate protection for reinforcement only when the concentration of the inhibitor is higher than
that of the chloride ions in the pore solution. Some inhibitors get leached out over an extended
period of exposure. Over dosage of inhibitors will cause pitting, leaching, and retarding effect.
The mechanism of mixed, organic & bipolar inhibitors is not very well understood in long-term
applications. Hence, it needs more extensive investigation in real concrete structures by
considering the various aspects, such as chloride content, types of cement, types of inhibitors,
etc. It can never be a technology for a long term durability of a RCC structure.

Stainless steel is perhaps the most acceptable corrosion resistance material which remains un-
attacked even in a highly polluted environment. This mainly protects the RCC structure by not
initiating a corrosion reaction even if a large concentration of pollutants have reached
concrete/rebar interface. That is why a life of 120 – 200 years is expected for RCC structure
using SS rebars.

FRP rebars are also good. They are very light and have no possibility of corrosion. They other
problems such as continuous fabrication of various diameter and length and storing. They are
prone to moisture and sunlight and microbial corrosion.

Thus, if we have now compare various rebar protection technology, they can be best compared
using a common model as shown in Fig. 2

Model for Estimating the Durability using a reinforced Bar

A simple model for the durability of the reinforced concrete structure can be understood from the
following schematic, given in Fig. 2. Rebar is covered with a concrete cover whose density
( M40, M60 or M80) decides its capability to permeate moisture or pollutants. Corrosion of
rebar can occur only if moisture/pollutants entering thru’ concrete cover and reach
concrete/rebar, at interface “B”. However, initiation of moisture or pollutants starts from
concrete cover surface “A” and its transportation thru concrete cover
A
Concrete B
cover Coating

Rebar
Concrete cover
Concrete cover

Fig. 2 Schematic of a concrete reinforced structure

Thus, for enhancing the durability of a concrete structure, it is necessary to design it with
following properties:
1. Create a suitable barrier protection at concrete cover so that the pollutants from
environment cannot enter the concrete cover.
2. In case a few % of moisture/pollutants enter thru’ cover, delay their diffusion or
transportation thru’ concrete cover.
3. Create a very strong natural obstruction on steel surface so that the pollutants are not able
to react with steel and form the voluminous corrosion products which cause distress to
structure.

Step 1

As far as the first step is concerned, it is simplest and requires a corrosion resistant coating on
the concrete surface which can resist the movement of aggressive environment ( moisture,
chlorides, carbon dioxide or sulphur dioxide) towards steel-concrete interface thru concrete
cover. These coatings are usually a modified epoxy coatings with a desired top coat of
polyurethane of the choice of any desired colour.

Step 2 requires following two things:

(a) Best concrete designing such as a concrete of density of M60 or more. Higher density helps
in two ways:

(i) A dense concrete will restricts the diffusion of moisture and pollutants to reach the
concrete/steel interface and hence delay in the formation of corrosion products at concrete/steel
interface and
(ii) Also, it prolongs the initiation of initial pin hole followed by micro-crack formation, leading
to main crack and spallation of concrete cover as would require more stress.

(b) Further modification of concrete cover can be done by (i) taking a mixed size of aggregates;
(ii) adding concrete straighteners such as silica fumes and (iii) the most important, adding
inhibitors to the concrete. The latter helps in delaying the diffusion of moisture and pollutants by
acting as obstacles and thus delaying the process as discussed in (a).

However, the main factor responsible for increasing the durability of concrete structure is the
activity at point “B”.

Now let us summarise which of the above technologies would give what life

Technology Life when the need of Cost

repair starts
1 Pure Steel 7-10 years Lowest (Rs. X per ton)
2 TMT 10-15 years X+ 0.1X
3 CRS 10-20 years X+0.2X
4 Liquid Epoxy 5-7 years X+0.3X
5 FBE 75-100 years X +0.2X
6 Galvanized 75-100 years X + 0.4 X
7 Only Inorganic inhibitors 6-10 years X/4
8 VCI Inhibitors 7-12 X/2
9 Technologies 1-6 + Addition of 3-7 years X + 0.1X
inorganic inhibitors
10 Stainless steels 100-200 years 2X to 5X
(depends of SS type)

Bibliography

1. Marijana Sedar, Lidija Valek Zulz and Dubravka Bjegovic, Corrosion Science, 69 (213)149-157.
2. A.S.Khanna, Stainless Steel- an ultimate choice for reinforced bar in concrete structure, Proc.
Americal concrete Soc., Bombay, 2003
3. Stainless Steel 1.4362 (S32304) test report from MET – which proves that the suitability of this
alloy at aggressive environment
4. Brisbane case study – with selective use of Duplex stainless achieved 300 years of service life
5. Technical comparison chart between 1.4362 – TMT – Galvanized Bars
6. User Guidelines while selecting and using stainless steel rebar for – extract of the IS 166551
(Annexure A)
7. “Evaluation of Multiple Corrosion Protection Systems for Reinforced Concrete Bridge
Decks” O’Reilly, M.; Darwin, D.; Browning, J.; Carl E. Locke, J.; The University of
Kansas Research Inc., Lawrence, KS, 2011.
8. Han-Seung Lee, Velu Saraswathy, Seung-Jun Kwon and Subbiah Karthick - Corrosion
Inhibitors for Reinforced Concrete: A Review