Monitoring the Performance of Concrete Exposed to a Marine

Environment
Introduction
Throughout the world, the deterioration and corrosion of concrete structures has put strain
onto governments due to their high repair costs. In the UK in 1995, 26 billion was spent on
infrastructure maintenance and repair, roughly 50% of the governments total spending that
year on the construction industry, which was a threefold increase since 1981. In Birmingham,
28 million was spent to build the Midlands link motorway in 1962 but between 1972 and
1989 repair cost totalled 45 million and it has been estimated that over the next 15 years
costs could reach up to 120 million. Structural repair costs have been increasing year-on-
year as concrete continues to deteriorate due to weather conditions and vibrational movement.
The ability to anticipate structural damage and ware offers governments an opportunity to
repair damage before the severity increases, reducing costs. Current testing methods are often
time consuming and costly. These also include indirect cost such as traffic management,
diversions and road closures which will have to occur during the inspection of structures. If
periodic monitoring of concrete was implemented, this would allow early detection of
structural failure and deterioration which would reduce costs and help to allow appropriate
repair to be carried out. Integrated monitoring systems in reinforced concrete will offer the
ability to collect data to help improve concrete in the future.

Background and Context

There are two stages to concrete deterioration, initiation and propagation. The initiation
period refers to changes that occur in the concretes cover zone (surface 20-50mm) due to
exposure to the environment. This stage doesnt change until the deterioration has spread
(propagation) through to the concrete. This period ends when the specific limit stage has
reached. The initial and propagation periods occur due to specific chemical, physical and
electrochemical interactions. The most common process that causes concrete deterioration is
the contamination of chloride ions. These Cl- ions can be introduced from contaminated water
due to de-icing salt used on roads or from the marine environment. Other damage can come
from: freeze thaw, sulphate attack, acid rain (nitric and sulphuric acid) and alkali-silica
reactions. The reinforcement of the concrete cover zone, which protects the structural steel,
increases the life span of concrete. Therefore, the more money spent on improving the cover
zone the better for reducing future maintenance costs.
 Testing
There have been a number of techniques developed to measure the level of surface
absorption. This has allowed a reasonable estimate of the lifetime of concrete structures and
helps to improve the resistance/ reduce the permeability of the concrete to water. These
include: concrete absorption test, water air permeability test, initial surface absorption test and
Figg hypodermic methods. Samples can also be placed in the marine environment so that their
absorption and deterioration can be monitored to help improve future development of
concrete.

Remote Interrogation and Field Monitoring

Remote monitoring techniques allow the ability to assess the structural strength of concrete
structures without having to go into the field and monitoring it. The first type of monitoring
is: Electrical Measurements. Using electrodes implanted into the cover-zone allows the
connectivity of the concrete to be measured. This means that the water/ ionic content of the
concrete to be assessed and feed back to when repair should be taken out. The second type of
monitoring involves exposing concrete specimens to different marine environments to
determine what compositions resist deterioration and therefore improve the resistance of
concrete in the future. Samples are positioned at different depths/ and marine environments to
allow an overall result to be attained. E.g. just above high-water-level in the airborn spray
zone, just below high-water-level in tidal/splash zone and mid-tide level (submerged zone). In
2010 a system was developed to allow data to be collected from the concrete cover-zone
without need for site visits. During this measurement, cover-zone resistance and thermistor
data are recorded and collected from the concrete. The thermistor data allows engineers to
understand the damage caused by freeze thaw. Freeze thaw cracking is caused by continual
fluctuations in temperatures that causes the concrete to splay and crack. As it is the cover-
zone that protects the reinforcing steal from damage, improving the concretes resistance to
attack is crucial to increasing the life span for many structures throughout the world.
 Resistivity/Time Response

(a) 20
Resistivity (lohm-cm)

15
5mm
10mm The Resistivity/Time Response graphs
10
15mm shown represent the change in
20mm resistivity for each electrode depth
5 with time.
30mm
40mm
(a) : CEM I concrete mix
0 (b) : CEM III/A concrete mix
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 (c) : CEM II/B-V
Time (Days)

(b) 70

60
Resistivity (kohm-cm)

50 10mm
15mm
40
20mm
30 30mm

20 40mm
50mm
10
0 25 50 75 100 125 150
Time (Days)

(c)
85
Resistivity (kohm-cm)

75
65 5mm

55 10mm
15mm
45
20mm
35
30mm
25
40mm
15
0 25 50 75 100 125 150
Time (Days)
 Mean Cover Temperature/Time Response

Mean Cover Temperature

14
Mean Cover Temperature (C)

(b) 12
10
8
CEM I
6
CEM III/A
4
CEM II/B-V
2
0
0 50 100 150
Time (Days)

The above graph shows the mean cover temperature recorded for each concrete mix
against time. Although thermistors were not placed at every depth, it was assumed that
due to concretes high thermal conductivity, the temperature throughout each concrete mix
would be the same as the regardless of depth.

Arrhenius Plots

(a) 3.0

2.8

2.6

2.4
5mm
ln(Resistivity)

2.2 10mm
2.0 15mm
20mm
1.8
30mm
1.6
40mm
1.4 50mm
1.2

1.0
3.50 3.52 3.54 3.56 3.58 3.60 3.62 3.64
1000/T (K-1)
(b) 4.15

3.95

3.75

10mm
ln(Resistivity)

3.55
15mm
20mm
3.35
30mm

3.15 40mm
50mm
2.95

2.75
3.49 3.54 3.59 3.64
1000/T (K-1)

(c) 4.45

4.25

4.05

3.85 5mm
ln(Resistivity)

10mm
3.65
15mm
3.45 20mm
30mm
3.25
40mm

3.05

2.85
3.48 3.53 3.58 3.63
1000/T (K-1)
Calculation of Ea/Rg from Measurements

CEM I
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4 5mm
ln(Resistivity)

2.2 10mm
2.0 15mm
1.8 20mm
1.6 30mm
1.4 40mm
1.2 50mm
1.0
3.50 3.52 3.54 3.56 3.58 3.60 3.62 3.64
1000/Tk

The graph above titled CEM I is a copy of the Arrhenius plot for CEM I with a trendline.
Note that most data points are omitted for clarity. The trendline for each electrode is a straight
line of slope Ea/Rg. After obtaining the gradient of each slope, and multiplying it by the gas
constant Rg, a known value, the activation energy is calculated for each electrode depth.
These values are shown in the table below. This value of Ea is then used to normalise the
measured resistivity values to 25C. These values are displayed subsequently.

Depth CEM I CEM III/A CEM II/B

(mm)
Ea/Rg (K) Ea (kJ/M) Ea/Rg (K) Ea (kJ/M) Ea/Rg (K) Ea (kJ/M)
5 3.56888184 29.673468 - - 3.87864454 32.24899
10 4.19842218 34.9077812 3.985190353 33.1348652 3.78614909 31.479937
15 3.60411908 29.9664481 3.975999919 33.0584513 3.91814278 32.577398
20 4.16787112 34.6537644 4.076620889 33.8950644 3.84012993 31.92876
30 4.13234188 34.3583566 4.170701183 34.677295 3.66587942 30.479954
40 4.07392778 33.8726725 4.059227953 33.7504508 3.98039032 33.094955
50 4.14164018 34.4356672 4.056660899 33.729107 - -
Mean 3.9838863 33.1240226 4.054066866 33.707539 3.84488935 31.968332
Normalising Resistivity to a Reference Temperature

CEM I - Temperature Corrected

6

5
Resistivity (kohm-cm)

5mm
4 10mm
3 15mm
20mm
2
30mm
1
40mm
0 50mm
0 25 50 75 100 125 150
Time (Days)

CEM III/A - Temperature Corrected

20
18
16
10mm
14
12 15mm
10 20mm
8 30mm
6 40mm
4
50mm
2
0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150

CEM II/B - Temperature Corrected

30

25
Resistivity (kohm-cm)

20 5mm
10mm
15
15mm
10 20mm

5 30mm
40mm
0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150
Time (Days)