ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL
Title no. 104-S34
Comparison of Two Accelerated Corrosion Techniques for
Concrete Structures
by Yingshu Yuan, Yongsheng Ji, and Surendra P. Shah
Characterizing deterioration of reinforced concrete structures
caused by the corrosion of steel bars is a major problem in predicting
service life. Normally, the galvanostatic method is used for
accelerating steel bar corrosion in concrete. The surface
characteristics of the corroded steel bar, however, are found to be
different when the corrosion is induced by galvanostatic method or
by natural environment. Recently, an artificial climate environment
has been used to accelerate reinforcing bar corrosion in concrete. This
method is becoming important in assessing the durability of concrete
structures because of the similarity in surface characteristics of the
corroded steel bar under natural and artificial climate environments.
In this study, two groups of reinforced concrete beams were
degraded as a result of the corrosion of steel bars. One group of
beams was subjected to the galvanostatic method, while the other
group was corroded using the artificial climate environment.
Comparative studies including the corroded characteristics of
steel bar surface, the mechanical behavior of the corroded bar, and
the load-bearing capacity were conducted. The comparisons between
the two groups of beams were based on the identical width of corrosion
cracking. Obvious differences were found from the comparisons.
Keywords: acceleration; corrosion; deterioration; reinforcement.
INTRODUCTION
Corrosion of steel reinforcement is one of the major causes
inducing deterioration of reinforced concrete structures. In
the past two decades, researchers have used the galvanostatic
method to study the effects of the degree of corrosion on
deterioration of the structural response. The method is an
impressed current technique for accelerating steel bar corrosion
in concrete. Corrosion on the steel bar is induced by applying
an electrical potential using the steel bar in concrete as the
anode and a stainless steel bar as the cathode. The corrosion
degree can be controlled by varying the current density and/
or the time interval of the impressed current. The advantages
of adopting this method are achieving a high degree of
corrosion within a short period of time and the easy control
of the corrosion degree desired. Many studies have been
carried out using the galvanostatic method in the past two
decades, such as the mechanical behavior of corroded steel
bar;1-2 the bond behavior between corroded bar and
concrete;3-5 the structural behavior of corroded elements;6-7
the behavior of marine concrete structure under fatigue
loading;8 and the interaction between loading, corrosion, and
serviceability of reinforced concrete.9 It is of benefit to qual-
itatively study the effect of the corrosion degree on the dete-
rioration of the structural behavior. However, it can be very
difficult to quantitatively predict the corrosion degree-
dependent deterioration of the structural behavior.
From an electrochemical aspect, the corrosion process is
different when the corrosion is induced using the galvanostatic
method or under a natural environment. A different corrosion
process will lead to different corrosion characteristics on the
344
TECHNICAL PAPER
surface of the steel bar and different deterioration of the bond
behavior between the corroded bar and concrete and will lead
to different capacity and ductility behavior of the structure. The
corrosion process of the bar corroded under an artificial
climate environment can be the same as under a natural envi-
ronment. Therefore, the durability test under artificial climate
environment not only can achieve the purpose of accelerating
steel corrosion and control the degree of the corrosion, but
also result in the same corrosion characteristics on the bar
surface. Researchers10-13 have begun to adopt the new accel-
erated corrosion technique for durability.
In this research, the corrosion process and the differences
of the structural behavior under the impressed current technique
and artificial climate environment are studied. The purpose
is to verify if the artificial climate environment can be
adopted as an accelerated technique for the durability test
instead of the galvanostatic method. Identical reinforced
concrete beams were corroded under the two accelerated
corrosion techniques, and the comparisons of their structural
behavior are carried out based on the same crack width
caused by steel bar corrosion.
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
To study the influence of the reinforcing bar corrosion on
the response of the reinforced concrete beams, the galvanostatic
method of inducing corrosion is commonly employed. The
corrosion process, however, is known to be different with the
impressed current technique as compared with the natural
environment. An alternative method of inducing corrosion
using artificial climate environment is proposed in this study.
To correctly predict the response of concrete structures subjected
to steel bar corrosion, it is essential that an appropriate
method be used in the laboratory to accelerate corrosion. It is
shown that the process of corrosion and the consequent
structural degradation are different when the two methods
were used to induce corrosion.
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
Reinforced concrete beams for testing
The reinforced concrete beams employed for testing are
divided into three groups. The first group (Group A) is
corroded under an artificial climate environment, the second
group (Group B) is corroded using the galvanostatic method,
and the third group (Group K) is in a non-corroded state. The
concrete composition, reinforcement, and dimension of the
ACI Structural Journal, V. 104, No. 3, May-June 2007.
MS No. S-2006-184.R3 received September 9, 2006, and reviewed under Institute
publication policies. Copyright © 2007, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved,
including the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright
proprietors. Pertinent discussion including author’s closure, if any, will be published
in the March-April 2008 ACI Structural Journal if the discussion is received by
November 1, 2007.
ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2007