Cite this article Research Article Keywords: codes of practice &

Robery P (2021) Paper 2000023 standards/concrete structures/corrosion

Best practice in the management and protection of concrete assets. Received 04/12/2020; Accepted 10/02/2021
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Forensic Engineering 174(1): 23–32, Published online 09/05/2021
https://doi.org/10.1680/jfoen.20.00023
ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

Forensic Engineering

Best practice in the management and

protection of concrete assets
Peter Robery FREng, CEng, FICE, FICT, FCS
Director, Robery Forensic Engineering Ltd, Solihull, UK; RAEng Visiting
Professor in Forensic Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK (Orcid:0000-0002-4202-9210)
(pcr@roberyforensics.com)

While reinforced concrete construction has boomed over the past 70 years, forensic analysis of failures shows that
many structures have not achieved the design service life due to poor durability. This can primarily be attributed to
a lack of understanding about durability design, poor construction practices and poor life-cycle maintenance,
resulting in unexpected deterioration and damage that requires intervention. Exposure to chloride ions continues to
present the construction industry with the greatest challenges. In Europe, EN 206 sets durability performance criteria
for reinforced concrete under normal exposure environments, supplemented by national recommendations.
Increasingly, infrastructure is being built either in environments that are so hostile to reinforced concrete or with
service design lives that are so long, that they are outside the scope of European standards. For design in hostile
environments, both within Europe and around the world, performance-related durability methods have been
adopted, using predictive ingress models over extended service lives. However, even then, the fundamental risk
remains as to whether what the designer intended, through the various cement and cover combinations, will be
achieved in practice by the contractor’s workforce and site practices. This paper explores the lessons from durability
failures of reinforced concrete and examines how performance can be modelled and enhanced in extreme
environments and assured by effective corrosion monitoring and management strategies.

1. Introduction some newly built reinforced concrete infrastructure was exhibiting

Over the past 60 years in Europe, reinforced concrete infrastructure
has a chequered history in terms of successful durability performance
in service (Robery, 2017). Early reinforced concrete structures dating
to the 1900s were carefully designed, the construction was closely
supervised and mock-ups were used to prove the design concepts.
The approach resulted in buildings such as Weaver’s flour mill
surviving for 81 years, before becoming functionally obsolete
(Concrete Society, 2009), and civil engineering structures such as the
Mulberry Harbour units, now over 70 years in seawater, being found
to have low chloride ion ingress and limited reinforcement corrosion
(Segers et al., 2015).
signs of premature reinforcement corrosion and were failing to meet
their intended design service life – normally taken to be the point
when significant structural repair work is required.
It was not widely appreciated that reinforcing steel was prevented
from corrosion by the naturally high pH of concrete pore water
(Currie and Robery, 1994), which produces a protective passive
oxide film on the surface of the steel reinforcement. The high
concentration of hydroxide ions in the pores prevents corrosion
even under damp conditions, but it was being affected by the
following three mechanisms.

When reinforced concrete was in its infancy, the available coarse-
grained ordinary Portland cement (PC) was used in much higher
quantities than is considered normal today. This was needed to
develop adequate early strength in the structure. Today, the
chemistry, technology and efficiency of cement production have
improved substantially, and many more types of cement are
available, which offer various benefits.
The popularity of mouldable concrete, a construction material like a
‘liquid rock’, contributed to a massive increase in reinforced concrete
usage and ultimately to premature deterioration (Robery, 2017).
Reinforced concrete was used for increasingly ambitious and
impressive structures, producing slender and delicate shapes and
shells, with patterns and colours. In the 1960s, a more reactive and
finely ground cement was used, giving higher early strength. This
allowed the cement content and cost of the concrete to be reduced
for the same 28-day strength. The industry then began to realise that
■ Absorption of carbon dioxide, a process known as
carbonation, which reduces the alkalinity of concrete. When
this happens to the reinforcement depth, it neutralises the
hydroxide ions and destroys the passive layer, allowing
general corrosion to begin on the steel.
■ Ingress of chloride ions from seawater and de-icing salt damages
the passive layer, causing pitting corrosion on the steel surface
(Broomfield, 2007). Chloride ions do not change the hydroxide
ion concentration, but above a critical free-chloride-to-hydroxide
ratio, pitting corrosion can begin. This is also expressed as the
total chloride ion content for corrosion activation, taken as 0.4%
chloride ions by mass of cement (Cl-bmc) for reinforced concrete
and 0.1% Cl-bmc for prestressed concrete.
■ Chloride ions were being intentionally added to reinforced
concrete as an admixture to accelerate the setting of concrete in
winter. While a large percentage of the chloride ions was
bound harmlessly into the hydrated cement matrix, some free

23
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Forensic Engineering
Volume 174 Issue 1
chloride ions remained, increasing the risk of reinforcement
corrosion when the admixture was used at a high dosage.
Designers had to consider not just structural design but also durability
design. The cement content, cement composition, water/cement (w/c)
ratio, chloride ion content and reinforcement cover depth all influence
reinforced concrete durability and design service life. In the 1970s,
limits were placed on the initial chloride ion content of the mix,
effectively banning the use of chloride-based admixtures for
reinforced concrete. The total chloride content of a mix was calculated
from the aggregates and water, ensuring that it was less than 0.4% Cl-
bmc. Also, high standards of workmanship were needed, focusing on
the three Cs of compaction, cover and curing, and to achieve this,
training and supervision were essential requirements.
The first attempt at durability design appeared in the 1970s, with
environmental exposure classes introduced into the UK structural
design code CP 110 (BSI, 1972). Since then, the industry has
continued to improve its approach to durability under known UK
exposure environments. Recommendations for cement content and
composition, w/c ratio, cover and minimum compressive strength
have been tightened progressively as the severity of the exposure
environments has been understood (Robery, 2000).
Yet the industry continues to build in ever more most hostile, hot
and salty exposure environments. Clients also seek longer-lasting
assets with possibly an ‘indefinite’ service life. This means assets
should continue to perform until functionally obsolete, rather than
having a fixed design service life of say 50 or 100 years. Meeting
these needs can be achieved only by modelling the effects of
hostile exposure environments and then combatting them
effectively by durability design and high-quality construction, as
explained in detail below.
2. Buildability and build quality
Today, few construction professionals will question the ability of
well-built concrete buildings to perform over a normal service life
of 50 or 100 years in the UK when carbonation is the
deterioration mechanism. Provided that construction is to an
acceptable standard of quality and the deterioration processes
have been correctly identified, durable structures should be
produced. Yet durability failures continue to occur even in
relatively benign exposure conditions.
In the UK, investigation of durability failures has shown the root
cause to lie in poor design and construction practice (Robery,
2017), with some of the key issues listed as follows:
■ Structural designs and details that require an impossibly
difficult fit for the reinforcement within the formwork and/or
the chosen concrete mix (e.g. incompatible with the selected
maximum aggregate size and flowability).
■ Procurement by design and construct, which has been an
increasing trend to ‘value-engineer’ designs and provide cost
savings, but where compromises can affect the durability.
24
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Best practice in the management and
protection of concrete assets
Robery
■ Construction ‘issues’ commonly occurring, including poor
formwork alignment and sealing; low cover to the
reinforcement; lower in situ strength than specified; unstable
mix design; and poor mixing, placing and compaction.
■ Lack of adequate operative training, where arguably the most
important people on the project are not trained in the
importance of how the three Cs affect quality – the attitude
seems to be ‘it is only concrete, so how difficult can it be to
pour it?’
■ Lack of experienced independent supervision – on many
projects the traditional ‘clerk of works’ inspector and/or
client’s engineer is seen as an unnecessary extra expense
(particularly in design-and-construct projects).
Many potential and avoidable defects are built into the
construction from the start, including the following.
■ Concrete placing errors, including mix segregation, poor
compaction causing honeycombing and voidage, restricted
flow through reinforcement and poor use of spacers resulting
in low cover.
■ Defectively sealed formwork allows grout loss and causes
honeycombing in the concrete, which will reduce the
effectiveness of the cover zone, as well as affect the
architectural quality.
■ Cracking caused by plastic shrinkage before the concrete has
set provides a path for aggressive ions to penetrate into the
reinforcement and should be avoided by better placing
practices in hot weather.
■ Poor surface curing after finishing, while not significantly
affecting strength, will impair the durability resistance of the
cover zone protecting the reinforcement, resulting in less
effective cover, and may also reduce abrasion resistance (e.g.
in warehouse flooring).
■ Excessive concrete heat rise, caused by casting large pours
without considering the thermal properties of the cement,
causes restrained thermal cracks that can affect durability.
This type of cracking can be avoided by using low-heat
cement or cement containing fly ash (FA) or ground
granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS) – see further details on
cement later in this paper.
■ All concrete undergoes drying shrinkage over time, but poor
movement provision can lead to cracking due to excessive
restraint, affecting durability.
■ All forms of cracking provide a path for the environment to
reach the reinforcement and leach away the protective
hydroxide ions. Plate 1 shows white straws of calcite caused
by water passing through cracks in concrete, which leaches
out the calcium hydroxide, and then carbonation of the
alkaline water forms characteristic hollow stalactites of
calcium carbonate. This can be seen in bridges, car parks and
other structures subject to leakage.
As a result of these avoidable defects, the intended design service
life may not be achieved, leading to forensic investigation of
 Forensic Engineering
Volume 174 Issue 1
Plate 1. Stalactites of calcite forming hollow, water-filled straws
below leaking cracks in concrete
failures, legal disputes and associated compensation claims. As an
industry, construction still does not pay enough care and attention
to the basics, resulting in poor concrete durability design, poor
concrete mix formulation and lack of training in the use of
concrete. Experience shows that at least one of these basics is
usually at the root cause of the failure. Even in relatively benign
exposure environments, such as industrial buildings and
warehousing, errors with these basics cause unwanted premature
cracking and other deterioration. If there is one takeaway
recommendation from this paper, it is this: remember that
operatives placing the concrete are the most important people
influencing the production of high-quality concrete infrastructure,
and so they need proper training and good supervision by
competent and experienced inspectors.
3. Effect of chloride ions on durability
The superposition of severe chloride exposure and buildability
‘issues’ creates a substantial risk of premature deterioration. Rather
than slow, general corrosion of the reinforcement that is seen with
carbonation, chloride ion ingress causes pitting corrosion on the
reinforcement, producing a rapid localised reduction in the cross-
sectional area, with the potential for structural collapse if the effects
of the contamination are not addressed. Plate 2 shows localised
pitting corrosion on a round reinforcing bar where the steel has
been eaten away. The concrete durability specialist needs to be
familiar with corrosion technologies to understand and appreciate
the risks. Broomfield (2007) offers a good introduction to this
important area and the importance of ratio of free chloride ions to
hydroxide ions at the bar surface.
The problems caused by chloride ion corrosion have resulted in
unplanned maintenance, structural repair and even replacement of
infrastructure before the design service life is achieved. Yet when
reinforced concrete use was in its infancy, researchers already
knew about these risks: Loov (1991) cites two quotations from
the 1920s that illustrate what had been forgotten by the 1950s:
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Best practice in the management and
protection of concrete assets
Robery
Plate 2. Example of pitting corrosion in concrete, with highly
localised section loss (arrowed)
researchers warned, ‘Reinforced concrete is not a material that
should be recklessly used’ and ‘Do not bring reinforced concrete
in contact with seawater’.
Perhaps because of greater experience with it, marine structures in
seawater have generally performed better than bridges. As early
as 1984, BS 6349-1 (BSI, 1984a) recommended the cover to
reinforcement in the tidal/splash zone be 75 mm, with a minimum
cement content of 400 kg/m3 and a minimum w/c ratio of 0.45.
With these limits, structures in seawater, including offshore oil
platforms and piers, have lasted well, although some have also
failed prematurely. A good example of older durable reinforced
concrete is the Tongue Sands Fort and Mulberry Harbour units,
built during 1939–1945 and made with PC. Investigations by the
Construction Industry Research and Information Association
(Ciria, 1979) found that the units have largely survived exposure
in seawater for over 70 years, with little evidence of chloride
penetration and reinforcement corrosion. This was attributed to
the high cover thickness and a cement content above 500 kg/m3,
which was necessary because the coarsely ground cement used
would set slowly. The message was clear: a high cement content
and a low w/c ratio were very important parameters for making
durable concrete.
Heavily loaded road bridges are also exposed to chloride salt in
the form of de-icing agents. As many papers testify, the post-
World War II roads programme led to considerable numbers of
trunk road bridges being built between 1950 and 1990, including
the UK’s famous Spaghetti Junction. Many bridges failed to
achieve the intended 120-year design service life required by the
bridge standards of the time (BSI, 1979)). In some cases, a life of
only 20 years was being achieved before major maintenance was
required to address corrosion of reinforcement caused by de-icing
salt exposure. This happened despite precautions being taken to
produce high-quality concrete, as most schemes of the time had
their own independent resident engineer and a testing laboratory.
25
 Forensic Engineering Best practice in the management and
Volume 174 Issue 1 protection of concrete assets
Robery

The durability design requirements for bridges in BS 5400 (BSI,
1979) provided an inadequate level of protection against de-icing
salt penetration, as judged by today’s research and standards. For
the most severe exposure, BS 5400-4 (BSI, 1984b) and
BS 5400-8 (BSI, 1978) permitted C32/40 concrete at a 50 mm
cover and a 330 kg/m3 cement content at a 0.45 w/c ratio. This is
significantly less stringent than the recommendations for seawater
exposure in BS 6349-1 (BSI, 1984a), as explained earlier.
reinforcing bar, initiating corrosion. With the benefit of hindsight, the
internal surfaces of the half-joint could have been protected with an
impervious coating at the time it was built, which would have
counteracted any leakage of de-icing salts into the bearing if the
elastomeric joint system failed. Once it was built, the internal
surfaces are inaccessible, so repair requires very specialised measures
such as impressed current cathodic protection (ICCP) to combat
corrosion, as explained later in this paper.

Not all bridges required major maintenance: some performed well
under chloride ion exposure, particularly post-tensioned bridges
where higher strengths and cement contents were needed for
structural purposes. It was the lower-strength reinforced concrete
bridges where the warning signs of corrosion were appearing.
Based on the findings, the UK’s Department for Transport
changed its recommendations for concrete durability: previously it
had been thought that reinforced concrete bridges needed no
additional protection, but by 1990, all highway bridge surfaces
were to have additional protective measures.
If chloride-laden water penetrates through a bridge deck due to
failure of elastomeric joints, then as was found on the Midland
Links viaducts, the consequences of leakage onto the support
structures is to initiate severe reinforcement corrosion in the
cross-head beams and support columns, as chloride levels rise
above 0.4% Cl-bmc. Yet again, with hindsight this could have
been prevented by fitting gutters below the joints to catch any
escaping water. Fitting gutters proved to be an effective retrofit
solution when repairs were being carried out in the 1990s,
keeping the cross-head beams dry and slowing corrosion rates.

■ Bridge deck surfaces were sealed with a waterproof

membrane beneath the asphalt that prevented downward
penetration of saline water that had ponded on the surface.
■ All spray-susceptible concrete parapets and abutments were
treated by hydrophobic impregnation to reduce the rate of
chloride ion penetration.

Despite these precautions, movement joints remained weak points

that were prone to failure, particularly those above half-joints and
support cross-beams, leading to corrosion in the reinforced
concrete substructures (Segers et al., 2015), and a typical example
of a half-joint is shown in Figure 1.

Plate 3 shows typical severe deterioration of the bearing area of the

half-joint, where de-icing salts have penetrated through or around the
elastomeric joint and down into the narrow gap between the concrete
Plate 3. Visible end surface of the half-joint nib, showing
sections, concentrating in the concrete forming the cantilever bearing
horizontal cracking, rust staining and heavy encrustation by white
to the left side of the half-joint (Figure 1). This raised the chloride calcite deposits
ion content well above the threshold of 0.4% Cl-bmc at the

Inaccessible areas for inspection, gap

Pavement typically 20−30 mm
Elastomeric joint Waterproofing

Bearing
Cantilever slab of half-joint
Nib

Figure 1. Section through Trent Valley floodplain viaduct half-joint, built 1966

26
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Forensic Engineering Best practice in the management and
Volume 174 Issue 1 protection of concrete assets
Robery

Macro-environmental factors have also exacerbated the chloride
ion problem. The ‘hollow-leg’ effect was so named by Browne
(1980) for reinforced concrete tunnels and hollow offshore
concrete structures such as oil and gas platforms. Where water
moves through a hollow concrete surface by capillary action or
hydrostatic pressure, a point is reached where dry air on the inside
face causes evaporation of the water, and any salts contained in
the water will be left behind, concentrating them close to the
inside face, which is usually where reinforcement is located.
An example of the hollow-leg effect causing accelerated chloride
ion build-up at the evaporation point is seen in mass rapid transit
systems, such as the Hong Kong Mass Transit Railway, which
first opened in 1979. The concrete tunnel segments were found to
have developed high levels of chloride ion build-up at the depth
of the internal reinforcement after only 15 years, requiring repair
by a track-mounted robotic system to cut away and replace the
inside of the segments (Davies and Brunnsatter, 1995).
Learning from this evidence, it has been shown that even mildly
brackish groundwater can be drawn through reinforced concrete
tunnel sections and then concentrated at the dew point to reach
levels above 0.4% Cl-bmc, as shown in Figure 2. This mechanism
drove one of the design approaches for the Copenhagen Metro,
where various options were considered to address ingress into the
tunnel segments, including provision for ICCP, as discussed later
in this paper. For other tunnel schemes, such as the Mass Rapid
Transit in Singapore where local soils had high chloride ion
contents, a combination of measures has been used, including
waterproofing additives in the concrete and waterproof surface
coatings to the outside face of the segment (Nmai et al., 2001).
4. The code catch-up
For new structures in Europe, chloride ion attack risk has been
managed by the progressive tightening of European and national
standards, particularly for concrete bridges exposed to de-icing salt
and for maritime structures. With advances in the understanding of
reinforced concrete corrosion, the European cement standard BS EN
197-1 (BSI, 2000a) included a range of cement compositions that
have improved resistance to chloride ion penetration, including PC-
based blends incorporating FA, GGBS and silica fume (SF).
Durability design requires the designer to consider not only
structural load cases but also environmental exposure classes. In
Europe, BS EN 206 (BSI, 2013a) sets out six exposure classes,
subdivided into 18 subclass exposure levels. As European
Committee for Standardization member states are a mix of
northern nations, such as Iceland and Finland, and warmer climes
of Spain and Malta, BS EN 206 (BSI, 2013a) allows national
standard bodies to establish requirements based on experience in
the country of use and local regulations.
For the UK, BS 8500-1 (BSI, 2015a) gives durability
recommendations to resist the prevailing climatic conditions, and
Table 1 lists seven exposure classes, with 18 subclass exposures.
The standard specifies minimum cement content and cement type,
minimum and nominal cover, maximum w/c ratio and minimum
Table 1. Exposure classes of BS 8500-1 (BSI, 2015a)
Class Description
X0 No risk of corrosion or attack
XC Corrosion induced by carbonation
XD Corrosion induced by chlorides other than those from
seawater
XS Corrosion induced by chlorides from seawater
XF Freeze–thaw attack
XA Chemical attack by aggressive ground (ACEC classes)
XAS Chemical attack from seawater
ACEC, Aggressive Chemical Environment for Concrete

R.C. tunnel
Submerged soil lining Operational tunnel
Groundwater pressure High temperature (40°C plus)
head 10−30 m Large air movements
cousing rapid drying

Soluble salts diffuse into the

concrete by way of the
capillary network
Groundwater transpired into
the tunnel as water vapour

Acidic soil and groundwater

attacks cover concrete
Unreacted soluble salts become
deposited in capillary pores of
concrete in the dew point zones

Dew point zone

Figure 2. Penetration of chloride ions through hollow tunnel structures. R.C., reinforced concrete (Doran et al., 1988)

27
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Forensic Engineering Best practice in the management and
Volume 174 Issue 1 protection of concrete assets
Robery

characteristic strength, with special design measures to address
attack from sulfate-bearing clays that have been shown to cause
the thaumasite form of sulfate attack (BRE CD, 2005) in the UK.
The scope of BS 8500-2 (BSI, 2015b) covers concrete production in
the UK and allows combination cements to be produced in the
concrete mixer by blending PC with FA, GGBS or SF, rather than
just using pre-blended cements manufactured in accordance with BS
EN 197-1 (BSI, 2011), which is mandated by BS EN 206 (2013a).
The industry’s incremental approach to the better management of
chloride ion risk under extreme exposure conditions is illustrated
by comparing the changing provisions in UK national standards.
Table 2 is adapted from TR 70 (Concrete Society, 2009) and
shows the changing requirements over the past 50 years for
resistance to seawater exposure class XS3, defined as the upper
tidal, splash and spray zone.
reactor, incorporating 25% FA (Blundell et al., 2006), giving the
benefit of lower heat of hydration in the large pours. The
advantages of using FA and GGBS for resisting sulfate and
chloride ions also began to be realised.
The constant updating and tightening of standards, as shown in
Table 2, means that until recently (unless they are tightened
again), the industry has been building concrete structures that are
underspecified in terms of durability and these legacy structures
may fail to achieve their design service life without monitoring
and intervention.
5. Non-cementitious enhancements
Various durability design enhancements have been proposed for
reinforced concrete in hostile environments, (Concrete Society,
2008), each having their own benefits and drawbacks, and some
of these are reviewed as follows.

Table 2 shows that even in the past 15 years, durability
recommendations have changed.
■ In 2006, BS 8500-1 (BSI, 2006) recommended a 60 mm
nominal cover for PC concrete, with a characteristic strength
of C40/50 and a w/c ratio 0.40.
■ Now, BS 8500-1 (BSI, 2015a) recommends a 90 mm nominal
cover for PC concrete, with a characteristic strength of C45/
55 and w/c ratio of 0.35.
■ If CEM IIIA is used, BS 8500-1 (BSI, 2015a) recommends a
55 mm nominal cover and C40/50 concrete, provided that the
GGBS content is least 46%.
The standards now recognise the benefits of using cements
containing constituents other than PC, including reactive materials
such as FA, GGBS and SF. In comparison, CP 110 (BSI, 1972)
gave no such recognition. It was not until the 1980s that FA and
GGBS began to be used more commonly: one of the largest UK
structures of the time was the Heysham 2 pressurised water
■ Alternative reinforcements, including stainless steel, synthetic
bar and fusion-bonded epoxy-coated (FBEC) bars, have been
used. Some, such as FBEC bars, have proven performance
under laboratory conditions, but when used on-site, the
coating can be chipped and rendered vulnerable. Also, when
bent at site, the coating on the bars can split, as the Florida
Keys failures demonstrated (Saguees et al., 1994).
■ Hydrophobic admixtures are specified for basements below
the water table to provide additional waterproofing and to
resist ionic penetration, producing low water absorption
characteristics. The additives are less effective against water
under high hydrostatic pressure, as indicated in Figure 3. At
1 MPa water pressure (approximately 100 m head of water),
the pressure overcomes the waterproofing effect for concrete
that otherwise had very low sorption characteristics.
■ Corrosion inhibitors such as calcium nitrite have been used in
the USA since at least 1969 (Berke and Rosenberg, 1989) and
are recommended as a ‘proven corrosion-inhibiting admixture’
for chloride exposure conditions. Research has also shown

Table 2. Summary of reinforced concrete durability requirements for exposure class XS3 (seawater upper tidal, splash and spray zones)
based on TR 70 (Concrete Society, 2009)
PC (CEM I) Blast-furnace cement (CEM III/Aa)
Code of practice/British Standard
MCC: kg/m 3
MWC fck,cube: MPa cnom: mm MCC: kg/m3 MWC fck,cube: MPa cnom: mm
CP 110-1:1972 (BSI, 1972) 330 0.45 50 50 330 0.45 40 50
BS 6349-1:1984 (BSI, 1984a) 400 0.42 40 50 400 0.42 40 50
BS 8110-1:1985 (BSI, 1985) 400 0.45 50 50 400 0.45 50 50
BS 8110-1:1997 (BSI, 1997) 400 0.45 50 50 400 0.45 50 50
BS 6349-1:2000 (BSI, 2000b) 400 0.40 50 60 360 0.50 37 50
BS 8500-1:2002 (BSI, 2002) 360 0.40 50 60 360 0.40 45 50
BS 8500-1:2006 (BSI, 2006) 380 0.40 50 60 380 0.40 45 50
BS 6349-1-4:2013 (BSI, 2013b) 360 0.35 50 90 380 0.35 50 55
BS 8500-1:2015 (BSI, 2015a) 380 0.35 55 90 380 0.35 50 55
a
Assumes that CEM III/A has a GGBS content of at least 40%, representative of UK Portland blast-furnace cements 1925–1990
Assumes a maximum aggregate size of 20 mmXS3 is equivalent to exposure classes previously described as severe, very severe or extreme
MCC, minimum PC or PC+GGBS by mass equivalent to the definitions of BS EN 197-1 (BSI, 2000a); MWC, maximum free w/c ratio; fck,cube, characteristic cube
compressive strength; cnom, nominal cover, assuming required minimum cover plus an allowance of 10 mm

28
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Forensic Engineering Best practice in the management and
Volume 174 Issue 1 protection of concrete assets
Robery

Permeability and sorption relationship for concrete with and without waterproofing admixture
1 × 10−8
Low quality

1 × 10−9
Valenta permeability coefficient, Kv: m/s

1 × 10−10

1 × 10−11

1 × 10−12

High quality
1 × 10−13
0 0.05 0.01 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
4 h sorption, S: mm/min0.5
Waterproofer No waterproofer

Figure 3. Relationship between capillary rise (sorption) and water permeability (100 mm dia. × 50 mm thick core specimens subjected to
1 MPa head (adapted from Papworth et al. (1985))

that under-dosing can increase the severity of pitting corrosion Construction in hostile environments, and/or at new project
(Anstice, 2000), meaning that the dosage has to be correct for locations where the local conditions are not covered by existing
the intended conditions. codes, requires performance-related durability methods and has
driven a four-step approach to durability assessment:
No single solution above provides the panacea for durable
reinforced concrete, so a life-cycle strategy is commonly needed ■ pre-construction durability assessments and testing, using the
where there is hostile exposure and an exceptionally long design locally available concreting materials and knowledge of what
service life, with both measures taken at new build and provisions has worked before
put in place that can be used where monitoring identifies the onset
of premature deterioration once in service.

6. Strategy for hostile exposure and

indefinite life
By the mid-1990s, in new construction projects such as the
Copenhagen Metro (Geiker, 1999) and Singapore Metro extension
(Nmai, 2001), deterioration modelling of chloride ion exposure
began to be used to predict corrosion risk for a service life of well
over 100 years. Multi-barrier protection strategies have emerged
that incorporate additional corrosion detection measures,
supported by provision for ICCP should this be needed when the
structures is in service.

The latest landmark crossing to open is the record-breaking 55 km

Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macao Bridge (HZMB), crossing the Pearl
Plate 4. HZMB immersed tube tunnel sections leaving the
River estuary, including an immersed tube tunnel section
precasting yard, joined together and then kept in a holding pond
(Plate 4). The HZMB uses enhanced asset durability prediction until installation
under the prevailing hostile exposure conditions (Li et al., 2016).

29
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Forensic Engineering
Volume 174 Issue 1
■ modelling the design service life based on accelerated testing and
life prediction assessment using recognised durability models
■ installing monitoring probes within the cover zone to validate
in-service durability modelling
■ preparing a quality assurance plan to ensure that the
reinforcement has the correct cover and the concrete is mixed,
placed, compacted and cured as intended by the durability design.
Several software packages are available for modelling durability,
including Life-365 (ACI Committee 365, 2000) and DuraCrete
(1988). Trial mixes can be prepared using the available aggregates
and cements and then chloride penetration resistance measured using
electrically accelerated methods such as ASTM C 1202 (ASTM,
2019) or NT Build 492 (Nordtest, 1999). A recent review of the
different modelling approaches is given by Pillai and Annapareddy
(2013). The accelerated penetration tests can also be used as a quality
assurance test during concrete production to ensure that the concrete
mix continues to provide the correct chloride ion barrier resistance.
The past 50 years has taught the industry not to build and forget
assets, particularly where they are in extreme/hostile exposure
environments. Assets can be monitored over the design service life to
warn of premature deterioration. To do this effectively, a durability-
management plan is required for the assets that allows changes in
performance to be monitored and compared with the design service
life modelling. Where the actual performance deviates from the
predicted performance, such as where higher levels of chloride ion
ingress are found in the cover zone, then proactive steps can be taken
to address deficiencies, thereby helping owners to make informed,
finance-led decisions as to the best times and ways to intervene.
Like many new structures, HZMB incorporates sensors into the
cover concrete to provide computer-aided structural health
monitoring, an approach that has been used increasingly over the
past 20 years. There is now a wide range of monitoring systems to
assist, inform and assure asset operators about the continued fitness
for purpose of their assets, as explained by Brownjohn (2007), and
sensors can detect the following:
■ load behaviour, such as defections, dynamic response, strain
and inclination
■ environmental exposure, including wind speed, seismic
effects, precipitation and temperature
■ deterioration impairment, such as the effect of sea salt causing
resistivity, half-cell and linear polarisation changes.
If problems develop, then a variety of techniques can be used to
retard chloride ion migration, with the two most common being
surface protection systems (SPSs) or ICCP, as explained below.
Considerable advances have been made in the formulation and
protective qualities of SPSs for concrete structures, providing a
barrier to waterborne salts and reducing rates of carbonation, and
there is now considerable experience in their use (Robery, 1988).
However, applying a surface coating means an enduring
30
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Best practice in the management and
protection of concrete assets
Robery
maintenance commitment at intervals of between 10 and 20 years,
depending on the type of coating and the exposure environment
(Almusallam et al., 2003). According to BS EN 1504-2 (BSI,
2004), there are three common generic types:
■ hydrophobic impregnation to produce a water-repellent
surface, where the pores and capillaries are internally coated,
but not filled, so no visible film is left on the surface of the
concrete and there is little or no change in its appearance
■ impregnation with resin to reduce the surface porosity and to
strengthen the surface, by partially or fully filling the pores
and capillaries
■ coating with resin to produce a continuous protective film on
the surface of concrete.
Coatings can be ‘designed’ by the specifier to be resistant to
carbonation and chloride ion penetration – for example, balancing
the intrinsic permeability and thickness of the paint film. Standard
tests are available to assess in-service durability such as crack-
bridging performance, with selection guidance given in BS EN
1504-2 (BSI, 2004).
Under hostile chloride exposure conditions, ICCP should be
considered at the construction stage. Many structures have been
designed with ICCP either installed and commissioned at the
construction stage (termed ‘cathodic prevention’) or retrofitted
later if needed (termed ‘cathodic protection’). ICCP design is
covered by BS EN ISO 12696 (BSI, 2016).
■ At the construction stage, the main requirement is for
reinforcement to be made electrically continuous, tack welding
some of the bars together and routing electrical connections
through the cover concrete. Power and control systems are either
installed and energised immediately to counteract chloride ion
ingress or added later should excessive ingress be detected that
would compromise the design service life.
■ With older structures, ICCP can be retrofitted. Provided that
the reinforcing cage is electrically continuous, either a surface
anode system can be provided or, for structures buried in the
ground or standing in seawater, external anodes can be
installed that use the conductivity of the surrounding medium
(i.e. soil or seawater).
ICCP works by the following three principles.
■ Developing a negative charge on the steel surface (i.e.
polarising it), which occurs as a direct result of the applied
cathodic protection voltage. This repels the negatively charged
chloride ions away from the steel and attracts them to the
positively charged anode, typically located at the surface of
the element receiving ICCP.
■ The excess of energy at the steel surface establishes the
cathodic reaction and generates hydroxide ions that increase
the resistance to chloride ions (lowering the free-chloride-to-
hydroxide ratio).
 Forensic Engineering
Volume 174 Issue 1
■ Hydroxide is also generated within pits at former anode sites
on the steel surface (e.g. Plate 2) and neutralises the acid
generated by the pitting corrosion reaction. As a result, the pH
around the bar increases, promoting restoration of a new
passive film and stabilisation within the base of the pits.
Embedded reference electrodes are installed at strategic locations to
evaluate the performance of the anode systems and enable system
adjustment to obtain optimum protection levels at the reinforcing bar
surface. These are linked to a communication system that should
include the following capabilities (Segers et al., 2015):
■ automated monitoring at scheduled intervals
■ remote adjustment of the system based on the monitoring data
■ automatic reporting
■ alarm condition monitoring for the system and alternating-
current supply.
7. Concluding remarks
This paper sets out a brief history of reinforced concrete usage in
both Europe and globally and summarises the lessons that
engineers have learned about premature deterioration from
forensic investigation of failures. These studies show the
importance of maintaining a high hydroxide ion concentration at
the reinforcing bar surface, by avoiding excessive carbonation and
keeping the chloride/hydroxide ratio low by resisting penetration
of chloride-bearing water. This has led to the current
recommendations to keep the chloride ion content at the bar depth
to less than 0.4% Cl-bmc to minimise chloride ion corrosion risk.
Codes have changed considerably over the past 50 years, moving
away from designing concrete structures based on strength alone.
Since the early 1980s, researchers, designers and standard bodies
have been playing catch-up to provide an effective design for
durability for the known climates, as well as offering performance
assessment guidance for new project locations around the world.
Designers can now confidently design durable concrete structures
in normal environments, with adjustments to minimum cement
contents, cement types, minimum cover and w/c ratio, and also
meet the required structural strength. Codes have been regularly
updated to improve durability performance and provide robust
design solutions that allow reinforced concrete to perform reliably
in standard environments.
Preventing chloride-induced corrosion under hostile exposure
conditions still poses a challenge for the industry. Most landmark
structures have exposure conditions and a design service life that
are outside code provisions, and in relatively new locations, codes
may not exist. New approaches are needed to design and build
durable structures.
Common approaches used today include durability modelling, based
on pre-construction assessments, with tools such as DuraCrete and
Life-365 providing predictions that show whether the intended
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Best practice in the management and
protection of concrete assets
Robery
service life can be achieved. As necessary, increased assurance can
be provided by monitoring corrosion risk using probes and by using
additional protective measures including ICCP and applying an SPS.
Finally, the construction must follow a quality assurance plan, to
ensure that the reinforcement has the correct cover and the
concrete is batched, mixed, placed, compacted and cured as
intended by trained operatives – arguably, it is the operatives who
are the most important people influencing the durability and
ultimately the success of the project.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the concrete and corrosion
prevention community, whose enthusiastic discussions in recent
years have helped formulate some of the concepts in this paper,
particularly Mr Paul Segers of SegCorr, a leading ICCP specialist.
This paper is also dedicated to the memory of two men who
generated the author’s interest in concrete technology: the late
Professor Adam Neville, CBE, FREng, at the University of Leeds
and the late Dr Roger Browne of Taywood Engineering.
REFERENCES
ACI Committee 365 (2000) ACI 365.1R-00: Service-life prediction –
state-of-the-art report. American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
MI, USA.
Alumsallam AA, Khan FM, Dulaijan SU and Al-Amoudi OSB (2003)
Effectiveness of surface coatings in improving concrete durability.
Cement and Concrete Composites 25(4–5): 473–481, https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0958-9465(02)00087-2.
Anstice DJ (2000) Corrosion Inhibitors for the Rehabilitation of
Reinforced Concrete. PhD thesis, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.
See http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.322144
(accessed 23/03/2017).
ASTM (2019) C 1202-19: Standard test method for electrical indication of
concrete’s ability to resist chloride ion penetration. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
Berke NS and Rosenberg A (1989) Technical review of calcium nitrite
corrosion inhibitor in concrete. Transportation Research Record 1211:
18–27.
Blundell R, Bamforth P and Miller E (2006) Nuclear environment – meeting
the challenge with concrete. In The Institute of Concrete Technology –
Yearbook: 2006–2007 (Hewlett PC, Oldham PC, Price B, Taylor G and
Perkis LE (eds)). Institute of Concrete Technology, Camberley, UK,
pp. 15–25.
BRE CD (BRE Construction Division) (2005) Concrete in Aggressive Ground,
3rd edn. Building Research Establishment Watford, UK, BRE SD1.
Broomfield JP (2007) Corrosion of Steel in Concrete: Understanding,
Investigation and Repair, 2nd edn. Taylor & Francis Abingdon, UK.
Browne RD (1980) Mechanisms of corrosion of steel in concrete in
relation to design, inspection, and repair of offshore and coastal
structures. In Proceedings of the 1980 International Conference on
Performance of Concrete in Marine Environment, St Andrews, NB,
Canada, pp. 169–204.
Brownjohn JMW (2007) Structural health monitoring of civil
infrastructure. Philosophical Transactions A: Mathematical, Physical
and Engineering Sciences 365(1851): 589–622.
BSI (1972) CP 110:1972: Code of practice for the structural use of
concrete. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (1978) BS 5400-8:1978: Steel, concrete and composite bridges.
Recommendations for materials and workmanship, concrete,
reinforcement and prestressing tendons. BSI, London, UK.
31
 Forensic Engineering
Volume 174 Issue 1
BSI (1979) BS 5400:1979: Steel, concrete and composite bridges. BSI,
London, UK.
BSI (1984a) BS 6349-1:1984: Code of practice for maritime structures.
General criteria. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (1984b) BS 5400-4:1984: Steel, concrete and composite bridges.
Code of practice for design of concrete bridges. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (1985) BS 8110-1:1985: Structural use of concrete. Code of practice
for design and construction. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (1997) BS 8110-1:1997: Structural use of concrete. Code of practice
for design and construction. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2000a) BS EN 197-1:2000: Cement. Composition, specifications and
conformity criteria for common cements. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2000b) BS 6349-1:2000: Maritime structures. Code of practice for
general criteria. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2002) BS 8500-1:2002: Concrete. Complementary British Standard
to BS EN 206-1. Method of specifying and guidance for the specifier.
BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2004) BS EN 1504-2:2004: Products and systems for the protection
and repair of concrete structures. Definitions, requirements, quality
control and evaluation conformity. Surface protection systems for
concrete. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2006) BS 8500-1:2006: Concrete. Complementary British Standard
to BS EN 206-1. Method of specifying and guidance for the specifier.
BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2011) BS EN 197-1:2011: Cement. Composition, specifications and
conformity criteria for common cements. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2013a) BS EN 206:2013: Concrete. Specification, performance,
production and conformity. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2013b) BS 6349-1-4:2013: Maritime works. General. Code of
practice for materials. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2015a) BS 8500-1:2015+A1:2016: Concrete. Complementary British
Standard to BS EN 206-1. Method of specifying and guidance for the
specifier. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2015b) BS 8500-2:2015+A1:2016: Concrete. Complementary British
Standard to BS EN 206-2. Specification for constituent materials and
concrete. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2016) BS EN ISO 12696:2016: Cathodic protection of steel in
concrete. BSI, London, UK.
Ciria (Construction Industry Research and Information Association) (1979)
Concrete in the Oceans: Marine Durability Survey of the Tongue
Sands Tower. Ciria, London, UK, UEG TN.5/1, Report 5652.
Concrete Society (2008) CS 163: Guide to the design of concrete
structures in the Arabian Peninsula. Concrete Society, Camberley, UK.
Concrete Society (2009) Historical Approaches to the Design of Concrete
Buildings and Structures. Concrete Society, Camberley, UK, TR 70.
Currie RJ and Robery PC (1994) Repair and Maintenance of Reinforced
Concrete. Building Research Establishment, Watford, UK, BRE 254.
Davies H and Brunnsatter M (1995) Robots used for Hong Kong Mass
Transit Railway repair. Tunnels & Tunnelling International 27(3):
28–30.
Doran SR, Robery PC, Ong H and Robinson SA (1988) Corrosion
protection to buried structures. Proceedings of the 1988 Singapore
Mass Rapid Transit Conference, Singapore, pp. 215–224.
DuraCrete (1998) Modelling of Degradation, EU-Project (Brite EuRam
III) No. BE95-1347, Probabilistic Performance Based Durability
Design of Concrete Structures 4–5.
Geiker M (1999) Durability design of concrete structures minimising total
life cycle costs – considerations and examples. In Concrete Durability
and Repair Technology: Proceedings of the International Conference
Held at the University of Dundee, Scotland, UK, on 8–10 September
1999 (Dhir RK and McCarthy MJ (eds)). Thomas Telford, London,
UK, pp. 319–333.
Li K, Zhang D and Li Q (2016) Service life design and assessment for
concrete structures in HZM sea link project for 120 years. In
Proceedings of the 2016 International RILEM Conference on
32
Downloaded by [] on [27/06/23]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Best practice in the management and
protection of concrete assets
Robery
Materials, Systems and Structures in Civil Engineering, Lyngby,
Denmark, pp. 69–78.
Loov RE (1991) Reinforced concrete at the turn of the century. Concrete
International 13(12): 67–73.
Nmai C, Seow KH, Khor EL and Robery P (2001) Application of high-
performance concrete in Singapore’s North-East and Changi
International Airport MRT Lines. In Fifth CANMET/ACI International
Conference on Recent Advances in Concrete Technology (Malhotra VM
(ed.)). American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, USA,
pp. 199–216.
Nordtest (1999) NT Build 492: Concrete, mortar and cement-based repair
materials: chloride migration coefficient from non-steady-state
migration experiments. Nordtest, Espoo, Finland.
Papworth F and Grace W (1985) Designing for concrete durability in
marine environments. Proceedings of the Concrete 85 Conference,
Brisbane, Australia.
Pillai RG and Annapareddy A (2013) Service life prediction models for
chloride-laden concrete structures: a review and nomographs.
International Journal of 3R’s 4(2): 563–580.
Robery PC (1988) Requirement of coatings. Journal of the Oil and Colour
Chemists’ Association 71(12): 403–406.
Robery PC (2017) The ability of concrete to resist hostile environments.
Proceedings of the 2017 Institute of Concrete Technology Annual
Technical Symposium, Leeds, UK.
Saguees AA, Powers RG and Kessler R (1994) Corrosion processes and
field performance of epoxy-coated reinforcing steel in marine
substructures. Proceedings of Corrosion 94: The NACE Annual
Conference and Corrosion Show, Houston, TX, USA, paper no. 299.
Segers JPM, Robery PC, Loganathan P and Quinn R (2015) Sustainable
life extension of deteriorating M1 motorway bridge half joints using
impressed current cathodic protection. Proceedings of the 16th
European Bridge Conference, Edinburgh, UK.
How can you contribute?
To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to
the editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be
forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered
appropriate by the editorial board, it will be published as
discussion in a future issue of the journal.
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions from the
civil engineering profession (and allied disciplines).
Information about how to submit your paper online
is available at www.icevirtuallibrary.com/page/authors,
where you will also find detailed author guidelines.