Back to Search Start Over

A critical examination of corrosion rate measurement techniques applied to reinforcing steel in concrete.

Authors :
Fahim, Andrew
Ghods, Pouria
Isgor, O. Burkan
Thomas, Michael D.A.
Source :
Materials & Corrosion / Werkstoffe und Korrosion; Dec2018, Vol. 69 Issue 12, p1784-1799, 16p
Publication Year :
2018

Abstract

This paper presents an investigation of five corrosion‐monitoring techniques for reinforced concrete. The techniques studied are the potentiodynamic, galvanostatic, and coulostatic direct‐current techniques as well as electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS), and the connectionless electrical pulse response analysis (CEPRA) technique. The study included monitoring corrosion rates on reinforced concrete specimens with a range of admixed chloride percentages, cover depths, and rebar diameters for 8 months. After this period, the rebars were extracted for mass loss measurements to determine the average corrosion rates. EIS was found to provide accurate measurements of active and passive corrosion rates with a simplified spectrum‐analysis procedure. Galvanostatic and potentiodynamic techniques were able to measure the corrosion rates for actively corroding reinforcements accurately, while the coulostatic technique overestimated it. For passive reinforcements, the coulostatic technique provided reliable corrosion rate estimates, while the potentiodynamic technique provided a minor overestimation, due to the fast scan rate used, and the galvanostatic technique failed in detecting passivity, due to the short measurement duration and confinement failure. Finally, the CEPRA technique provided accurate corrosion rate predictions except for passive rebars with small diameters embedded in saturated concrete. The reliability of five corrosion‐monitoring techniques is evaluated through comparing the electrochemically determined corrosion rate to that found gravimetrically. It was found that reinforced concrete characteristics and test setup can have a significant impact on the accuracy of the techniques. The differences between the techniques, sources of error, and optimum test parameters are discussed in detail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
09475117
Volume :
69
Issue :
12
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Materials & Corrosion / Werkstoffe und Korrosion
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
133428015
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1002/maco.201810263