Upload
others
View
10
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors
FINAL REPORT
Submitted by Dr P N Balaguru Principal Investigator
Mohamed Nazier Graduate Assistant
NJDOT Research Project Manager
Mr Carey Younger
In cooperation with
New Jersey Department of Transportation
Division of Research and Technology and
US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration
Center
FHWA-NJ-2003-005
Pisca
Dept of Civil amp Environmental Engineering for Advanced Infrastructure amp Transportation (CAIT)
Rutgers The State University taway NJ 08854-8014
Disclaimer Statement
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the
accuracy of the data presented herein The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the New Jersey Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration This report does not constitute
a standard specification or regulation
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors Who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the
Information presented herein This document is disseminated Under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation University Transportation Centers Program in the interest of
information exchange The US Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof
TE HNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGEC
1 Report No 2 Government Accession No 3 Rec ip ien t s Ca ta log No
5 Repor t Date
8 Performing Organization Report No
6 Performing Organizat ion Code
4 Ti t le and Subti t le
7 Author(s)
9 Performing Organization Name and Address 10 Work Unit No
11 Contracts or Grant No
13 Type of Report and Period Covered
14 Sponsoring Agency Code
12 Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
15 Supplementary Notes
16 Abstract
17 Key Words
19 Security Classif (of this report) 20 Security Classif (of this page)
18 Distribution Statement
21 No of Pages 22 Price
December 2002
CAITRutgers
Final Report 02012000 to 09302001
FHWA-NJ-2003-005
Dept of Civil amp Environmental Engineering Center for Advanced Infrastructure amp Transportation Rutgers The State University Piscataway NJ 08854-8014
New Jersey Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration CN 600 US Department of Transportation Trenton NJ 08625 Washington DC
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures A number of laboratory studies are available on the performance of various corrosion inhibiting admixtures But studies on concrete used in the field are rare A new bypass constructed by the New Jersey Department of Transportation provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the admixtures in the field Five new bridge decks were used to evaluate four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four commercially available corrosion reduction admixtures The four admixtures were DCI-S XYPEX C-1000 Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 901 The fifth deck was used as a control All the decks with admixtures had black steel where as the control deck had epoxy coated bars Extra black steel bars were placed on the control deck Both laboratory and field tests methods were used to evaluate the admixtures The uniqueness of the study stems from the use of field concrete obtained as the concrete for the individual bridge deck were placed In addition to cylinder strength tests minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion testing The bridge was instrumented for long term corrosion monitoring Tests to measure corrosion rate corrosion potential air permeability and electrical resistance were used to determine the performance of the individual admixtures Unfortunately the length of the study o about 4 years was not sufficient to induce corrosion even in the accelerated tests It was expected that the field study will not result in any corrosion measurements because the steel in the decks can no be expected to corrode in 4 years But the accelerated tests also did not provide measurable corrosion because of the good quality of concrete The corrosion just initiated in accelerated test specimens and only for the control concrete that had no admixtures In other samples there is a trend but not statically significant In terms of scientific observations xypex provides a denser concrete If the concrete can be kept free of cracks this product will minimize the ingress of liquids reducing corrosion The other three provides a protection to reinforcement by providing a barrier reducing the effect of chlorides or both In order to distinguish the differences the study should continue or a different test method should be adopted Based on the results the authors can recommend the use of xypex if there are no cracks in the slab The admixture will reduce the ingress of chemicals It is also recommended to continue the field measurements and develop a more effective accelerated test
Corrosion reinforcement inhibitor Minideck admixture bridge deck protection chloride barrier
Unclassified Unclassified
141
FHWA-NJ-2003-005
Dr PN Balaguru Mohamed Nazier
Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors
Form DOT F 17007 (8-69)
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided by NJDOT and the cooperation of Mr Carey Younger and Mr Robert Baker The encouragement and contribution of professor Ali Maher Chairman and Director of CAIT are acknowledges with thanks The contribution of the following graduate students and Mr Edward Wass are also acknowledged
Mr Nicholas Wong Mr Anand Bhatt Mr Hemal Shah
Mr Yubun Auyeung
ii
Executive Summary
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures A number of laboratory studies are available on the performance of various corrosion inhibiting admixtures But studies on concrete used in the field are rare A new bypass constructed by the New Jersey Department of Transportation provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the admixtures in the field Five new bridge decks were used to evaluate four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four commercially available corrosion reduction admixtures The four admixtures were DCI-S XYPEX C-1000 Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 901 The fifth deck was used as a control All the decks with admixtures had black steel where as the control deck had epoxy coated bars Extra black steel bars were placed on the control deck Both laboratory and field tests methods were used to evaluate the admixtures The uniqueness of the study stems from the use of field concrete obtained as the concrete for the individual bridge deck were placed In addition to cylinder strength tests minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion testing The bridge was instrumented for long term corrosion monitoring Tests to measure corrosion rate corrosion potential air permeability and electrical resistance were used to determine the performance of the individual admixtures Unfortunately the length of the study of about 4 years was not sufficient to induce corrosion even in the accelerated tests It was expected that the field study will not result in any corrosion measurements because the steel in the decks can not be expected to corrode in 4 years But the accelerated tests also did not provide measurable corrosion because of the good quality of concrete The corrosion just initiated in accelerated test specimens and only for the control concrete that had no admixtures In other samples there is a trend but not statically significant In terms of scientific observations xypex provides a denser concrete If the concrete can be kept free of cracks this product will minimize the ingress of liquids thus reducing corrosion The other three provides a protection to reinforcement by providing a barrier reducing the effect of chlorides or both In order to distinguish the differences the study should continue or a different test method should be adopted Based on the results the authors can recommend the use of xypex if there are no cracks in the slab The admixture will reduce the ingress of chemicals It is also recommended to continue the field measurements and develop a more effective accelerated test
iii
Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of xypex in decks with no cracks The admixture provides a
more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete in addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
iv
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to formulate their experimental program
v
Table of Contents Page
Abstract i Acknowledgements ii Table of Contents vi List of Tables viii List of Figures xi 1 Introduction 1 2 Background Information 3 3 Experimental Program 6
31 Test Variables 7
32 Test methods 11
321 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter 11
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 11
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers 12
324 Standard Test Method for Determining the Effect of Chemical 14
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Embedded Steel Reinforcement
in Concrete Exposed to Chloride Environments ASTM G 109
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests 15
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests 27
4 Results and Discussion 32
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability 33
411 Electrical Resistance 33
vi
412 Air Permeability 34
42 Corrosion Measurements 40
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibitors Further Analysis 52
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 54
51 Conclusions 54
52 Recommendations 54
6 References 57
7 Appendix 59
vii
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
Disclaimer Statement
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the
accuracy of the data presented herein The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the New Jersey Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration This report does not constitute
a standard specification or regulation
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors Who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the
Information presented herein This document is disseminated Under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation University Transportation Centers Program in the interest of
information exchange The US Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof
TE HNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGEC
1 Report No 2 Government Accession No 3 Rec ip ien t s Ca ta log No
5 Repor t Date
8 Performing Organization Report No
6 Performing Organizat ion Code
4 Ti t le and Subti t le
7 Author(s)
9 Performing Organization Name and Address 10 Work Unit No
11 Contracts or Grant No
13 Type of Report and Period Covered
14 Sponsoring Agency Code
12 Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
15 Supplementary Notes
16 Abstract
17 Key Words
19 Security Classif (of this report) 20 Security Classif (of this page)
18 Distribution Statement
21 No of Pages 22 Price
December 2002
CAITRutgers
Final Report 02012000 to 09302001
FHWA-NJ-2003-005
Dept of Civil amp Environmental Engineering Center for Advanced Infrastructure amp Transportation Rutgers The State University Piscataway NJ 08854-8014
New Jersey Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration CN 600 US Department of Transportation Trenton NJ 08625 Washington DC
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures A number of laboratory studies are available on the performance of various corrosion inhibiting admixtures But studies on concrete used in the field are rare A new bypass constructed by the New Jersey Department of Transportation provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the admixtures in the field Five new bridge decks were used to evaluate four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four commercially available corrosion reduction admixtures The four admixtures were DCI-S XYPEX C-1000 Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 901 The fifth deck was used as a control All the decks with admixtures had black steel where as the control deck had epoxy coated bars Extra black steel bars were placed on the control deck Both laboratory and field tests methods were used to evaluate the admixtures The uniqueness of the study stems from the use of field concrete obtained as the concrete for the individual bridge deck were placed In addition to cylinder strength tests minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion testing The bridge was instrumented for long term corrosion monitoring Tests to measure corrosion rate corrosion potential air permeability and electrical resistance were used to determine the performance of the individual admixtures Unfortunately the length of the study o about 4 years was not sufficient to induce corrosion even in the accelerated tests It was expected that the field study will not result in any corrosion measurements because the steel in the decks can no be expected to corrode in 4 years But the accelerated tests also did not provide measurable corrosion because of the good quality of concrete The corrosion just initiated in accelerated test specimens and only for the control concrete that had no admixtures In other samples there is a trend but not statically significant In terms of scientific observations xypex provides a denser concrete If the concrete can be kept free of cracks this product will minimize the ingress of liquids reducing corrosion The other three provides a protection to reinforcement by providing a barrier reducing the effect of chlorides or both In order to distinguish the differences the study should continue or a different test method should be adopted Based on the results the authors can recommend the use of xypex if there are no cracks in the slab The admixture will reduce the ingress of chemicals It is also recommended to continue the field measurements and develop a more effective accelerated test
Corrosion reinforcement inhibitor Minideck admixture bridge deck protection chloride barrier
Unclassified Unclassified
141
FHWA-NJ-2003-005
Dr PN Balaguru Mohamed Nazier
Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors
Form DOT F 17007 (8-69)
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided by NJDOT and the cooperation of Mr Carey Younger and Mr Robert Baker The encouragement and contribution of professor Ali Maher Chairman and Director of CAIT are acknowledges with thanks The contribution of the following graduate students and Mr Edward Wass are also acknowledged
Mr Nicholas Wong Mr Anand Bhatt Mr Hemal Shah
Mr Yubun Auyeung
ii
Executive Summary
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures A number of laboratory studies are available on the performance of various corrosion inhibiting admixtures But studies on concrete used in the field are rare A new bypass constructed by the New Jersey Department of Transportation provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the admixtures in the field Five new bridge decks were used to evaluate four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four commercially available corrosion reduction admixtures The four admixtures were DCI-S XYPEX C-1000 Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 901 The fifth deck was used as a control All the decks with admixtures had black steel where as the control deck had epoxy coated bars Extra black steel bars were placed on the control deck Both laboratory and field tests methods were used to evaluate the admixtures The uniqueness of the study stems from the use of field concrete obtained as the concrete for the individual bridge deck were placed In addition to cylinder strength tests minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion testing The bridge was instrumented for long term corrosion monitoring Tests to measure corrosion rate corrosion potential air permeability and electrical resistance were used to determine the performance of the individual admixtures Unfortunately the length of the study of about 4 years was not sufficient to induce corrosion even in the accelerated tests It was expected that the field study will not result in any corrosion measurements because the steel in the decks can not be expected to corrode in 4 years But the accelerated tests also did not provide measurable corrosion because of the good quality of concrete The corrosion just initiated in accelerated test specimens and only for the control concrete that had no admixtures In other samples there is a trend but not statically significant In terms of scientific observations xypex provides a denser concrete If the concrete can be kept free of cracks this product will minimize the ingress of liquids thus reducing corrosion The other three provides a protection to reinforcement by providing a barrier reducing the effect of chlorides or both In order to distinguish the differences the study should continue or a different test method should be adopted Based on the results the authors can recommend the use of xypex if there are no cracks in the slab The admixture will reduce the ingress of chemicals It is also recommended to continue the field measurements and develop a more effective accelerated test
iii
Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of xypex in decks with no cracks The admixture provides a
more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete in addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
iv
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to formulate their experimental program
v
Table of Contents Page
Abstract i Acknowledgements ii Table of Contents vi List of Tables viii List of Figures xi 1 Introduction 1 2 Background Information 3 3 Experimental Program 6
31 Test Variables 7
32 Test methods 11
321 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter 11
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 11
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers 12
324 Standard Test Method for Determining the Effect of Chemical 14
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Embedded Steel Reinforcement
in Concrete Exposed to Chloride Environments ASTM G 109
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests 15
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests 27
4 Results and Discussion 32
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability 33
411 Electrical Resistance 33
vi
412 Air Permeability 34
42 Corrosion Measurements 40
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibitors Further Analysis 52
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 54
51 Conclusions 54
52 Recommendations 54
6 References 57
7 Appendix 59
vii
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
TE HNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGEC
1 Report No 2 Government Accession No 3 Rec ip ien t s Ca ta log No
5 Repor t Date
8 Performing Organization Report No
6 Performing Organizat ion Code
4 Ti t le and Subti t le
7 Author(s)
9 Performing Organization Name and Address 10 Work Unit No
11 Contracts or Grant No
13 Type of Report and Period Covered
14 Sponsoring Agency Code
12 Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
15 Supplementary Notes
16 Abstract
17 Key Words
19 Security Classif (of this report) 20 Security Classif (of this page)
18 Distribution Statement
21 No of Pages 22 Price
December 2002
CAITRutgers
Final Report 02012000 to 09302001
FHWA-NJ-2003-005
Dept of Civil amp Environmental Engineering Center for Advanced Infrastructure amp Transportation Rutgers The State University Piscataway NJ 08854-8014
New Jersey Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration CN 600 US Department of Transportation Trenton NJ 08625 Washington DC
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures A number of laboratory studies are available on the performance of various corrosion inhibiting admixtures But studies on concrete used in the field are rare A new bypass constructed by the New Jersey Department of Transportation provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the admixtures in the field Five new bridge decks were used to evaluate four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four commercially available corrosion reduction admixtures The four admixtures were DCI-S XYPEX C-1000 Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 901 The fifth deck was used as a control All the decks with admixtures had black steel where as the control deck had epoxy coated bars Extra black steel bars were placed on the control deck Both laboratory and field tests methods were used to evaluate the admixtures The uniqueness of the study stems from the use of field concrete obtained as the concrete for the individual bridge deck were placed In addition to cylinder strength tests minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion testing The bridge was instrumented for long term corrosion monitoring Tests to measure corrosion rate corrosion potential air permeability and electrical resistance were used to determine the performance of the individual admixtures Unfortunately the length of the study o about 4 years was not sufficient to induce corrosion even in the accelerated tests It was expected that the field study will not result in any corrosion measurements because the steel in the decks can no be expected to corrode in 4 years But the accelerated tests also did not provide measurable corrosion because of the good quality of concrete The corrosion just initiated in accelerated test specimens and only for the control concrete that had no admixtures In other samples there is a trend but not statically significant In terms of scientific observations xypex provides a denser concrete If the concrete can be kept free of cracks this product will minimize the ingress of liquids reducing corrosion The other three provides a protection to reinforcement by providing a barrier reducing the effect of chlorides or both In order to distinguish the differences the study should continue or a different test method should be adopted Based on the results the authors can recommend the use of xypex if there are no cracks in the slab The admixture will reduce the ingress of chemicals It is also recommended to continue the field measurements and develop a more effective accelerated test
Corrosion reinforcement inhibitor Minideck admixture bridge deck protection chloride barrier
Unclassified Unclassified
141
FHWA-NJ-2003-005
Dr PN Balaguru Mohamed Nazier
Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors
Form DOT F 17007 (8-69)
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided by NJDOT and the cooperation of Mr Carey Younger and Mr Robert Baker The encouragement and contribution of professor Ali Maher Chairman and Director of CAIT are acknowledges with thanks The contribution of the following graduate students and Mr Edward Wass are also acknowledged
Mr Nicholas Wong Mr Anand Bhatt Mr Hemal Shah
Mr Yubun Auyeung
ii
Executive Summary
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures A number of laboratory studies are available on the performance of various corrosion inhibiting admixtures But studies on concrete used in the field are rare A new bypass constructed by the New Jersey Department of Transportation provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the admixtures in the field Five new bridge decks were used to evaluate four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four commercially available corrosion reduction admixtures The four admixtures were DCI-S XYPEX C-1000 Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 901 The fifth deck was used as a control All the decks with admixtures had black steel where as the control deck had epoxy coated bars Extra black steel bars were placed on the control deck Both laboratory and field tests methods were used to evaluate the admixtures The uniqueness of the study stems from the use of field concrete obtained as the concrete for the individual bridge deck were placed In addition to cylinder strength tests minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion testing The bridge was instrumented for long term corrosion monitoring Tests to measure corrosion rate corrosion potential air permeability and electrical resistance were used to determine the performance of the individual admixtures Unfortunately the length of the study of about 4 years was not sufficient to induce corrosion even in the accelerated tests It was expected that the field study will not result in any corrosion measurements because the steel in the decks can not be expected to corrode in 4 years But the accelerated tests also did not provide measurable corrosion because of the good quality of concrete The corrosion just initiated in accelerated test specimens and only for the control concrete that had no admixtures In other samples there is a trend but not statically significant In terms of scientific observations xypex provides a denser concrete If the concrete can be kept free of cracks this product will minimize the ingress of liquids thus reducing corrosion The other three provides a protection to reinforcement by providing a barrier reducing the effect of chlorides or both In order to distinguish the differences the study should continue or a different test method should be adopted Based on the results the authors can recommend the use of xypex if there are no cracks in the slab The admixture will reduce the ingress of chemicals It is also recommended to continue the field measurements and develop a more effective accelerated test
iii
Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of xypex in decks with no cracks The admixture provides a
more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete in addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
iv
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to formulate their experimental program
v
Table of Contents Page
Abstract i Acknowledgements ii Table of Contents vi List of Tables viii List of Figures xi 1 Introduction 1 2 Background Information 3 3 Experimental Program 6
31 Test Variables 7
32 Test methods 11
321 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter 11
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 11
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers 12
324 Standard Test Method for Determining the Effect of Chemical 14
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Embedded Steel Reinforcement
in Concrete Exposed to Chloride Environments ASTM G 109
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests 15
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests 27
4 Results and Discussion 32
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability 33
411 Electrical Resistance 33
vi
412 Air Permeability 34
42 Corrosion Measurements 40
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibitors Further Analysis 52
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 54
51 Conclusions 54
52 Recommendations 54
6 References 57
7 Appendix 59
vii
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided by NJDOT and the cooperation of Mr Carey Younger and Mr Robert Baker The encouragement and contribution of professor Ali Maher Chairman and Director of CAIT are acknowledges with thanks The contribution of the following graduate students and Mr Edward Wass are also acknowledged
Mr Nicholas Wong Mr Anand Bhatt Mr Hemal Shah
Mr Yubun Auyeung
ii
Executive Summary
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures A number of laboratory studies are available on the performance of various corrosion inhibiting admixtures But studies on concrete used in the field are rare A new bypass constructed by the New Jersey Department of Transportation provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the admixtures in the field Five new bridge decks were used to evaluate four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four commercially available corrosion reduction admixtures The four admixtures were DCI-S XYPEX C-1000 Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 901 The fifth deck was used as a control All the decks with admixtures had black steel where as the control deck had epoxy coated bars Extra black steel bars were placed on the control deck Both laboratory and field tests methods were used to evaluate the admixtures The uniqueness of the study stems from the use of field concrete obtained as the concrete for the individual bridge deck were placed In addition to cylinder strength tests minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion testing The bridge was instrumented for long term corrosion monitoring Tests to measure corrosion rate corrosion potential air permeability and electrical resistance were used to determine the performance of the individual admixtures Unfortunately the length of the study of about 4 years was not sufficient to induce corrosion even in the accelerated tests It was expected that the field study will not result in any corrosion measurements because the steel in the decks can not be expected to corrode in 4 years But the accelerated tests also did not provide measurable corrosion because of the good quality of concrete The corrosion just initiated in accelerated test specimens and only for the control concrete that had no admixtures In other samples there is a trend but not statically significant In terms of scientific observations xypex provides a denser concrete If the concrete can be kept free of cracks this product will minimize the ingress of liquids thus reducing corrosion The other three provides a protection to reinforcement by providing a barrier reducing the effect of chlorides or both In order to distinguish the differences the study should continue or a different test method should be adopted Based on the results the authors can recommend the use of xypex if there are no cracks in the slab The admixture will reduce the ingress of chemicals It is also recommended to continue the field measurements and develop a more effective accelerated test
iii
Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of xypex in decks with no cracks The admixture provides a
more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete in addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
iv
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to formulate their experimental program
v
Table of Contents Page
Abstract i Acknowledgements ii Table of Contents vi List of Tables viii List of Figures xi 1 Introduction 1 2 Background Information 3 3 Experimental Program 6
31 Test Variables 7
32 Test methods 11
321 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter 11
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 11
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers 12
324 Standard Test Method for Determining the Effect of Chemical 14
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Embedded Steel Reinforcement
in Concrete Exposed to Chloride Environments ASTM G 109
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests 15
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests 27
4 Results and Discussion 32
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability 33
411 Electrical Resistance 33
vi
412 Air Permeability 34
42 Corrosion Measurements 40
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibitors Further Analysis 52
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 54
51 Conclusions 54
52 Recommendations 54
6 References 57
7 Appendix 59
vii
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
Executive Summary
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures A number of laboratory studies are available on the performance of various corrosion inhibiting admixtures But studies on concrete used in the field are rare A new bypass constructed by the New Jersey Department of Transportation provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the admixtures in the field Five new bridge decks were used to evaluate four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four commercially available corrosion reduction admixtures The four admixtures were DCI-S XYPEX C-1000 Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 901 The fifth deck was used as a control All the decks with admixtures had black steel where as the control deck had epoxy coated bars Extra black steel bars were placed on the control deck Both laboratory and field tests methods were used to evaluate the admixtures The uniqueness of the study stems from the use of field concrete obtained as the concrete for the individual bridge deck were placed In addition to cylinder strength tests minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion testing The bridge was instrumented for long term corrosion monitoring Tests to measure corrosion rate corrosion potential air permeability and electrical resistance were used to determine the performance of the individual admixtures Unfortunately the length of the study of about 4 years was not sufficient to induce corrosion even in the accelerated tests It was expected that the field study will not result in any corrosion measurements because the steel in the decks can not be expected to corrode in 4 years But the accelerated tests also did not provide measurable corrosion because of the good quality of concrete The corrosion just initiated in accelerated test specimens and only for the control concrete that had no admixtures In other samples there is a trend but not statically significant In terms of scientific observations xypex provides a denser concrete If the concrete can be kept free of cracks this product will minimize the ingress of liquids thus reducing corrosion The other three provides a protection to reinforcement by providing a barrier reducing the effect of chlorides or both In order to distinguish the differences the study should continue or a different test method should be adopted Based on the results the authors can recommend the use of xypex if there are no cracks in the slab The admixture will reduce the ingress of chemicals It is also recommended to continue the field measurements and develop a more effective accelerated test
iii
Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of xypex in decks with no cracks The admixture provides a
more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete in addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
iv
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to formulate their experimental program
v
Table of Contents Page
Abstract i Acknowledgements ii Table of Contents vi List of Tables viii List of Figures xi 1 Introduction 1 2 Background Information 3 3 Experimental Program 6
31 Test Variables 7
32 Test methods 11
321 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter 11
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 11
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers 12
324 Standard Test Method for Determining the Effect of Chemical 14
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Embedded Steel Reinforcement
in Concrete Exposed to Chloride Environments ASTM G 109
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests 15
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests 27
4 Results and Discussion 32
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability 33
411 Electrical Resistance 33
vi
412 Air Permeability 34
42 Corrosion Measurements 40
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibitors Further Analysis 52
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 54
51 Conclusions 54
52 Recommendations 54
6 References 57
7 Appendix 59
vii
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of xypex in decks with no cracks The admixture provides a
more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete in addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
iv
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to formulate their experimental program
v
Table of Contents Page
Abstract i Acknowledgements ii Table of Contents vi List of Tables viii List of Figures xi 1 Introduction 1 2 Background Information 3 3 Experimental Program 6
31 Test Variables 7
32 Test methods 11
321 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter 11
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 11
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers 12
324 Standard Test Method for Determining the Effect of Chemical 14
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Embedded Steel Reinforcement
in Concrete Exposed to Chloride Environments ASTM G 109
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests 15
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests 27
4 Results and Discussion 32
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability 33
411 Electrical Resistance 33
vi
412 Air Permeability 34
42 Corrosion Measurements 40
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibitors Further Analysis 52
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 54
51 Conclusions 54
52 Recommendations 54
6 References 57
7 Appendix 59
vii
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to formulate their experimental program
v
Table of Contents Page
Abstract i Acknowledgements ii Table of Contents vi List of Tables viii List of Figures xi 1 Introduction 1 2 Background Information 3 3 Experimental Program 6
31 Test Variables 7
32 Test methods 11
321 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter 11
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 11
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers 12
324 Standard Test Method for Determining the Effect of Chemical 14
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Embedded Steel Reinforcement
in Concrete Exposed to Chloride Environments ASTM G 109
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests 15
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests 27
4 Results and Discussion 32
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability 33
411 Electrical Resistance 33
vi
412 Air Permeability 34
42 Corrosion Measurements 40
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibitors Further Analysis 52
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 54
51 Conclusions 54
52 Recommendations 54
6 References 57
7 Appendix 59
vii
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
Table of Contents Page
Abstract i Acknowledgements ii Table of Contents vi List of Tables viii List of Figures xi 1 Introduction 1 2 Background Information 3 3 Experimental Program 6
31 Test Variables 7
32 Test methods 11
321 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter 11
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 11
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers 12
324 Standard Test Method for Determining the Effect of Chemical 14
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Embedded Steel Reinforcement
in Concrete Exposed to Chloride Environments ASTM G 109
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests 15
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests 27
4 Results and Discussion 32
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability 33
411 Electrical Resistance 33
vi
412 Air Permeability 34
42 Corrosion Measurements 40
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibitors Further Analysis 52
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 54
51 Conclusions 54
52 Recommendations 54
6 References 57
7 Appendix 59
vii
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
412 Air Permeability 34
42 Corrosion Measurements 40
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibitors Further Analysis 52
5 Conclusions and Recommendations 54
51 Conclusions 54
52 Recommendations 54
6 References 57
7 Appendix 59
vii
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
List of Tables
Page Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7 Admixtures and Reinforcing Steel Type Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound 8 Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound 8 Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Westbound 9 Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road Eastbound 9 Table 36 Mix Design of Route 130 Westbound 10 Table 37 Table 37 Minideck Sample Location 31 Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties 32 Table 42 Hardened Concrete properties 32 Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential 52 Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time 53
and the Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997) 62 Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 62
(ASTM C 876)
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997) 64
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings 64
(ASTM C 876)
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 64
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow 70
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996) 72
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 87
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ) 87
viii
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability
Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin) 89
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 91
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 93
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ) 94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg)
SCCM (mlmin) 95
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ) 95
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 98
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 101
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 104
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 107
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 110
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 113
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 115
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 116
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 118
ix
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 119
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 121
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV) 122
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2) 124
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) 125
x
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
List of Figures
Page Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint 12
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109) 14
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests 18
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on 18
Route 130 Westbound
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables 19
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings 23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests 26
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold 27
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold 28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam 29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples 30
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 36
xi
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ) 37
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin) 39
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 42
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 43
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 44
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 45
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA) 46
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average 47
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average 48
Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 50
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 51
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion 52
Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View) 63
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 65
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 66
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator 67
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test 67
for Penetrating Sealers
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound 74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound 75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound 76
xii
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound 77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound 78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound 79
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound 79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound 80
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound 80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound 81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound 82
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound 82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during 83 Concrete Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion 83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion 84
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion 84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion 85
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion 85
FigG1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 99
FigG2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 102
Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
FigG3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 105
FigG4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential 108
FigG5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 111
FigG6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 114
FigG7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 117
FigG8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6
Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 120
FigG9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 123
FigG10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV) 126
xiii
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
1 Introduction
Corrosion of reinforcement is a global problem that has been studied extensively
Though the high alkali nature of concrete normally protects reinforcing steel with the
formation of a tightly adhering film which passivates the steel and protects it from
corrosion the harsh environment in the Northeastern United States and similar locations
around the world accelerate the corrosion process The major techniques used for
reducing corrosion and preventing it to some extent are (i) Use of concrete with least
permeability (ii) Use corrosion inhibitors (iii) Use of epoxy coated bars (iv) Surface
protection of concrete and (v) Cathodic protection of reinforcement Use the nonmetallic
reinforcement is one more technique to reduce corrosion which is still in development
stage
The use of inhibitors to control the corrosion of concrete is a well-established
technology Inhibitors are in effect any materials that are able to reduce the corrosion
rates present at relatively small concentrations at or near the steel surface When
correctly specified and applied by experienced professionals inhibitors can be effective
for use in both the repair of deteriorating concrete structures and enhancing the durability
of new structures
The use of good quality concrete and corrosion inhibitors seems to be an
economical effective and logical solution especially for new structures The objective
of this study is to determine the effectiveness of four different corrosion inhibitors to
reduce corrosion of the structural steel reinforcement in a structure The data is
compared with the data from structural steel reinforcement not protected by a corrosion
inhibitor
11 Objective
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
1
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
2
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
2 Background Information
Steel reinforced concrete is one of the most durable and cost effective
construction materials The alkaline environment of the concrete passivates the steel
resulting in reduction of corrosion activity in steel However concrete is often utilized in
extreme environments in which it is subjected to exposure to chloride ions which disrupt
the passivity (Berke 1995) Though corrosion inhibitors are one of the most practical
and effective means to arrest the corrosion process in old and new reinforced concrete
the use of good quality concrete is also very significant in inhibiting corrosion Concrete
with low water to cement ratios can lower the amount of chloride ingress Pozzolans
such as silica-fume increases concrete resistively and permeably to chloride (Berke
1995)
The principle of most inhibitors is to develop a thin chemical layer usually one or
two molecules thick on the steel surface that inhibits the corrosion attack Inhibitors can
prevent the cathodic reaction the anodic reaction or both They are consumed and will
only work up to a given level of attack The chloride content of the concrete determines
the level of attack (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of inhibitors available in the market They have different
effects on the steel or the concrete to enhance the alkalinity block the chloride intrusion
and reduce the corrosion rate Some are true corrosion inhibitors some are hybrid
inhibitors pore blockers and alkali generators (Broomfield 1997)
There are a number of ways inhibitors can be applied Corrosion inhibiting
admixtures are added to fresh concrete during the batching process Other inhibitors can
be applied to the surface of hardened concrete These migrating inhibitors are called
vapor phase inhibitors These are volatile compounds that can be incorporated into a
number of carries such as waxes gels and oils In principle their ability to diffuse as a
vapor gives them an advantage over liquid inhibitors However they could also diffuse
out of the concrete unless trapped in place (Broomfield 1997)
DCI S developed by WR Grace amp Co XYPEX C-1000 developed by Quick-
Wright Associates Inc Rheocrete 222+ developed by Masters Builders Inc and
3
Ferrogard 901 developed by Sika Corporation are all corrosion inhibiting admixtures for
concrete and represent the state of the art in technology These admixtures were
evaluated for their performance as a means to reduce corrosion in new structures
DCI S corrosion inhibitor is a calcium nitrite-based solution It is added to
concrete during the batching process and effectively inhibits the corrosion of reinforcing
steel and prestressed strands According to WR Grace amp Co the admixture chemically
reacts with the embedded metal to form a passivating oxide layer which inhibits
chloride attack of the fortified reinforcing steel The addition of DCI S to concrete
delays the onset of corrosion and reduces the corrosion rate once it has begun DCI S
is a neutral set (DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor 1997)
XYPEX C-1000 is a corrosion inhibitor which is specially formulated as an
additive for concrete at the time of batching According to the manufacture the concrete
itself becomes sealed against the penetration of water or liquid The active chemicals in
XYPEX C-1000 cause a catalytic reaction which generates a non-soluble crystalline
formation within the pores and capillary tracts of concrete preventing the penetration of
water and liquids necessary to the corrosion process XYPEX C-1000 may delay the
initial set time of the fresh concrete (XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by
Crystallization)
Rheocrete 222+ is a corrosion inhibitor admixture formulated to prevent the
corrosion of steel reinforced concrete According the manufacturer Rheocrete 222+ can
extend the service life of reinforced concrete in two ways The admixture slows the
ingress of chlorides and moisture two elements involved in the corrosion process by
lining the pores of the concrete matrix The admixture also slows the rate of corrosion by
forming a protective film on the reinforcing steel depriving the corrosion process of
oxygen and moisture Rheocrete 222+ is added to the concrete batch water during the
mixing process and does not require changes to the normal batching procedures
(Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture 1995)
The Ferrogard 901 corrosion inhibitor admixture for fresh concrete developed by
the Sika Corporation is based on an organic film forming amino compound that can
diffuse through the pores of the concrete The protective film that forms around the
reinforcing steel is a protective layer that can protect the steel in both anodic and cathodic
4
areas According to the manufacturer this Ferrogard 901 suppresses the electrochemical
corrosion reaction and shows no detrimental effects to the concrete (MacDonald 1996)
DCI-S Rheocrete 222+ and Ferrogard 911 are primarily made of organic
products The organic substances form a coating around the steel and provide protection
XYPEX C-2000 consists of Portland cement very fine treated silica and various active
proprietary chemicals These active chemicals react with the moisture in concrete
forming non soluble crystalline formation in the concrete pores
5
3 Experimental Program
The primary objective of the research program is to evaluate the effectiveness of
the latest corrosion inhibiting admixtures for steel reinforced concrete using laboratory
and field study It was envisioned that the laboratory accelerated test will provide
effectiveness of the commercially available corrosion inhibitors and these results can be
used to predict the behavior of bridge decks The bridge decks were instrumented to
measure corrosion levels and the results from these decks were to be correlated with
laboratory results
The test variables are the four corrosion-inhibiting admixtures mentioned in
chapter 2 These were incorporated in bridge decks during the construction of the bridge
decks on the route 133 Hightstown Bypass One deck was constructed with no corrosion-
inhibiting admixture which served as control
The field evaluation consists of three tests GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
Surface Air Flow Permeability Indicator and Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers The results of these tests can be used to determine the physical characters as
well as the corrosion protection provided by a particular admixture The bridges were
instrumented for corrosion testing and are periodically monitored for corrosion activity
The laboratory samples were tested using ASTM G 109 This accelerated process will
give an early indication of the effectiveness of the admixtures All the concrete samples
were taken from the field as the concrete for the individual bridge decks was placed
Fresh concrete was tested for workability and air content Compressive strength
was obtained at 28 days The parameters studied were corrosion rate corrosion potential
air permeability and electrical resistance
6
31 Test Variables
During the course of this research program four types of corrosion inhibiting
admixtures as well as control specimens with no corrosion inhibiting admixtures were
evaluated in laboratory and field tests Table 31 lists the bridge locations on Route 133
Hightstown Bypass and the corresponding admixtures used on each bridge deck
Table 31 Bridge Locations with Corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures and
Reinforcing Steel Type
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
Type of Reinforcing Steel
North Main Street -
Westbound
WR Grace
DCI-S
Black
North Main Street -
Eastbound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc XYPEX C-1000
Black
Wyckoff Road
Westbound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
Black
Wyckoff Road
Eastbound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
Black
Route 130
Westbound
Control none Epoxy Coated
The control concrete did not contain any corrosion-inhibiting admixture Epoxy
coated steel was used in the reinforcement of the concrete deck unlike the other bridges
tested which used uncoated black reinforcing steel
The mix proportions for the five types of concrete used are presented in Tables
32 33 34 35 and 36 The proportions were developed by the New Jersey
Department of Transportation in accordance with ASTM C 94 From the tables 32 to
36 it can be seen that the cement and aggregate contents remained the same for all the
mixes The water content was adjusted to account for water present in the admixtures
7
Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor DCI-S)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 293
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 63
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
WR Grace DCI-S (gal) 3
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street Eastbound (Corrosion Inhibitor XYPEX
C-1000)
Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound
Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Quick Wright Associates Inc XYPEX C-1000 (lbs) 12
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
8
Table 34 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Westbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 38
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 84
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Master Builders Inc Rheocrete 222+ (gal) 1
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
Table 35 Mix Design of Wyckoff Road - Eastbound
Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 21 1998 Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 291
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Sika Corporation Ferrogard 901 (gal) 2
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
9
Table 36 Mix design of Route 130-Westbound (Corrosion Inhibitor none)
Bridge Deck over Route 130 Westbound
Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
Cements (lbs) 700
Sand (lbs) 1346
frac34 in Aggregate (lbs) 1750
Water (gal) 318
WC Ratio 038
Sika Corporation AER Air-Entraining Admixture ASTM C-150 (oz) 42
Sika Corporation Plastocrete 161 Water reducing Admixture Type
A ASTM C 494 (oz)
21
Slump (inches) 3+1
Air () 6+15
10
32 Test Methods
The test procedures used are described in the following sections The first three
tests were conducted in the field where as the fourth one was conducted in the laboratory
The laboratory test provides the information on corrosion potential which can be
used to estimate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The air permeability and the
electrical resistance test conducted in the field were used to determine possible variations
in permeability and uniformity of concrete in the five bridge decks chosen for the study
Corrosion rate measured in the field can be used to correlate the laboratory test results
that were obtained using accelerated corrosion
321 GECOR Corrosion Rate Meter
The GECOR 6 Corrosion rate Meter provides valuable insight into the kinematics
of the corrosion process Based on a steady state linear polarization technique it provides
information on the rate of the deterioration process The meter monitors the
electrochemical process of corrosion to determine the rate of deterioration This
nondestructive technique works by applying a small current to the reinforcing bar and
measuring the change in the half-cell potential The corrosion rate corrosion potential
and electrical resistance are provided by the corrosion rate meter
Description of the equipment and test procedure is presented in Appendix A
322 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
The Concrete Surface Air Flow (SAF) Permeability Indicator is a nondestructive
technique designed to give an indication of the relative permeability of flat concrete
surfaces The SAF can be utilized to determine the permeability of concrete slabs
support members bridge decks and pavement (Manual for the Operation of a Surface
Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994) The concrete permeability is based on
airflow out of the concrete surface under an applied vacuum The depth of measurement
was determined to be approximately 05in below the concrete surface A study between
11
the relationships between SAF readings and air and water permeability determined that
there is a good correlation in the results As stated in the Participants Workbook
FHWA-SHRP Showcase (Scannell 1996) the SAF should not be used as a substitute for
actual laboratory permeability testing Cores tested under more standardized techniques
will provide a more accurate value for permeability due the fact that the effects of surface
texture and micro cracks have not been fully studied for the SAF
The SAF can determine permeability of both horizontal surfaces by use of an
integral suction foot and vertical surfaces by use of external remote head The remote
head was not used for this project A description of the equipment and the test procedure
are presented in Appendix C
323 Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
Although the main use of this testing method is to determine the effectiveness of
concrete penetrating sealers it can also indicate the resistance of unsealed concrete
surfaces The resistance measurement is tested on two strips of conductive paint sprayed
onto the concrete surface to be tested by using a Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter The
spray pattern can be seen in Fig 31
Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
The materials needed for this test and test procedure are presented in Appendix D
12
The higher the resistance the less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel
due to the higher density of the concrete and improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion The collected data and a discussion on the
resistance indicated are presented and discussed in the Test Results and Discussions
chapter
13
324 Minideck Test
Fig 32 View of Concrete Minideck (ASTM G 109)
The corrosion rate is tested using minidecks presented in Fig32 and a high
impedance voltmeter accurate up to 001 mV The top bar is used as the anode while the
14
bottom bars are used as the cathode Voltage is measured across a 100Ω resistor The
current flowing Ij from the electrochemical process is calculated from the measured
voltage across the 100Ω resistor Vj as
Ij = Vj100
The corrosion potential of the bars is measured against a reference electrode half-cell
The electrode is placed in the dam containing the NaCl solution The voltmeter is
connected between the electrodes and bars
The current is monitored as a function of time until the average current of the
control specimens is 10 microA or Greater and at least half the samples show currents equal
to or greater than 10 microA The test is continued for a further three complete cycles to
ensure the presence of sufficient corrosion for a visual evaluation At the conclusion of
the test the minidecks are broken and the bars removed to assess the extent of corrosion
and to record the percentage of corroded area
The results are interpreted with Table B1 and Table B2 in the Appendix The
results of this test are presented in the results and Discussion Chapter
33 Instrumentation for Field Tests
Electrical connections were made to the top-reinforcing mat of each bridge deck
before the placement of the concrete Five connections were made to Route 130
Westbound and four each on the remaining four bridges A total of 105 readings were
taken per cycle using the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Twenty-five readings were
taken at the bridge deck over RT130 West Bound Twenty readings each were taken at
the other four bridge decks tested The locations of the tests are presented on Fig33 34
35 36 and 37 Due to the use of epoxy coated reinforcing bars on the bridge deck over
RT130 West Bound it was necessary to place uncoated reinforcing bars into the top mat
The locations of these bars are presented in Fig 38 Short lengths of uncoated
reinforcing bars were welded to the existing reinforcement The ends were tapped to
accept stainless steel nuts and bolts to attach underground copper feeder cables seen in
Fig 39 that were used to connect the meter to the reinforcement in the bridge deck To
ensure accurate readings the connecting lengths of reinforcing bars were wire brushed to
15
remove the existing corrosion They were then coated with epoxy and spray painted to
seal out moisture
Fig 33 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 34 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
16
Fig 35 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 36 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
17
Fig 37 Locations of GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 38 Locations of Uncoated Steel Reinforcement Bars on Route 130 Westbound
(X location at which reading was taken)
18
Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
19
A total of fifteen readings were recorded per cycle using the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator Three readings were taken transversely across the concrete
deck at either end and at midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 310
311 312 313 and 314 The readings provide an indication of effect of a particular
corrosion-inhibiting admixture on permeability
20
Fig 310 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 311 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
21
Fig 312 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 313 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
22
Fig 314 Locations of Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Readings
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
A total of fifteen readings were taken per cycle using the Electrical Resistance
Test for Penetrating Sealers Three resistance readings were taken on each bridge deck at
midspan The locations of the readings can be seen on Fig 315 316 317 318 and
319 Due to the difficulty in creating an adequate gage using the fine line tape and the
metal mask an aluminum mask with a rubber gasket was fabricated The stiff aluminum
mask fabricated with the correct dimensions eliminated the need for the fine line tape and
mask as well as producing a better gage according to the acceptance criteria Though a
formal determination has not been made for categorizing unsealed concrete effectiveness
against corrosive effects using the testing method a comparison of the various bridge
decks admixtures in relation to each other can determine which is most effective
23
Fig 315 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 316 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
North Main Street Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
24
Fig 317 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
Fig 318 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Wyckoff Road Eastbound (x location at which reading was taken)
25
Fig 319 Locations of Electrical Resistance Tests
Route 130 Westbound (x location at which reading was taken)
26
34 Specimen Preparation for Laboratory Tests
Molds for the ASTM G 109 Test were fabricated from frac12 in Plexiglas because of
its impermeability and durability No 5 reinforcing bars were used for the test instead of
the No 4 bars specified in the ASTM to better correlate the laboratory test results with
data gathered from the field The connections made to the five bridge decks on Route
133 Hightstown Bypass for the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Test were specially placed on
the No 5 bars that make up the top mat of the reinforcement Holes were drilled and
tapped in one end of each of the pieces of reinforcing bar that were to be placed in the
molds to receive stainless threaded rods and nuts This provided a better connection for
the corrosion rate and corrosion potential tests The wire brushed and wrapped bars were
placed into the molds and caulked into place as shown in Fig 320
Fig 320 Prepared Minideck Mold
A total of thirty minidecks were cast for the ASTM G 109 Test All the concrete
samples used for the research program were taken from the mixing trucks as the concrete
for the individual decks were placed Six minidecks were cast for each of the five
bridges The concrete taken were from two separate trucks per bridge deck to better
correlate the Minideck samples to the actual concrete being placed in the new bridge
deck Fresh and hardened concrete properties were taken by the NJDOT Quality Control
27
Team and are provided on Table 41 and 42 in the Results and Discussion Chapter The
samples were consolidated through rodding and placed under plastic sheets to cure for the
first 24 hours The samples were removed from the molds after the 24 hours and placed
in a 100 humidity room to cure for 90 days Fig 321 shows a Minideck after removal
from mold
Fig 321 Minideck after Removal from Mold
The minidecks were prepared for accelerated corrosion tests after 90 days
Silicon caulk was then used to fix frac14 in thick Plexiglas dams to the top of each sample in
the center The Plexiglas dam can be seen in Fig322 Concrete sealing epoxy was used
to seal all four sides and the top of the sample except for the area enclosed by the dam
The samples were placed on sturdy racks supported on frac12 in strips of wood The
Minideck designation is listed on Table 37
The samples were ponded with 3 NaCl solution and tested for corrosion rate
and corrosion potential as per ASTM G 109 and ASTM C 876 respectively The ponded
specimens can be seen in Fig 323 The corrosion data is provided in the Results and
Discussion Chapter
28
Fig 322 View of Plexiglas Dam
29
Fig323 Ponded Minideck Samples
30
Table 37 Minideck Sample Location Admixture Type and Designation
Bridge Location Corrosion Inhibiting
Admixture
ASTM G 109 Minideck
Designations
North Main Street West
Bound
WR Grace
DCI S
A
North Main Street East
Bound
Quick Wright Associates
Inc
XYPEX C-2000
B
Wyckoff Road West
Bound
Master Builders Inc
Rheocrete 222+
C
Wyckoff Road East
Bound
Sika Corporation
Ferrogard 901
D
Route 130 West
Bound
Control
none
E
31
4 Results and Discussion
The results presented consist of fresh and hardened concrete properties
accelerated laboratory tests and field measurement Fresh concrete properties are
presented in table 41 Hardened concrete properties are presented in table 42
Table 41 Fresh Concrete Properties
Minideck Concrete Temp
(degF) Slump (inches)
Entrained Air
Content ()
A 65 338 600 B 64 300 585 C 82 338 570 D 78 388 505 E 84 400 528
Table 42 Hardened Concrete Properties
Minideck 28Day Average Compressive Strength
(PSI)
A 5825 B 5305 C 4425 D 6123 E 4935
From Tables 41 and 42 it can be seen that the slump and air contents are not
significantly different for the various admixtures The slump varied from 3 to 4 in where
as the air content varied from 5 to 6
32
Compressive strength varied from 4425 to 6125 psi The variation could be
considered a little high However this variation may not influence corrosion studies
because the corrosion is primarily influenced by permeability Rapid air permeability
tests indicate that the variation in permeability among the five bridge decks is not
significant
Corrosion rate and corrosion potential for minidecks subjected to accelerated
corrosion and actual bridge decks are presented in the following sections Since the
corrosion process did not start in either set of samples a correlation could not be
developed However the data will be very useful if future readings taken in the field
indicate corrosion activity Once corrosion activity is evident in the laboratory or field
tests a correlation can be attempted
41 Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Variations of electrical resistance for the five decks are presented in Fig 41 to
45 and the variations of air permeability are presented in Fig 46 to 410 The actual
numbers are presented in Appendix F
Overall the variation in both air permeability and electrical resistance is
negligible among the five bridge decks Therefore the permeability of uncracked decks
can be assumed to be the same for all fiver decks
411 Electrical Resistance
Review of Fig 41 to 45 leads to the following observations
bull The resistance varies from 20 to 100 KΩ Since the resistance is very sensitive to a
number of factors this variation is not significant
bull Except for North Main Street - East bound (XYPEX C 1000) the average resistance
was higher than 50 KΩ For North Main Street West bound the resistance was
about 30 KΩ
bull The variations across and among the decks were not significant Therefore the
uniformity of concrete and quality of concrete for all the decks can be assumed to be
33
same for all the five bridge decks It should be noted that this observation is based on
the measurements taken on uncracked decks
412 Air Permeability
Review of Fig 46 to 410 leads to the following observations
bull The air flow rate varied from 25 to 45 mlmin
bull The magnitude of variation in air flow across and among (the five) the decks were
smaller for air flow as compared to electrical resistance This should be expected
because air flow is primarily influenced by density Other factors such as degree of
saturation have much less effect on permeability as compared to electrical resistance
bull Careful review of all the readings leads to the conclusion that the variation of air
permeability across and among the five decks is negligible Here again the results
were obtained on uncracked decks
34
Fig 41 North Main Street Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 42 North Main Street Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
35
Fig 43 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 44 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
36
Fig 45 Route 130 Westbound Average Electrical Resistance AC (KΩ)
Fig 46 North Main Street Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
37
Fig 47 North Main Street Eastbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 48 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
38
Fig 49 Wyckoff Road Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
Fig 410 Route 130 Westbound Average Air Flow Rate (mlmin)
39
42 Corrosion Measurements
Corrosion potential and corrosion rate (ASTM G109) were made on both
minidecks and the five bridge decks For minidecks each cycle consists of two weeks of
ponding with salt water and two weeks of drying For the bridge decks measurements
were taken at approximately 6 months intervals Since the corrosion rates were more
consistent the changes in corrosion rate with number of cycles are presented in a
graphical form The actual corrosion rates corrosion potentials and variation of corrosion
potentials are presented in Appendix G
The variations of corrosion rate for minidecks are presented in Fig 411 to 415
The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright Associates Inc
(XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika Corporation
(Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 411 412 413 and 414 respectively The results
for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 415
The variation of corrosion rate measured on actual decks is presented in Fig 416
to 410 The results The results for decks with WR Grace (DCI S) Quick Wright
Associates Inc (XYPEX C-2000) Master Builders INC (Rheocrete 222+) and Sika
Corporation (Ferrogard 901) are presented is Fig 416 417 418 and 419 respectively
The results for the control deck with no inhibitors are presented in Fig 420
A careful review of Fig 411 to 420 and results presented in Appendix G lead to
the following observations
bull As expected the variation of corrosion potential and corrosion rate is smaller in
bridge decks as compared to minidecks This should be expected because the
corrosion potential on actual decks is non existent and minidecks were ponded
with salt solution
bull Corrosion activity is much lower in actual decks as compared to mini decks For
example the corrosion rate for actual decks is well bellow 1 microA where as for
40
minidecks the values are as high as 6 microA Here again the presence of salt solution
on minidecks plays an important role
bull There should not be any corrosion activity in the well constructed bridge decks
for at least 15 years and the very low readings confirm the early trend
bull For minidecks the corrosion rate has to be more than 10 microA in order to ascertain
the presence of corrosion Unfortunately none of the minidecks had average
readings more than 7 microA Most readings were less than 2 microA and hence
conclusions could not be drawn on the actual or comparative performance of the
four corrosion inhibitors Some of the decks are beginning to show some
corrosion activity However it was decided to terminate the rest program because
the decks were evaluated for more than 2 years
bull Further analysis of corrosion activities are presented in section 43
41
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 411 Minideck A Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
42
000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 412 Minideck B Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
43
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 413 Minideck C Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
44
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 414 Minideck D Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
45
000
050
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 415 Minideck E Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
46
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 416 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
47
0
02
04
06
08
1
12
14
16
18
2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycle
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 417 North Main Street Eastbound Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
48
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt (u
A)
Fig 418 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
49
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mac
roce
ll C
urre
nt
Fig 419 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
50
000
020
040
060
080
100
120
140
160
180
200
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on R
ate
Mar
ocel
l Cur
rent
(uA
)
Fig 420 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Rate Macrocell Current (microA)
51
43 Performance of Corrosion Inhibiting Admixtures Further Analysis
Field data for all five decks including control concrete indicate that there is no
corrosion activity This should be expected because the bridges are less than 4 years old
The instrumentation is in place and the authors recommend that readings be taken after 5
years
Data taken using minidecks start to show some corrosion activity Here again the
data does not show much difference except for control concrete The control concrete
seems to show the starting of corrosion activity
To confirm the observations of graphs and tables a regression analysis was
carried out For each set of data a linear regression relationship was developed between
corrosion rate and corrosion potential versus the age in days The correlation coefficients
expressed in terms of R Square are presented in Table 43 The high correlation of 0926
between corrosion potential for control (Minideck E) shows that the potential is starting
to increase This is an indication of the initiation of corrosion The equation developed
using corrosion potential and logarithm of time further confirms the aforementioned
observation The R square for regressions using Logarithm of time is presented in Table
44
Table 43 R Square Values for Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0169406322 A 0157884832
B 0245391494 B 0248121115
C 0047466507 C 0458786955
D 0001754974 D 0512547608
E 0097588551 E 0926168975
52
Table 44 R Square Values for the Correlation between the Logarithm of time and the
Corrosion Rate and Corrosion Potential
(a) Corrosion Rate (b) Corrosion Potential
Minideck R Square Minideck R Square
A 0082462327 A 0200227812
B 0220550345 B 0257215627
C 0019432379 C 0463155286
D 0063782587 D 0489597971
E 0017419943 E 0881117966
bull Continuation of the experiments is needed to fully evaluate the performance of the
admixtures
53
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
51 Conclusions
Based on the experimental results and observations made during the fabrication
and testing the following conclusions can be drawn
bull There are no significant differences in the plastic and hardened concrete
properties for the four admixtures evaluated
bull The authors suggest that though the results of the Surface Air Flow Field
Permeability Indicator can be used for a rough evaluation and comparison of
admixtures it should not be used as an accurate means to determine air
permeability
bull In authors opinion the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter provides better electrical
resistance reading than the Electrical Resistance Test of Penetrating Sealers
bull Time of exposure is not sufficient to cause any corrosion activity in the field This
is reflected in the corrosion potential and corrosion rate readings taken in the
field If the instrumentation is protected readings could be taken after 15 or 20
years of exposure
bull As expected the laboratory samples had more corrosion activity However here
again the corrosion was not sufficient to evaluate the difference in behavior
among various admixtures Since the samples are not cracked admixtures that
decrease the permeability show less corrosion activity However the difference is
not statistically different The control mix is starting to show some corrosion
activity This lack of corrosion activity denied the achievement of the objective of
evaluation of the effectiveness of the admixtures
52 Recommendations
Based on the scientific principles and comparative behavior of mini decks the
authors recommend the use of XYPEX in decks with no cracks The admixture provides
a more dense and impermeable concrete that reduces the ingress of chemicals
54
The aforementioned statement is not intended to indicate that only XYPEX is
recommended for use The remaining three admixtures are being used in the field Since
we could not initiate the corrosion in any of the minidecks we are not able to provide any
recommendations on the contribution of inhibitors Since the quality of concrete and
quality control were good the control concrete itself provided very good performance
Even though this is good and logical the primary objective of the research could not be
fulfilled Since the experiments were run for more than 2 years the NJDOT decided to
terminate the project
For field study the authors strongly recommend to continue the measurements of
corrosion potential and corrosion rate The instrumentation is in place and the results will
be very valuable for the entire world It is recommended that the readings should be taken
every 6 months Since the bridges are in use NJDOT should provide traffic control
during measurements Since the instrumentation is in place the cost for the measurement
and yearly report could be in the range of $7000 If the contract is extended to 10 years
15 years data could be obtained for an additional cost of $70000 The authors believe
that the uniqueness of this database which does not exit anywhere makes this
expenditure worthwhile
For the laboratory study improvements are needed for the current procedure The
major problem was the permeability of concrete The concrete should not be allowed to
dry-out and the corrosion should be induced after 24 hours The authors recommend that
NJDOT initiate another study to develop the test procedure The main factors that
contribute to corrosion are permeability of concrete and cracks through which the
chemicals permeate The accelerated test method should be designed to incorporate these
two factors The study should utilize 2 or 3 NJDOT standard mixes with no admixture
However for both sets of specimens a higher water cement ratio should be used to
increase the permeability of concrete In addition the samples should not be cured
resulting further increase in permeability
The mini decks can be prepared using the same procedure used for the current
Minidecks However for one set of samples very thin plastic plates should be placed on
both top and bottom covers to simulate cracking
55
The objective of the new study is to develop an accelerated test method that will
provide corrosion within 18 months The test method should be able to evaluate the
effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors The envisioned variables are as follows
bull Minimum water-cement ratio that can provide corrosion in 18 months for the
NJDOT mixes
bull Maximum thickness of plates used for crack simulation
The researchers can chose a range for both water-cement ratio and plate thickness to
formulate their experimental program
56
6 References
1 ACI 222R-1996 Corrosion of Metals in Concrete ACI Committee 222 American
Concrete Institute 1997
2 ASTM G 109 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
3 ASTM C 876 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
4 ASTM C 94 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
5 ASTM C 150 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
6 Beeby AW Development of a Corrosion Cell for the study of the influences of the
environment and the Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN
Spoon London UK 1992
7 Bentur A Diamond S Burke NS Modern Concrete Technology Steel Corrosion
in Concrete Fundamentals and Civil Engineering Practice E amp FN Spoon London
UK 1992
8 Berke NS Hicks MC Hoopes RJ Concrete Bridges in Aggressive
Environments SP-151-3 Condition Assessment of Field Structures with Calcium
Nitrate American Concrete Institute 1995
9 Berke NS Roberts LR Concrete Bridges in Aggressive Environments SP 119-
20 Use of Concrete Admixtures to provide Long-Term Durability from Steel
Corrosion American Concrete Institute 1995
10 Berke NS Weil TG Advances in Concrete Technology World-Wide Review of
Corrosion Inhibitors in Concrete Published by CNMET Canada 1997
11 Broomfield John P Corrosion of Steel in Concrete Understanding Investigation and
Repair E amp FN Spoon London UK 1997
57
12 DCI S Corrosion Inhibitor WR Grace and Co 1997 httpwwwgcp-
gracecomproductsconcretesummariesdcishtml and httpwwwgcp-
gracepressroomadva_nzhtml
13 MacDonald M Sika Ferrogard 901 and 903 Corrosion Inhibitors Evaluation of test
Program Special Services Division Sika Corporation 1996
14 Manual for the operation of a surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator Texas
Research Institute Austin Inc Austin Texas June 1994
15 Page CL Treadway KWJ Bamforth PB Corrosion of Reinforcement in
Concrete Society of the chemical Industry Symposium held at Warwickshire UK
1990
16 Rheocrete 222+ Organic Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture Master Builders Inc
Printed in USA 1995
17 Scannel William T Participants Workbook FHWA SHRP Showcase US
Department of Transportation Conncorr Inc Ashburn Virginia July 1996
18 Sennour ML Wheat HG Carrasquillo RL The effects of chemical and Mineral
Admixtures on the Corrosion of Steel in Concrete University of Texas Austin 1994
19 XYPEX Concrete Waterproofing by Crystallization Quick-Wright Associates Ink
httpwwwqwacomconcretehtml
58
Appendix A
Description of Equipment and Test Procedure for GECOR 6
The GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter has three major components the rate meter and two
separate sensors Only the larger sensor was used during this project The sensor is filled
with a saturated CuCuSO4 solution for the test for half-cell potential The main
components of this device can be seen in FigA1 A wet sponge is used between the
probe and the concrete surface as seen in Fig A2 Long Lengths of wire are also
provided to connect the sensor to the rate meter and to connect the rate meter to the
reinforcing bar mat of the bridge deck a necessary step for the operation of the meter
The procedure for the operation of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter is as
follows (Scannel 1996)
1 The device should not be operated at temperatures below 0degC (32degdegF) or above 50 C
(122degF) The relative humidity within the unit should not exceed 80
2 Use a reinforcing steel locator to define the layout at the test location Mark the bar
pattern on the concrete surface at the test location
3 Place a wet sponge and the sensor over a single bar or over the point where the bars
intersect perpendicularly if the diameter of both bars is known
4 Connect the appropriate lead to an exposed bar The leads from the sensor and
exposed reinforcing steel are then connected to the GECOR device
5 Turn on the unit The program version appears on the display screen
LG-ECM-06 V20
copy GEOCISA 1993
59
6 A help message appears on the screen momentarily This message advises the
operator to use the arrows for selecting an option and CR to activate an option The
various options are
bull CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT
bull RELHUMIDITY AND TEMPERATURE
bull RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull EDIT MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS
bull DATAFILE SYSTEM EDITING
bull DATAAND TIME CONTROL
7 Select the option CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT and press the CR key
8 The screen prompts the user to input the area of steel Calculate the area of steel
using the relationship Area = 3142 x D x 105 cm D is the diameter of the bar in
centimeters and 105 cm (4 in) is the length of the bar confined by the guard ring
Key ii the area to one decimal space In case of an error use the B key to delete the
previous character Press the CR key to enter the area
9 The next screen displays
ADJUSTING
OFFSET WAIT
No operator input is required at this stage The meter measures the half-cell potential and
then nulls it out to measure the potential shift created by the current applied from the
sensor
10 The next screen displays
Er mV OK
Vs mV OK
Er (ECORR) is the static half-cell potential versus CSE and Vs is the difference in
potential between the reference electrodes which control the current confinement
Once the Er and the Vs values are displayed no input is required from the operator
60
11 The meter now calculates the optimum applied current ICE This current is applied
through the counter electrode at the final stage of the measurement The optimum ICE
value is displayed No input is required from the operator
12 The next screen displays the polarized potential values No input is required from the
operator
13 The meter now calculates the balance constant in order to apply the correct current
to the guard ring It is displayed on the next screen No input is required from the
operator
14 The meter now calculated the corrosion rate using the data collected from the sensor
and input from the operator The corrosion rate is displayed in microAcm2 Associated
parameters including corrosion potential mV and electrical resistance KΏ can be
viewed using the cursor keys
15 Record the corrosion rate corrosion potential electrical resistance
16 Press the B key to reset the meter for the next reading The screen will return to
CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENT Repeat the procedure for the next test
location
The corrosion rate and corrosion potential data can be interpreted using Table A1 and
A2 and Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B respectively Higher resistance is an
indication for less potential for corrosion in the embedded steel due to higher density of
the concrete Higher resistance is also an indication of improved insulation against the
electrochemical process of corrosion
Unlike The Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers the GECOR 6 penetrates
the concrete surface for a greater area of measurement
61
Table A1 Interpretation of Corrosion Rate Data (Scannell 1997)
ICORR microAcm2 Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 10 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table A2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200gt 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to 350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt-350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
62
FigA1 Components of the GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter
FigA2 GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate Meter Sensor with Sponge
63
Appendix B
Table B1 Interpretation of Corrosion rate data (Scannell 1997)
Icorr (microAcm2) Corrosion Condition
Less than 01 Passive Condition
01 to 05 Low to Moderate Corrosion
05 to 1 Moderate to High Corrosion
Greater than 10 High Corrosion
Table B2 Interpretation of Half Cell (Corrosion) Potential Readings (ASTM C 876)
Half Cell Potential (mV) Corrosion Activity
-200 90 Probability of No Corrosion
Occurring
-200 to -350 Corrosion Activity Uncertain
lt350 90 Probability of Corrosion Occurring
Table B3 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
64
Appendix C
Description of the Equipment and the Test Procedure for the Surface Air Flow
Field Permeability Indicator
A picture of the device and its accessories can be seen in FigC1 and FigC2 For
transportability the device uses a rechargeable NI-Cad battery The suction foot is
mounted using three centering springs to allow it to rotate and swivel in relation to the
main body A closed cell foam gasket is used between the foot and the testing surface to
create an airtight seal Two-foot pads are threaded into the suction foot so the operator
can apply pressure to compress the gasket The switches to open the solenoid and hold
the current reading are located within easy reach at the base of the handles Digital
displays for the permeability readings and the time are located at the top of the device
FigC3 Outline drawings of the device and its schematics can be seen on FigC4 and
FigC5 respectively (Manual for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability
Indicator 1994)
FigC1 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
65
FigC2 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator (Front View)
66
FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
(Top View of Digital Displays)
FigC4 Drawing of Concrete Surf e Air Flow Permeability Indicator ac
67
FigC5 Schematic of Concrete Surface Air Flow Permeability Indi ator
The procedure for the operation of the SAF on horizontal surfaces is as follows
(Manu
c
al for the Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
1 Remove the instrument from its case and install the two-foot pads The footpads
should be screwed all the way into the tapped holes on the suction foot base and th
backed out until the aluminum-checkered plates are pointed to the top of the machine
en
Unfold the two handles by pushing the buttons on either end of the T handle lock
Make sure all the switches are in the off position and the left handle switch in the
ch
2
pins and removing them When the handles are horizontal the lock pins are needed
to be reinserted the other holes in the handle brackets to lock the handles in the
extended positions
3
release position Set the elapsed time indicator to zero by pushing the RESET swit
Ensure that the directional valve switch is in the down position
68
4 Charge the battery for at least eighteen hours before testing
Unplug the charger and turn on the power switch and observe that the digital displays
To check the device on a reference plate place the closed cell gasket on an
Stand on the footpads with the balls of your feet About half of the body weight
Turn ON the PUMP At this time both the flow and vacuum gages will display
Turn On the solenoid
0 When the elapsed time indicator reads 45 seconds push the left handle to the hold
5
are activated Turn on the power switch Wait ten minute for the device to warm up
The device should be tested before any field activities to make sure that it is operating
correctly To test the vacuum in a closed system turn the PUMP in ON position
Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize between 750 to 765 mm Hg To
test the device as an open system leave the PUMP ON and turn ON the solenoid
switch Wait thirty seconds The readings should stabilize at a value of 29 to 31
SCCM
6
impermeable metallic plate Center the suction foot over the gasket
7
should be placed on the footpads and the other half on the heels This will compress
the gasket and form an airtight seal
8
values and the elapsed time indicator will start The vacuum should stabilize greater
than 650 mm Hg vacuum The flow will have a high initial value due to air in the
lines but will stabilize after about fifteen to twenty seconds
9
1
position to freeze the reading Record the reading at this point The vacuum should
read greater than 650 mm Hg and the flow should be less than 1 SCCM (1mlmin)
69
11 Turn off the vacuum PUMP and the solenoid valve Turn the switch on the left
handle to the release position and push the reset button on the elapsed time indicator
The device is now ready to be moved to the next test spot
12 Tests on actual concrete surfaces are performed in a manner identical to the initial
check test In some cases however it may take longer than 45 seconds for the
readings to stabilize Surfaces should be dry free of dirt or debris and not cracked
grooved or textured
The permeability of concrete greatly contributes to the corrosion potential of the
embedded steel bars due to water and chloride penetration The lower the permeability
the more resistant the concrete is to chloride penetration The relative concrete
permeability readings provided by SAF can be categorized into low moderate and high
according to the airflow rate (mlmin) illustrated on table 39 and Table 63 in the
Appendix The collected data and a discussion on the permeability indicated are
presented and discussed in the Results and Discussions chapter
Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
Operation of a Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator 1994)
Air Flow Rate (mlminute) Relative Permeability Indicated
0 to 30 Low
30 to 80 Moderate
80gt High
70
Appendix D
Description and Test Procedure for Resistance Measurement
The materials needed for this test are shown in FigD1 and are as follows
Fine line tape (18in wide)
Metal mask (with 58in wide and 4 in long cutout)
Conductive silver spray paint
Duct tape
Nilsson 400 soil resistance meter
Multimeter
Thermometer
Infrared propane heater
FigD1 Equipment Required for Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating Sealers
71
The procedure for the performing the Electrical Resistance Test for Penetrating
Sealers is as follows (Scannell 1996)
1 Surface must be clean and dry with no grooves or cracks
2 Apply the fine line tape t the test area
3 Center metal mask over fine line tape
4 Duct tape mask in place
5 Spray paint lengthwise over slit six times
6 Heat surface with infrared heater for five minutes keeping the temperature at 120 F
7 Repeat steps 5 and 6 two additional times
8 Remove the mask and the fine line tape
9 Measure DC end-to-end resistance of both sides of the gage using the multimeter and
records the readings
10 Measure the DC resistance between the two sides of the gage using the multimeter
and record the reading
11 Compare the DC readings for the end-to-end resistance as well and the one taken
between the two sides to the acceptance criteria in Table 310
12 Lay wet sponge on gage and keep wet for five minutes
13 Remove the sponge and press a folder paper towel against the gage for five seconds
14 Gently wipe the gage with a crumpled paper towel in a lengthwise direction
15 Place the probes on the soil resistance meter against the gage and record the AC
resistance reading
Table D1 Preliminary DC Testing of Gauge (Scannell 1996)
Test Acceptance Criteria
End-to-End Resistance 5 to 15 Ω Very Good
up to 125 Ω - Acceptable
Insulation Resistance
(Side-to-Side)
gt20MΩ Normal
gt 5 MΩ Acceptable
72
Appendix E
Details of Connections on Bridge Decks
The details of the connections are presented in FigE1 E2 E3 E4 and E5 The cables
were passed through flexible steel conduits and into rain tight steel enclosure to protect
then from the elements and from possible tampering FigE6 E7 E8 E9 and E10 A
reinforcing steel locator was not needed because locations of reinforcement and
connections were recorded before the placement of the concrete
Connections were observed during the placement of concrete and were tested
after the concrete had hardened to check for broken connections Pictures of the
connections during concrete placement can be seen in FigE11 E12 and E13 All
connections survived and remained intact
Photographs of the five bride decks tested on the new Route 133 Hightstown Bypass can
be seen in FigE14 E15 E16 E17 and E18
73
FigE1 Connection to North Main Street Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
74
FigE2 Connection to North Main Street Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
75
FigE3 Connection to Wyckoff Road Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
76
FigE4 Connection to Wyckoff Road Eastbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
77
FigE5 Connection to Route 130 Westbound
(The white wires connects the black steel to junction box located at the abutments)
78
FigE6 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Westbound
FigE7 Conduits and Enclosure North Main Street Eastbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
79
FigE8 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Westbound
FigE9 Conduits and Enclosure Wyckoff Road Eastbound
80
FigE10 Conduits and Enclosure Route 130 Westbound
(Junction box attached to the abutment)
81
FigE11 Vibrating of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Eastbound
FigE12 Placement of Fresh Concrete at North Main Street Westbound
(Connections withstood the construction process)
82
FigE13 View of Connections at North Main Street Westbound during Concrete
Placement
FigE14 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Westbound near Completion
83
FigE15 Bridge Deck over North Main Street Eastbound near Completion
FigE16 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Westbound near Completion
84
FigE17 Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road Eastbound near Completion
FigE18 Bridge Deck over Rout 130 Westbound near Completion
85
Appendix F
Electrical Resistance and Air Permeability
Table F1 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 157 142 286 104
2 122 160 146 105
3 117 148 153 120
4 120 144 139 097
5 106 146 112 083
B2 1 118 111 160 130
2 123 120 127 111
3 120 124 129 108
4 116 124 137 106
5 124 123 128 097
B3 1 121 124 145 114
2 128 155 160 114
3 126 130 116 097
4 132 138 114 093
5 126 134 117 104
B4 1 151 152 112 102
2 120 140 152 112
3 175 146 182 161
4 133 144 126 114
5 127 138 154 114
Average 128 137 145 109
86
Table F2 North Main Street Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F3 North Main Street Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (kΩ)
87
Table F4 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 275 269 123 136
2 170 171 155 140
3 151 129 120 127
4 161 115 277 134
5 169 134 131 122
B2 1 147 099 153 100
2 170 101 148 102
3 152 073 102 102
4 147 120 146 128
5 153 108 160 126
B3 1 143 087 130 114
2 156 082 118 118
3 145 101 147 121
4 155 130 131 127
5 141 099 112 102
B4 1 127 099 321 373
2 169 089 078 120
3 154 105 116 110
4 171 105 142 116
5 136 112 090 094
Average 160 116 145 131
88
Table F5 North Main Street Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F6 North Main Street Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
89
Table F7 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 447 196 343 205
2 483 157 302 246
3 343 111 298 144
4 247 221 287 163
5 300 158 307 119
B2 1 377 145 322 134
2 367 132 253 137
3 290 124 291 106
4 280 115 222 122
5 254 130 330 113
B3 1 267 136 154 137
2 272 149 264 134
3 325 140 193 125
4 228 109 251 120
5 272 146 323 089
B4 1 320 186 415 098
2 299 156 292 096
3 333 186 252 097
4 305 175 242 099
5 289 187 266 087
Average 315 153 280 129
90
Table F8 Wyckoff Road Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F9 Wyckoff Road Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
91
Table F10 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 354 172 209 189
2 417 191 155 231
3 314 172 144 236
4 120 111 145 205
5 175 085 137
Reading No
211
B2 1 167 072 142 205
2 204 073 145
3 159 101 140 218
4 172 111 155
5 174 107 146 216
B3 1 184 161 145
2 148 095 170 183
3 069 162 128
4 194 071 165 189
183 085 134 237
B4 1 516 116 132 181
2
204
138
087
160
5
397 090 148 202
3 205 073 097 222
4 202 103 153 185
5 167 085 146 220
Average 231 105 199 148
92
Table F11 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM
(mlmin)
Table F12 Wyckoff Road Eastbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
93
Table F13 Route 130 Westbound GECOR Electrical Resistance (KΩ)
Connection
Reading No
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter
B1 1 178 159 141 148
2 179 180 124 127
3 151 165 149 133
4 254 220 154 134
5 223 215 140 128
B2 1 185 207 168 107
2 150 163 110 111
3 147 164 101 110
4 153 169 097 099
5 171 187 124 122
B3 1 181 205 102 119
2 208 189 097 108
3 151 148 111 114
4 137 167 130 132
5 141 167 133 130
B4 1 197 197 137 118
2 180 175 107 126
3 170 166 118 142
4 167 163 128 106
5 143 156 109 103
B5 1 211 252 173 128
2 173 158 171 124
3 172 222 128 100
4 187 239 184 120
5 176 211 085 122
Average 170 185 126 117
94
Table F14 Route 130 Westbound Air Permeability Vacuum (mm Hg) SCCM (mlmin)
Table F15 Route 130 Westbound Electrical Resistance Sealer Test (KΩ)
95
Appendix G
Corrosion Measurements
96
Table G1 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 060 090 060 090 100 090 090 100 015 008 018A2 030 060 070 080 100 080 100 090 018 008 025A3 020 100 060 110 100 110 150 150 073 073 090
A4 100 050 030 070 080 070 080 080 003 008 008
A5 030 010 010 000 040 010 010 020 003 015 003
A6 010 030 030 050 040 030 040 040 010 015 015
Average 042 057 043 067 077 065 078 080 020 021 026
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 003 011 009 059 020 040 1010 110 1280 750 960
A2 004 014 013 000 030 004 000 030 780 230 200
A3 004 060 057 000 030 003 160 070 100 220 460
A4 008 006 007 017 080 098 030 010 010 010 020
A5 000 005 006 000 340 380 050 027 820 140 230
A6 001 010 010 007 010 020 040 030 010 010 020
Average 003 018 017 014 085 091 215 046 500 227 315
97
Table G2 Minideck A ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
A1 NA NA -1167 -1212 -1529 -1388 -2307 -1254 -1400 -692 -646A2 NA NA -219 -148 -497 -306 -1180 -109 001 -024 -015
A3 NA NA -075 -680 -539 -327 -1046 -086 -2351 -1707 -1438
A4 NA NA -207 -268 -736 -644 -1603 -616 -1569 -992 -767
A5 NA NA -560 -592 -1028 -953 -1869 -899 -2376 -1828 -1548
A6 NA NA -1358 -1391 -1846 -1771 -2764 -2050 -3382 -2773 -2514
Average NA NA -598 -715 -1029 -898 -1795 -836 -1846 -1336 -1154
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
A1 -481 -1006 -490 -590 003 1230 -2597 11145 272 2139 258
A2 -012 -001 000 001 375 460 2550 -625 123 920 124
A3 -1122 -1774 -1164 -1224 786 836 1498 465 181 3540 117
A4 -570 -1091 -530 -451 1330 1365 2000 098 194 490 089
A5 -1343 -1829 -1253 -1216 1284 1536 6647 081 630 1311 087
A6 -2275 -2877 -2180 -2153 401 501 -870 082 810 451 088
Average -967 -1429 -936 -939 697 988 -2358 1874 368 1475 127
98
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G1 Minideck A Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
99
Table G3 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0181 0145 0063 0197 0131 0072 0232 0311
2 0280 0157 0096 0135 0177 0345 0034 0206
3 0265 0084 0121 0201 0055 0210 0127 0175
4 0216 0127 0171 0181 0192 0272 0179 0321
5 0250 0110 0129 0001 0234 0310 0091 0142
B2 1 0295 0231 0109 0119 0112 0212 0234 0310
2 0264 0140 0089 0094 0072 0121 0232 0045
3 0244 0203 0136 0137 0214 0134 0079 0310
4 0262 0116 0154 0136 0092 0129 0132 0272
5 0211 0150 0131 0131 0217 0312 0121 0042
B3 1 0222 0162 0156 0208 0037 0107 0302 0233
2 0205 0175 0147 0127 0112 0179 0290 0157
3 0259 0178 0138 0119 0311 0202 0191 0161
4 0206 0136 0155 0139 0091 0072 0055 0199
5 0263 0211 0159 0156 0192 0011 0197 0209
B4 1 0191 0196 0155 0362 0272 0111 0290 0218
2 0216 0169 0151 0130 0047 0075 0147 0139
3 0274 0413 0132 0162 0312 0275 0310 0194
4 0183 0227 0128 0150 0149 0263 0311 0279
5 0196 0154 0133 0156 0172 0229 0099 0078
Average 0234 0174 0133 0152 0160 0182 0183 0200
100
Table G4 Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -888 -1274 -2207 -2349 -2491 -2523 -1904 -1709
2 -562 -1281 -1686 -1542 -944 -1971 -2703 -1412
3 -635 -1245 -1903 -2025 -972 -2424 -1791 -1576
4 -759 -1409 -1832 -1943 -1702 -732 -846 -1214
5 -830 -1334 -1878 -1927 -2019 -2143 -1972 -2124
B2 1 -782 -1264 -2147 -2197 -1811 -993 -1474 -2124
2 -841 -878 -2118 -2187 -1786 -1095 -882 -1532
3 -735 -1236 -2188 -2271 -917 -2054 -1676 -2213
4 -764 -1208 -2275 -2332 -1924 -1460 -817 -1593
5 -736 -1263 -2211 -2358 -787 -2003 -1004 -1666
B3 1 -864 -1086 -2333 -2535 -894 -1046 -1118 -1914
2 -955 -1167 -2404 -2497 -1075 -924 -2079 -1293
3 -998 -1161 -2662 -2674 -1924 -1874 -2012 -1485
4 -899 -1265 -2133 -2205 -1485 -849 -973 -947
5 -957 -1423 -2166 -2263 -2044 -798 -872 -1485
B4 1 -912 -1429 -2033 -2392 -1414 -1143 -1867 -2024
2 -985 -1315 -2224 -2453 -1872 -1725 -1555 -1916
3 -831 -1533 -2038 -2276 -1214 -764 -892 -1048
4 -832 -1415 -1697 -1817 -2004 -223 -2705 -910
5 -917 -1423 -1911 -2019 -1585 -1675 -1765 -2149
Average -834 -1280 -2102 -2213 -1543 -1421 -1545 -2196
101
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Cy c l e s
Fig G2 North Main Street Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
102
Table G5 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
B1 000 020 020 030 030 030 050 040 003 002 028
B2 010 000 000 010 020 010 030 020 005 008 108
B3 000 010 010 010 030 020 020 020 004 001 023
B4 010 020 010 000 000 010 010 010 010 008 100
B5 010 030 040 020 040 050 050 050 012 008 058
B6 030 030 050 030 050 020 040 040 001 001 050
Average 010 018 022 017 028 023 033 030 006 005 061
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 300 023 010 160 020 040 890 810 1070 950 174
B2 900 085 093 437 010 014 310 230 150 010 040
B3 350 003 015 020 020 030 910 685 020 010 040
B4 108 108 118 000 020 020 060 010 010 030 020
B5 135 095 138 107 010 010 1460 164 2180 1140 165
B6 175 010 000 000 030 035 310 380 080 190 050
Average 328 054 062 121 018 025 657 380 585 388 082
103
Table G6 Minideck B ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
B1 NA NA -2152 -2155 -2451 -2198 -3116 -2019 -2617 -2037 -1764
B2 NA NA -1861 -1765 -2035 -1832 -2787 -1569 -2209 -1620 -1309
B3 NA NA -2051 -2342 -3003 -3147 -4588 -3766 -7959 -4600 -4209
B4 NA NA -1945 -1927 -2194 -1932 -2853 -1760 -3837 -3175 -2960
B5 NA NA -1775 -1726 -2033 -1748 -2577 -1435 -2272 -1736 -1529
B6 NA NA -6033 -1864 -2287 -2364 -3504 -2719 -1172 -568 -241
Average NA NA -1903 -1963 -2334 -2204 -3238 -2211 -3344 -2289 -2002
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
B1 -1598 -2055 -1622 -1655 888 932 28894 7422 832 1655 105
B2 -1138 -1732 -1141 -1115 1637 1639 350 252 705 396 093
B3 -4284 -6292 -4095 -4125 1845 2015 1258 619 1018 460 145
B4 -2939 -3395 -2919 -2882 916 1023 745 515 326 295 160
B5 -687 -1899 -1332 -1314 1798 1956 26268 457 568 1099 195
B6 -067 -612 -039 -043 1805 2058 878 595 404 318 255
Average -1785 -2664 -1858 -1855 1482 1604 9732 1643 642 704 159
104
-4000
-2000
000
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G3 Minideck B Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
105
Table G7 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0050 0156 0294 0259 0261 0293 0311 0272
2 0093 0231 0382 0209 0291 0202 0312 0372
3 0090 0068 0138 0455 0379 0209 0427 0482
4 0091 0179 0276 0200 0147 0197 0277 0304
5 0050 0120 0264 0398 0407 0442 0472 0279
B2 1 0098 0115 0215 0743 0229 0374 0497 0507
2 0140 0139 0409 0654 0577 0612 0405 0779
3 0080 0909 0242 0252 0123 0272 0297 0372
4 0081 0084 0307 0328 0299 0372 0272 0407
5 0077 0140 0269 0253 0277 0197 0372 0394
B3 1 0087 0134 0478 0884 0701 0645 0644 0601
2 0100 0287 0432 0296 0227 0312 0407 0327
3 0069 0083 0323 0539 0417 0392 0207 0499
4 0056 0130 0354 0342 0397 0472 0312 0409
5 0097 0101 0288 0666 0578 0720 0609 0578
B4 1 0088 0067 0110 0088 0107 0097 0172 0119
2 0152 0087 0507 0438 0279 0478 0511 0427
3 0091 0105 0241 0361 0352 0317 0411 0397
4 0089 0085 0324 0539 0572 0642 0391 0694
5 0100 0069 0424 0593 0384 0578 0412 0578
Average 0089 0164 0314 0425 0350 0391 0386 0440
106
Table G8 North Main Street Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -549 -980 -1435 -1396 -1720 -984 -824 -1042
2 -168 -678 -873 -896 -414 -567 -924 -762
3 -167 -248 -922 -1258 -827 -744 -572 -389
4 -198 -355 -886 -1034 -548 -172 -537 -414
5 -58 -571 -666 -912 -589 -673 -755 -234
B2 1 -631 -822 -1302 -1779 -1521 -1214 -943 -312
2 -574 -513 -1186 -1356 -1724 -1209 -1672 -1124
3 -203 -1069 -1546 -1554 -1454 -714 -312 -1074
4 -81 -152 -1077 -1291 -1214 -1484 -1596 -714
5 -331 -345 -1003 -1180 -976 -824 -723 -489
B3 1 -715 -1489 -1621 -1766 -1704 -767 -1129 -1389
2 -56 -690 -1096 -1049 -189 -197 -273 -964
3 -69 -267 -1009 -1236 -1321 -1117 -923 -766
4 -669 -920 -1370 -1516 -424 -667 -798 -312
5 -329 -320 -1170 -1392 -1124 -974 -823 -517
B4 1 -736 -684 -1125 -1255 -793 -614 -224 -478
2 -513 -176 -1234 -1141 -1124 -1793 -928 -798
3 -242 -395 -964 -1133 -879 -924 -148 -556
4 -36 -368 -1084 -1267 -1002 -793 -1724 -498
5 -31 -150 -1047 -1313 -793 -1004 -1873 -1009
Average -318 -560 -1131 -1286 -1017 -872 -885 -692
107
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cy c l e s
Fig G4 North Main Street Eastbound GEOCOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
108
Table G9 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
C1 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 010 008 008 008
C2 010 020 040 040 040 030 040 040 025 005 010
C3 060 060 120 100 130 120 130 140 008 015 008
C4 040 070 060 070 060 040 080 060 013 013 018
C5 020 030 050 040 050 040 060 050 015 018 005
C6 000 010 020 020 010 020 030 030 013 013 003
Average 023 032 048 045 048 042 058 055 013 012 008
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 008 005 010 000 010 020 010 000 010 000 010
C2 030 015 013 010 010 030 020 000 010 010 010
C3 008 010 000 017 010 040 010 230 140 040 020
C4 035 005 060 000 000 036 050 050 030 020 020
C5 010 025 028 067 030 001 020 640 380 110 070
C6 010 003 005 013 050 054 030 020 020 040 460
Average 017 010 019 018 018 030 023 157 098 037 098
109
Table G10 Minideck C ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
Cycle 9
Cycle 10
Cycle 11
Specimen
C1 NA NA -1431 -1382 -1782 -1480 -2545 -1250 -2066 -1329 -980
C2 NA NA -639 -622 -1001 -685 -1794 -723 -2825 -2042 -1709
C3 NA NA -3281 -3144 -3636 -3352 -4423 -3050 -4444 -3574 -3229
C4 NA NA -3554 -3481 -3887 -3527 -4652 -3390 -2549 -1790 -1456
C5 NA NA -1424 -1347 -1828 -1665 -2781 -1643 -3727 -2933 -2547
C6 NA NA -2182 -2175 -2578 -2366 -3538 -2336 101 1272 1638
Average NA NA -2085 -2025 -2452 -2179 -3289 -2065 -2585 -1733 -1380
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
C1 -766 -1528 -876 -909 1742 1802 1152 1152 566 202 356
C2 -1519 -2337 -1552 -1215 1772 1836 2015 095 298 354 148
C3 -2996 -3937 -3018 -2211 1766 2025 358 096 544 1055 140
C4 -1253 -2060 -1233 -2098 353 400 -225 1539 309 206 266
C5 -2360 -3243 -2248 -2912 326 436 1543 26360 399 17964 105
C6 1886 764 2099 1200 1625 1936 1242 -137 410 5140 095
Average -1168 -2057 -1138 -1357 1264 1406 1014 4851 421 4154 185
110
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G5 Minideck C Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
111
Table G11 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0061 0150 0069 0381 0217 0229 0394 0462
2 0040 0095 0057 0315 0085 0197 0402 0472
3 0063 0098 0066 0434 0279 0127 0397 0272
4 0082 0155 0065 0119 0372 0402 0287 0197
5 0064 0110 0031 0567 0599 0379 0234 0099
B2 1 0069 0188 0037 0233 0112 0087 0217 0307
2 0059 0114 0049 0233 0297 0187 0398 0402
3 0083 0104 0044 0336 0205 0112 0077 0325
4 0067 0144 0046 0312 0372 0424 0278 0221
5 0089 0176 0059 0558 0599 0473 0372 0617
B3 1 0100 0121 0276 0223 0227 0079 0114 0472
2 0116 0248 0051 0303 0409 0198 0224 0395
3 0059 0204 0096 0324 0221 0188 0272 0155
4 0064 0117 0048 0263 0255 0097 0072 0137
5 0072 0150 0030 0468 0572 0432 0397 0482
B4 1 0075 0181 0021 0492 0572 0302 0272 0599
2 0126 0209 0032 0441 0277 0124 0343 0407
3 0068 0079 0043 0277 0317 0297 0397 0317
4 0107 0191 0044 0309 0402 0198 0272 0612
5 0066 0136 0042 0347 0192 0355 0473 0578
Average 0077 0149 0060 0347 0329 0244 0295 0376
112
Table G12 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -236 -1112 -524 -1182 -593 -674 -414 -1053
2 -304 -823 -494 -1102 -1143 -924 -873 -562
3 -146 -722 -915 -1188 -824 -1214 -673 -714
4 96 -929 -587 -1188 -489 -619 -924 -827
5 -151 -981 -775 -1451 -1314 -924 -724 -509
B2 1 -402 -1278 -674 -2021 -1854 -2214 -1792 -654
2 -512 -958 -578 -1279 -624 -484 -1129 -799
3 -209 -1045 -669 -1172 -1004 -1414 -672 -1124
4 79 -976 -769 -1150 -724 -1213 -553 -367
5 -78 -838 -986 -1349 -1212 -923 -721 -678
B3 1 -2167 -1390 -1094 -1636 -1414 -966 -783 -583
2 -309 -1208 -659 -1406 -1293 -997 -1423 -1073
3 -47 -1186 -903 -1095 -1143 -1273 -621 -393
4 294 -770 -697 -1087 -473 -1134 -878 -417
5 91 -946 -1312 -1375 -919 -1924 -484 -1313
B4 1 -205 -1112 -1537 -1623 -1523 -1004 -784 -413
2 -233 -1017 -603 -1411 -927 -1148 -984 -1074
3 -240 -1174 -1018 -1435 -673 -1213 -779 -272
4 -658 -1348 -664 -1429 -1224 -873 -1319 -1379
5 -43 -841 -1294 -1558 -784 -1114 -1218 -1379
Average -269 -1033 -838 -1357 -1008 -1112 -887 -779
113
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G6 Wyckoff Road Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion
Potential (mV)
114
Table G13 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 070 100 140 080 110 070 100 100 043 033 063
D2 080 080 090 110 120 120 130 120 025 008 008
D3 040 080 080 080 080 080 080 090 083 095 153
D4 020 050 040 110 040 030 040 040 028 020 020
D5 070 080 120 130 130 080 120 110 070 073 075
D6 070 080 120 130 140 120 140 140 103 080 120
Average 058 078 098 107 103 083 102 100 058 051 073
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 053 5 040 000 010 012 010 010 010 010 020
D2 008 008 000 007 010 012 330 100 310 230 140
D3 080 153 063 000 010 023 020 010 310 030 050
D4 028 008 003 000 020 020 450 230 010 200 130
D5 083 225 100 000 010 015 020 000 010 050 010
D6 095 089 085 000 040 050 290 180 250 170 150
Average 058 096 048 001 017 022 187 088 150 115 083
115
116
Average 872 146 874 920 1372 1501 2709 -1081 220 964 158
Table G14 Minideck D ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
D1 NA NA -2097 -1684 -2013 -1507 -2200 -825 -4262 -3394 -2990
D2 NA NA -1764 -1479 -1793 -1359 -1978 -563 -519 467 816
D3 NA NA -2080 -1851 -2174 -1793 -2380 -1350 -127 2597 2946
D4 NA NA -680 -535 -882 -396 -814 -473 376 1389 1772
D5 NA NA -1830 -1655 -2000 -1517 -2206 -965 246 2266 2620
D6 NA NA -1838 -1655 -1983 -1523 -2022 -677 -1508 -1187 -806
Average NA NA -1715 -1477 -1808 -1349 -1933 -809 -966 356 726
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
D1 -3026 -3466 -3122 -3076 2340 2636 4167 -2058 112 188 143
D2 1044 109 1168 1221 2298 2556 2559 -1288 186 208 150
D3 3095 2193 3048 3140 1854 2036 2273 -566 505 837 213
D4 1957 1010 1881 1862 1122 1163 2671 -1058 191 317 150
D5 2746 1455 2805 2906 265 236 2522 -573 207 450 120
D6 -582 -422 -536 -532 350 380 2060 -944 119 3782 172
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G7 Minideck D Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
117
Table G15 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0038 0146 0257 0071 0052 0212 0317 0297
2 0048 0118 0249 0092 0192 0077 0272 0121
3 0033 0089 0214 0210 0272 0178 0199 0244
4 0168 0125 0168 0150 0422 0134 0222 0307
5 0153 0198 0283 0092 0042 0079 0212 0199
B2 1 0190 0578 0229 0078 0092 0117 0232 0322
2 0134 0593 0379 0078 0177 0224 0334 0209
3 0094 0105 0285 0112 0077 0124 0272 0319
4 0176 0142 0274 0105 0179 0212 0312 0099
5 0162 0146 0320 0130 0272 0144 0211 0275
B3 1 0135 0106 0314 0142 0155 0167 0044 0272
2 0096 0120 0356 0066 0212 0052 0313 0212
3 0110 0083 0198 0134 0137 0144 0232 0372
4 0126 0132 0234 0062 0071 0123 0054 0109
5 0200 0179 0195 0043 0121 0321 0091 0262
B4 1 0036 0223 0210 0153 0155 0167 0272 0148
2 0028 0180 0321 0112 0073 0148 0198 0278
3 0084 0140 0708 0085 0312 0243 0297 0311
4 0169 0210 0369 0088 0278 0312 0066 0124
5 0108 0138 0623 0115 0194 0244 0233 0092
Average 0114 0188 0309 0106 0174 0171 0219 0229
118
Table G16 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV) Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 -290 -853 -1011 -892 -786 -1003 -443 -567
2 105 -250 -977 -984 -993 -724 -523 -409
3 97 -383 -940 -1515 -12213 -1813 -924 -678
4 -13 -567 -996 -1241 -1314 -964 -893 -456
5 -133 -829 -1104 -1259 -918 -893 -614 -323
B2 1 -592 -1623 -1720 -892 -947 -1043 -887 -1004
2 -273 -782 -1073 -776 -589 -637 -428 -319
3 171 -10 -828 -934 -1074 -1124 -823 -489
4 -13 -177 -819 -1176 -373 -494 -567 -394
5 -42 -185 -1003 -1366 -1074 -1124 -1324 -1143
B3 1 -810 -827 -1432 -1046 -938 -998 -1723 -1018
2 -275 -332 -1102 -820 -484 -273 -943 -492
3 -12 -149 -774 -1314 -1143 -1214 -1007 -273
4 -07 -169 -698 -941 -623 -793 -823 -1193
5 -22 -417 -865 -1556 -895 -1073 -489 -1213
B4 1 -281 -821 -1342 -1462 -1087 -887 -793 -294
2 -76 -527 -1142 -1151 -798 -873 -993 -1028
3 -17 -602 -1189 -948 -1114 -894 -934 -1113
4 -38 -675 -890 -997 -1234 -764 -784 -489
5 -72 -419 -1147 -1248 -588 -632 -598 -534
Average -130 -530 -1053 -1126 -1459 -911 -826 -671
119
-230
-180
-130
-80
-30
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G8 Wyckoff Road Eastbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential
(mV)
120
121
Average 022 137 015 048 310 273 067 068 063 047 033
Table G17 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 080 140 140 120 190 180 NA NA 025 020 001
E2 300 180 140 080 050 050 NA NA 008 003 008
E3 200 140 130 080 070 000 NA NA 103 080 113
E4 090 110 090 040 080 080 NA NA 005 005 003
E5 090 090 060 030 070 060 NA NA 008 005 008
E6 700 310 200 090 050 040 NA NA 000 000 000
Average 243 162 127 073 085 068 NA NA 025 019 022
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 020 595 010 255 1520 1260 270 240 230 170 130
E2 010 138 003 000 020 036 020 050 040 030 010
E3 090 075 075 010 070 077 010 020 040 010 010
E4 005 003 003 007 120 136 070 050 040 020 020
E5 005 010 000 007 090 123 010 020 030 020 020
E6 000 000 000 010 040 006 020 030 000 030 010
122
Average 175 -435 122 086 974 1073 1485 -013 156 1676 217
Table G18 Minideck E ASTM G 109 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Specimen Cycle
1 Cycle
2 Cycle
3 Cycle
4 Cycle
5 Cycle
6 Cycle
7 Cycle
8 Cycle
9 Cycle
10 Cycle
11
E1 -9432 -7340 -6660 -5586 -6234 -3895 NA NA 878 1261 1622
E2 -797 -6468 -5310 -3954 -4507 -1883 NA NA -1215 -334 067
E3 -6293 -4652 -4277 -3397 -4054 -2273 NA NA -2128 -1370 -1008
E4 -7388 -5366 -4876 -4168 -5061 -3222 NA NA -1453 -600 -114
E5 -7975 -5692 -5190 -4313 -5035 -3042 NA NA -1751 -1395 -1030
E6 -1105 -7753 -7085 -5201 -5515 -3319 NA NA -172 -108 015
Average -8490 -6212 -5566 -4437 -5068 -2939 NA NA -974 -586 -075
Specimen Cycle
12 Cycle
13 Cycle
14 Cycle
15 Cycle
16 Cycle
17 Cycle
18 Cycle
19 Cycle
20 Cycle
21 Cycle
22
E1 1784 1173 2035 2285 332 336 1328 344 121 5064 228
E2 249 -048 295 210 325 345 2290 -972 165 981 355
E3 -810 -1621 -809 -818 1800 2000 1662 -171 146 688 392
E4 084 -868 174 208 242 360 1075 436 218 750 092
E5 -824 -1245 -872 -837 1318 1458 1412 -006 190 1838 089
E6 567 -001 -091 -532 1825 1936 1145 292 098 733 144
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
000
1000
2000
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Cycles
Cor
rosi
on P
oten
tial (
mV)
Fig G9 Minideck E Average Corrosion Potential (mV)
123
124
Table G19 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Rate (microAcm2)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 0096 0276 0100 0093 0072 0052 0052 0124
2 0185 0142 0262 0050 0123 0077 0077 0112
3 0203 0190 0129 0073 0052 0085 0085 0091
4 0138 0109 0101 0092 0172 0142 0142 0123
5 0132 0096 0115 0103 0124 0172 0172 0131
B2 1 0235 0096 0104 0077 0142 0117 0117 0107
2 0202 0145 0054 0066 0097 0094 0094 0042
3 0172 0169 0098 0091 0087 0132 0132 0092
4 0174 0189 0107 0414 0137 0127 0127 0077
5 0161 0223 0130 0099 0124 0192 0192 0051
B3 1 0152 0132 0258 0058 0092 0272 0272 0129
2 0088 0223 0074 0075 0123 0255 0255 0141
3 0210 0198 0064 0078 0137 0234 0234 0172
4 0209 0173 0080 0095 0148 0313 0313 0142
5 0209 0261 0088 0091 0078 0149 0149 0154
B4 1 0139 0267 0096 0056 0048 0237 0237 0091
2 0222 0231 0058 0075 0114 0199 0199 0052
3 0277 0209 0073 0071 0271 0144 0144 0212
4 0313 0317 0061 0074 0314 0152 0152 0324
5 0271 0343 0524 0073 0421 0212 0212 0177
B5 1 0266 0107 0053 0055 0094 0172 0172 0097
2 0212 0151 0087 0099 0073 0054 0054 0121
3 0177 0119 0064 0067 0312 0232 0232 0342
4 0220 0250 0072 0079 0272 0198 0198 0482
5 0250 0198 0788 0091 0432 0272 0272 0511
Average 0197 0193 0146 0092 0162 0171 0171 0164
125
Table G20 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Corrosion Potential (mV)
Connection
Reading
Cycle 1
Cycle 2
Cycle 3
Cycle 4
Cycle 5
Cycle 6
Cycle 7
Cycle 8
B1 1 1232 268 215 287 317 424 272 532
2 861 525 -239 540 572 312 732 872
3 651 1070 -53 -32 123 141 272 913
4 -60 554 -139 -306 -79 -103 -213 17
5 -424 209 -82 -222 -313 -92 -123 -89
B2 1 762 828 67 159 184 924 673 556
2 451 346 524 307 423 107 914 633
3 279 341 -32 -160 -153 -109 214 135
4 76 531 04 -664 -553 -178 -214 -19
5 -68 572 -71 -77 -23 -124 -195 -119
B3 1 741 709 -375 210 144 214 177 279
2 10 -125 336 96 123 89 314 489
3 332 708 491 175 717 823 972 787
4 336 617 438 101 148 198 273 334
5 -83 457 561 194 272 334 475 588
B4 1 523 169 371 371 493 574 623 387
2 186 304 1093 310 422 556 334 198
3 218 400 531 135 557 667 789 819
4 231 763 1092 405 673 774 884 917
5 137 477 -81 106 819 895 756 664
B5 1 893 982 686 157 124 678 717 524
2 675 787 421 35 213 778 899 155
3 230 528 479 110 314 844 812 177
4 187 373 460 113 424 964 212 198
5 23 228 -645 188 556 219 314 214
Average 336 505 242 102 260 396 435 406
126
-2300
-1800
-1300
-800
-300
200
700 Cy c l e sCycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
Fig G10 Route 130 Westbound GECOR 6 Average Corrosion Potential (mV)