Final Project Report
Final Project Report
INTRODUCTION
Structures located along the coastal lines are highly exposed to corroding
environment. The corrosion process has the ability to start in any environmental
conditions and the rate of corrosion is determined by the harshness of the environment.
The high alkaline environment of good quality concrete forms a passive film on the
surface of the embedded steel that normally prevents the steel from further corroding.
1
However, under the penetration of chloride ions, the passive film is disrupted or
destroyed and the steel corrodes. The corrosion products occupy a larger volume and
these induce expansive stresses in the concrete surrounding reinforcement resulting in
cracking, delamination and spalling. In addition, a RC member may undergo structural
damage due to loss of bond between steel and concrete and also loss of rebar cross-
sectional area [3].
If the reduction in cross sectional area of the steel is uniform throughout the
length, then the corrosion is referred to as uniform corrosion. This type of corrosion
results in reduced load-carrying capacity of the reinforcements and hence that of
complete structure. While non-uniform distribution of corrosion along the length of the
reinforcements is referred to as pitting corrosion. This category of corrosion causes
localized yielding which reduces strength and ductility of the structure. Use of steel bars
which are susceptible to localized corrosion damage has serious effect on reliability and
general integrity of the structures with reinforced concrete [2].
Columns form one of the most important structural elements, which sustains
axial forces of dead load and live loads. Failure of column leads to total failure of a
building, as only through that element, vertical loads are transferred to the ground.
Corroded reinforcements in columns could create catastrophic failures of brittle nature.
To plan cost effective repair strategies, it is necessary to estimate the strength of the
existing structures, for which the effect of corrosion on the structural behavior of RC
columns is to be evaluated.
2
1.1.1 Carbonation
The process of carbonation involves gaseous, aqueous and solid reactants. The
solids which react with CO2 include Ca(OH)2, main strength component of cement paste
CSH, and the un-hydrated constituents of C3S and C2S. Water is always present in larger
or lesser amounts in the pores of the hardened cement paste and plays a key role in the
process of carbonation. Water plays a major role, first it blocks the pores and thus hinders
diffusion of CO2 through the pores; second, it provides a medium for reaction between
CO2 and Ca(OH)2. At very low ambient relative humidity levels, CO2 can diffuse fast, but
most pores are dry and the rate of carbonation is very slow. At high ambient relative
humidity levels, practically all the pores are filled with water, therefore diffusion of CO 2
becomes very slow. The penetration is nearly proportional to square root of time. Fig.1.1
shows the mechanism of corrosion.
(Source: www.theconstructor.org)
3
1.1.2 Chlorides
The chloride ions, originating from de-icing salts or seawater, are the primary
cause of reinforcing steel corrosion in coastal structures. Chlorides which are transported
through the pores and micro cracks in concrete breaks the oxide film covering the
reinforcing steel and accelerate the reaction of corrosion and concrete deterioration.
Chloride penetration is a process which takes place in totally or partly water-filled pores.
The risk of corrosion increases as the chloride content of concrete increases. Chloride-
containing admixtures can also cause corrosion. When the chloride content at the surface
of the steel exceeds a certain limit, called the threshold value, corrosion will occur, if
water and oxygen are also available.
The pH of the concrete is reduced by the carbonation and the entry of acidic
gaseous pollutants such as SO2 and NO2. The fall in pH to certain levels may cause
4
commencement of reinforcement of corrosion, loss of passivity of concrete against rebar
corrosion and catastrophic corrosion as indicated in table 1.2.
Aerobic bacteria may aid in the formation of differential aeration cell which will
lead to corrosion. In sewer concrete, the anaerobic bacteria produces iron sulphides which
too enables the corrosion reaction to proceed even in absence of oxygen. The bacteria
decrease the amount of cover by disintegration of cementitious material.
Basically w/c ratio control strength, durability and permeability of concrete and
does not control the rate of corrosion but ‘permeability’ which is a function of w/c ratio
affects the corrosion of rebar. The depth of penetration of particular chloride threshold
value increases with an increase in the w/c ratio. Carbonation depth has been found to be
linearly increasing with an increase in w/c ratio. The oxygen diffusion coefficient is also
found to be increasing with an increase in the w/c ratio.
5
1.2.5 Effect of cover over reinforcing steel
Risk of reinforcement corrosion with low cover thickness, has been reported by
various researchers. The cover thickness has a remarkable effect on rebar corrosion due
to penetration of chloride or carbonation. This effect of corrosion is limited within the
time of casting to the time at which the rebar is de-passivated and corrosion is started.
The rate of corrosion, once it has started, is independent of the cover thickness.
Corrosion reduces the effective cross section of structural components. This will
reduce the axial and flexural strength of elements, and makes them structurally weak.
Even if corroded elements look stable, it does not mean they are safe; in fact, the
corroded structures become vulnerable for design loads (ultimate loads), i.e. a strong
ground motion can increase the stress actions beyond the capacity of the sections. Loss of
strength can happen in steel and reinforced concrete structures.
6
capacity of the section. In case of lap splices or anchorage, this may reduce the effective
length of anchorage, and resulting in premature failure of sections.
(Source: http://www.c3sinc.com)
The existing older RCC structures were constructed with lower concrete strength
and poor workmanship. Further, in these structures, the durability aspects were generally
not taken into account. Parameters such as minimum required cement content, water-
cement ratio and cover to the re-bars are decided according to the prevailing
environmental conditions. However, these provisions were not included in earlier
building codes and hence the structures are prone to higher degrees of corrosion level.
Columns being the most crucial structural element, the influence of corroded
reinforcements could cause the whole structure to collapse. Unexpected increments in
7
loading could aggravate the situation. For assessing the condition of corrosion-damaged
structures, the remaining service life of such structures is to be estimated. For this
purpose, the effects of maintenance and repair options on their service life are to be
determined. To meet this objective, the present study is focused on the residual strength
and ductility of reinforced concrete columns that were subjected to different degrees of
corrosion damage. [2]
The aim of the present study is to evaluate the structural behavior of RCC
columns with corroded re-bars (5%, 10% and 15% mass loss) in terms of strength and
deformability performance. The purpose of this study is to develop a graphical tool that
can be used to predict reduction in bearing capacity in a scenario where the extent of
corrosion is known, the extent of corrosion being expressed in terms of the mass loss in
the reinforcements. .
8
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
A number of experimental investigations have been carried out in the recent years
on the effects of corrosion of reinforcements on the structural behavior of the reinforced
concrete structures.
Corrosion of reinforcing steel in concrete can alter the interface between the steel
and concrete and thus affects the bond mechanism. This subsequently influences the
behavior of reinforced concrete structures in terms of their safety and serviceability. C.
Q. Li et al., developed a numerical method that can simulate the behavior of reinforced
concrete walls subjected to steel corrosion in concrete as measured by their load-
deflection relationship. The method accounts for the effects of corrosion on the stiffness,
maximum strength, residual strength, and failure mode of the bond between the steel and
9
concrete. In the numerical method, the corrosion-affected stiffness and maximum
strength of the bond are explicitly expressed as a function of the corrosion rate. It is
found in this paper that the corrosion-affected reinforced concrete walls exhibit less
ductile behavior when compared with the un-corroded walls.
10
establishing a relationship between the duration of the impressed current and
reinforcement corrosion was prepared. The magnitude of reinforcement corrosion was
measured as gravimetric loss in weight of the steel bars. The results indicated a sharp
reduction in the ultimate flexural strength of slabs with up to 29% reinforcement
corrosion; thereafter, the strength decreased at a somewhat reduced rate with further
increase in reinforcement corrosion. The ultimate deflection of the slabs decreases with
an increase in the magnitude of reinforcement corrosion, leading to a marked and
progressive reduction in the ductility of the slab.
Kyle Stanish et al., has done extensive research on the loss of bond between steel
and concrete due to corrosion and used pullout tests to find out bond strength in
specimens. According to Stanish the change in texture of the reinforcement structure
reduces the bond strength. Additionally, the corrosion products which are much more
voluminous than the iron that was corroded causes spalling, thereby exposing the steel
further.
J Revathy et al., had conducted a study on the effect of corrosion damage on the
ductility performance of concrete columns. An accelerated corrosion regime of different
degrees of corrosion damage of 10 and 25% were induced in the steel reinforcement of
11
concrete columns. It was based on the Faraday’s law. The columns were then tested under
uni-axial compression until failure. The results showed a marked reduction in axial
strength and ductility of the corroded concrete columns. According to the study, the
increase in corrosion intensity decreased the axial load carrying capacity of the columns
and hence reduction in the ductility of the corroded columns.
All specimens have been designed and fabricated conforming to the IS 456:2000.
12
2.1 COMMENTS ON LITERATURE REVIEW
Accelerated corrosion using direct current is the most suitable method for
corroding the steel reinforcements within the concrete.
Corrosion process can be completed within the given time frame with the help of
this method.
The corrosion damage induced by the technique might not be natural, but can
induce severe damage with wide cracks and spalling of concrete cover-pitting
corrosion.
Loss in the cross sectional area of reinforcement is one of the reasons for the loss
in strength of the reinforced concrete members.
As per the studies, the presence of concrete increased the time required for a mass
loss when compared to that of a bare bar. A factor λ was introduced to counter this
effect.
13
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1 OBJECTIVES
The columns are tested under uniaxial compression until failure and the
relationship between degrees of corrosion level of re-bars to the structural
behavior of RCC columns were reported
3.2 METHODOLOGY
14
The time required for achieving different levels of corrosion by mass loss was
calculated using Faraday’s Law.
MIt
m= ………..(1)
zF
15
Fig.3.1. Accelerated corrosion setup for bare bar
The presence of surrounding concrete can reduce the actual value of mass loss
induced, for a particular time calculated, for a desired corrosion level. Hence a factor λ, in
the equation accounts for the presence of surrounding concrete. The studies involving
corrosion in small scaled column specimens are entirely devoted to estimate the value of
λ, which is obtained by finding the ratio of the predicted theoretical mass loss to actual
mass loss. As per the studies conducted by Jayasree et al., the obtained average value of
factor λ is 1.65 for specimens of size 100 mm x100 mm x500 mm. By modifying
equation (1), the time required to provide a certain level of mass loss for reinforcements
embedded in concrete is given by:
λ mzF
t=
ℑ
16
CHAPTER 4
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
4.1 GENERAL
4.2.1.Cement
Ordinary Portland cement of 43 grade was used. Various tests were conducted on
cement to determine the different properties of cement. The test results are shown in
Table 4.1.
Table 4.1.
Properties of cement
Properties of Cement
Properties Values
Initial setting time 110 minutes
Final setting time 6 hours
7 Day Compressive Strength 34N/mm2
28 Day Compressive strength 44N/mm2
17
4.2.2. Fine aggregate
M sand passing through 4.75 mm sieve was used as fine aggregate. Laboratory tests were
conducted on fine aggregate to determine the different physical properties as per IS 2386-
1963 Part 3 (Reaffirmed 1997). The gradation curve obtained from the sieve analysis is
shown in Fig.3.1. From the particle size distribution curve, it is seen that the fine
aggregate used is medium sand and conforms to zone 2 grading pattern as per IS 383-
1970 (Reaffirmed 1997).Several other tests were conducted on M-sand and other
properties were determined as shown in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2.
Properties of M- Sand
Specific Gravity 2.41
Bulk Density 1.74 g/cc
Void ratio 0.37
Porosity 28%
100
Percentage Finer(N)
80
60
40
20
0
0.1 1 10
Sieve Opening(D)
18
Fig.4.1. Gradation curve of fine aggregate
Crushed rock of nominal sizes 12.5 mm and 20 mm were used in the proportion
60 % and 40 % respectively as coarse aggregate in the study .The different tests as per IS
2386-1963(Reaffirmed 1990) were conducted on coarse aggregate and the results are
shown in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3.
Properties of Coarse Aggregate
Properties Values
Specific Gravity 2.7
Bulk Density 2.64 g/cc
Void ratio 0.69
Porosity 42%
19
100
90
80
70
60
% Passing
50 Gradation curve
40 Upper limit
30 Lower limit
20
10
0
1 10 100
Sieve size (mm)
Fe-550 Grade steel was used for casting the reinforced concrete column specimen.
Various tests were conducted on the steel reinforcement bars and the results are shown in
Table 4.4.
Table.4.4.
Properties of Steel
Properties Values
Yield Strength 599 N/mm2
Breaking Strength 674 N/mm2
Percentage Elongation 24%
4.2.5. Water
Clear water without any impurities was used for preparing the mix.
20
4.3 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME
Slump flow test is one of the most commonly used methods of measuring the
workability of fresh concrete. The relative quantities of cement, fine aggregate, coarse
aggregate and water were added together to control its properties in the fresh state. For
conducting slump flow test, a standard slump cone of 200 mm bottom diameter, 100 mm
top diameter and 300 mm height and a base plate is used. The base plate and the inside of
the cone is oiled. Base plate is kept on a level ground with slump cone placed centrally
over it and is held down firmly. Then concrete is poured into the cone and the excess
concrete is struck off and level the top surface with a trowel. The cone is raised vertically
21
and concrete is allowed to flow out freely. The diameter of flow of concrete in two
perpendicular directions is measured.
Table 4.5
Workability of the mix
SL NO SPECIMEN SLUMP (mm)
1. M20 43
Table 4.6
Compressive strength of cubes
AVERAGE
SL NO SPECIMEN STRENGTH(N/mm2) STRENGTH
(N/mm2)
24
22
1. M20 23.7
25
The reinforcement details of a typical control column are shown in Fig 6. The
column had square cross section 140mm X 140mm. The overall length of the column is
1000 mm.
22
Fig.4.3. Reinforcement detailing in the column (All dimensions in mm)
23
Fig.4.4. Reinforcement cage
Steel formwork of required size and shape was fabricated for the preparation of
the specimen as shown in Figure 4.5. The inner surface was oiled and the reinforcement
cage was fixed in position.
24
Fig.4.5. Steel mould for casting specimen
4.7.3 Concreting
The required quantity of cement, fine aggregate and coarse aggregate and water
for the designed mix were weighed and a uniform concrete mix was prepared. Mixing
was done until a uniform mix of required consistency was obtained. A vibrator was used
for compacting the concrete. After filling to the top, the top surface was levelled using a
trowel. Then the specimens were kept undisturbed for 24 hours. The column specimen
after casting is shown in the Fig. 4.6.
25
Fig.4.7. Column specimens before curing
4.7.4 Curing
After 24 hours, the formwork was stripped off and the specimens were immersed
in salt water for curing. The specimens were cured for a period of 28 days.
Accelerated corrosion on bare bars were done to verify the accuracy of Faraday’s
equation used .The accelerated corrosion setup consisting of a glass cage, a DC power
source with constant current, steel plate as cathode was set up.10mm diameter bare bar
was immersed in the 4% NaCl electrolyte. Connections were made from the DC power
source to the anode and cathode. The bare bars were supplied with constant period of
time (obtain from Faraday’s equation) depending on the degree of corrosion required.
After corrosion the bare bars were taken out and their final mass was measured after
cleaning with sand paper. The final mass and the initial mass of the specimen was
compared to find the actual degree of corrosion attained.
26
Fig.4.8. Corrosion setup of bare bars
27
Fig.4.10. Accelerated corrosion setup of columns
The column specimens were tested under uniaxial compression until failure after
accelerated corrosion .The test setup along with instrumentation for recording
measurements is shown in Figure. The columns were tested in a loading frame using a
28
jack having capacity of 100kN. Load increments ere applied uniformly. In order to
measure the axial core displacements ,an LVDT was provided between the MS flats for
which the gauge length was 130mm. Lateral displacements were measured using two dial
gauges at mid height and one third height from the top. Axial strain values were noted
from gauge readings.
29
CHAPTER 5
5.1 GENERAL
30
The load carrying capacity of tested columns is shown in table4.The ultimate load
carrying capacity is found to be decreasing for increasing percentage of corrosion of re-
bars. The reason for decrease in axial load carrying capacity might be due to concrete
cover cracking and decrease in area of reinforcement due to corrosion. The ultimate
strength reduced by 17% for 5% of corrosion damage,24% for 10% of corrosion damage
and 29% for 15% corrosion damage.
Table 5.1.
The ultimate load carried by the different specimens
Percentage Ultimate Load (kN) Ultimate stress (MPa) Percentage
Corrosion reduction
(%) in strength
Average
Average
Sample 1
Sample 2
Sample 1
Sample 2
0 502.80 504.83 503.82 25.65 25.76 25.7
5 416.66 412.54 414.6 21.26 21.05 21.15 17.7
10 378.23 382.34 380.28 19.29 19.51 19.4 24.51
15 355.98 350.76 353.37 18.16 17.89 18.03 29.86
31
Fig.5.1. Graph relating percentage reduction in strength and percentage corrosion
From the shape of the graph, the equation obtained is a Quadratic Equation.
Equation:
x = Percentage corrosion
Also a graph relating the ultimate load carrying capacity and percentage corrosion in
columns was also plotted.
32
The load and deflection values recorded during the loading test of columns were
used to draw the Load deflection graphs. Fig 5.3 shows the load deflection graphs of the
control specimen and the corroded specimens.
Table 5.2.
Deflection corresponding to Axial load for control specimen
Deflection (mm)
Axial stress
Axial load
(MPa)
(kN)
Sample 1 Sample 2 Average
50 2.55 3.6 3.8 3.7
100 5.1 5.9 5.5 5.7
150 7.65 6.4 6.2 6.3
200 10.2 6.8 7.2 7
250 12.75 7.3 7.7 7.5
300 15.3 7.7 8.5 8.1
350 17.86 9.5 9.1 9.3
400 20.41 10.8 11.2 11
450 22.96 12.3 12.1 12.2
500 25.51 13.2 13 13.1
Table 5.3.
Deflection corresponding to Axial load for specimens with 5% corrosion
Deflection (mm)
Axial load Axial stress
(kN) (MPa)
Sample 1 Sample 2 Average
50 2.55 2.8 3 2.9
100 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.9
150 7.65 5.6 6.2 5.9
200 10.2 7.3 6.9 7.1
250 12.75 7.4 7.8 7.6
300 15.3 8.4 8.2 8.3
33
350 17.86 8.6 9.2 8.9
400 20.41 9.6 9.2 9.4
Table 5.4
Deflection corresponding to Axial load for specimens with 10%corrosion
Deflection
Axial load Axial stress
Sample 1 Sample 2 Average
(kN) (MPa)
50 2.55 0.7 0.9 0.8
100 5.1 2.2 2.6 2.4
150 7.65 3.3 3.7 3.5
200 10.2 4 4.4 4.2
250 12.75 4.8 5.4 5.1
300 15.3 5.4 5.6 5.5
350 17.86 5.8 6.2 6
Table 5.5
Deflection corresponding to Axial load for specimens with 15% corrosion
Deflection
Axial load Axial stress
Sample 1 Sample 2 Average
(kN) (MPa)
50 2.55 1 1.4 1.2
100 5.1 2.8 3 2.9
150 7.65 3.1 3.5 3.3
200 10.2 4.2 4 4.1
250 12.75 5.3 4.7 5
300 15.3 5.1 5.5 5.3
34
350 17.86 5.2 6 5.6
As the percentage corrosion increased the level of distress in the columns also
increased and the cracks became longer and drastic. In the control specimen very few
35
cracks were observed and as the corrosion level increased cracks became more prominent
and even led to spalling of concrete.
36
Fig.5.6 Crack pattern for 15% corrosion
37
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS
The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of corrosion of the
reinforcements on the performance of columns. As per the experiments carried out, a
comparison of the corroded and non-corroded specimens was possible. From the
investigations, a study of the ultimate load carrying capacity and the load deflection
characteristics was done. And the following are the conclusions from the study:
REFERENCES
38
2. Jayasree S(2016), “Experimental Investigations on RCC Columns with Corroded
Reinforcements” , ICI journal , Vol 15 - July-September 2016.
11. IS 456 - 2000 (Reaffirmed 2005), “Plain and reinforced concrete - code of
practice”, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India, 2000.
12. IS 2386 (Part III) - 1983 (Reaffirmed 2002), “Methods of test for aggregates for
concrete”, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India, 1983.
39
13. IS 383:1970, Indian Standard specifications for coarse aggregate and fine
aggregate from natural sources.
14. ASTM G1 - 03, "Standard Practice for Preparing, Cleaning, and Evaluation
Corrosion Test Specimens", American Society for Testing and Materials Standard
Practice, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 2004
40