evaluation of corrosion inhibitors - nj

141
Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors FINAL REPORT Submitted by Dr. P. N. Balaguru, Principal Investigator Mohamed Nazier, Graduate Assistant Pisca NJDOT Research Project Manager Mr. Carey Younger FHWA-NJ-2003-005 In cooperation with New Jersey Department of Transportation Division of Research and Technology and U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering Center for Advanced Infrastructure & Transportation (CAIT) Rutgers, The State University taway, NJ 08854-8014

Upload: others

Post on 03-Dec-2021

8 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 2: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 3: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 4: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 5: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 6: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 7: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 8: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 9: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 10: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 11: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 12: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 13: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 14: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 15: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 16: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 17: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 18: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ

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)

  • Mr Nicholas Wong
    • Executive Summary
        • Recommendations
          • Table of Contents
            • Page
                • List of Tables
                  • Page
                    • Table 31 Bridge Locations with corresponding Corrosion Inhibiting 7
                      • List of Figures
                        • Page
                          • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint12
                          • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator65
                          • Reinforcing Steel Type
                            • Bridge Location
                            • Corrosion Inhibiting Admixture
                            • Type of Reinforcing Steel
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Wyckoff Road ndash
                              • Route 130 ndash
                              • Table 32 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash West
                                • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Westbound
                                • Date of Deck Pour May 6 1998
                                  • Table 33 Mix Design of North Main Street ndash East
                                    • Bridge Deck over North Main Street ndash Eastbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 14 1998
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Wyckoff Road ndash Westbound
                                    • Bridge Deck over Route 130 ndash Westbound
                                    • Date of Deck Pour May 29 1998
                                      • Fig 31 Strips of Silver Conductive Paint
                                      • Fig 39 Insulated Copper Underground Feeder Cables
                                        • Bridge Location
                                        • A
                                        • Corrosion Condition
                                        • Corrosion Activity
                                            • FigC3 Surface Air Flow Field Permeability Indicator
                                              • Table C1 Relative Concrete Permeability by Surface Air Flow (Manual for the
                                                  • Relative Permeability Indicated
                                                  • Test
                                                  • Acceptance Criteria
Page 19: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 20: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 21: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 22: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 23: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 24: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 25: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 26: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 27: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 28: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 29: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 30: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 31: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 32: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 33: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 34: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 35: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 36: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 37: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 38: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 39: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 40: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 41: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 42: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 43: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 44: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 45: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 46: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 47: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 48: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 49: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 50: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 51: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 52: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 53: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 54: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 55: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 56: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 57: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 58: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 59: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 60: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 61: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 62: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 63: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 64: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 65: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 66: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 67: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 68: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 69: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 70: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 71: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 72: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 73: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 74: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 75: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 76: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 77: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 78: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 79: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 80: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 81: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 82: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 83: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 84: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 85: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 86: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 87: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 88: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 89: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 90: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 91: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 92: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 93: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 94: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 95: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 96: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 97: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 98: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 99: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 100: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 101: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 102: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 103: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 104: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 105: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 106: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 107: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 108: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 109: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 110: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 111: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 112: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 113: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 114: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 115: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 116: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 117: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 118: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 119: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 120: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 121: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 122: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 123: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 124: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 125: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 126: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 127: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 128: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 129: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 130: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 131: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 132: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 133: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 134: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 135: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 136: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 137: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 138: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 139: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 140: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ
Page 141: Evaluation of Corrosion Inhibitors - NJ