I

Concrete cover for

durable RC structures
ACC 1.119.

m 8 C DIRECTORATE
THANE1 5

N. Subramanian and K. Geetha

Sufficient cover is required for the reinforcement in concrete

structures for protection against corrosion. Though several
codes of practices have specified minimum cover for various
climatic conditions, it is often not maintained in practice. In
this paper, the authors contend that the Indian Codal provisions
relating to concrete cover have to be revised as they do not
account for many factors related to minimum concrete cover.
Also, some devices and methods to increase the quality of cover
are discussed. The authors also stress that just an increase in
concrete cover does not ensure durable structures.
For durable concrete structures, it is imperative that the steel
embedded in concrete is protected adequately against corrosion. It is also necessary that concrete should be dense, uniform and free from deleterious components. For this, adequate
cover to the steel should be provided on all faces of the concrete element.
Concrete protects steel in two ways : one, by providing a
barrier against the ingress of moisture and air and two, by
forming a passive protective film on the steel surface'. The
protective film remains effective so long as concrete is strongly
alkaline (pH value > 12). However, the external atmospheric
gases like carbondioxide when combined with atmospheric
moisture starts carbonation of concrete at the surface. This
carbonation makes the concrete less alkaline and may render
the embedded steel susceptible to corrosion, when the depth
of carbonation is large. Table 1 relates carbonation time (years)
to the water-cement ratio for various depths of cover(mm) 3 .
This table applies to Ordinary Portland Cement (no additive)
with sand and gravel aggregate.
Thus with a water-cement ratio of 0.55 and 10mm cover,
the carbonated zone will penetrate the cover in 12 years. This
table should be considered as indicative only as the
environmental conditions are not defined. However, it does
Dr. N. Subramanian, Chief Executive, Computer Design Consultants, 191, North
Usman Road, T. Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.
K. Geetha, Technical Officer, Computer Design Consultants, 191, North Usman
Road, T. Naga Chennai - 600 017.

April 1997 * The Indian Concrete Journal

MAY ' 00 7

LIBRARY Et INFORMATION

emphasise the significance of cover to the reinforcement and

the water-cement ratio.
The depth of carbonation in concrete subjected to 15 years
of normal indoor exposure in Tokyo is approximately equal
to 5mm 3 . Further, the corrosion may occur due to chloride
attack, once the threshold chloride levels are exceeded. The
corrosion due to chloride attack is more severe, and difficult
to control.
Though a minimum cover is specified by the codes of practice, this is often not maintained in practice. Moreover, the
devices used to ensure specified concrete cover are themselves
not of adequate quality. These aspects and the methods to be
adopted to ensure quality cover are discussed in this paper.
Sometimes increasing the concrete cover may lead to
higher transverse tension in the concrete of the compression
zone, for example in frame corners subjected to positive moments and in beams subjected to shear and bending. These
effects are also discussed.

Codal specifications for minimum cover

Minimum cover should be related to the exposure conditions,
concrete strength, water-cement ratio, nominal maximum size
of aggregate depending upon the method of compaction of
concrete, degree of grading of coarse aggregate, congestion
of steel and likely exposure to fire.
Concrete cover and tolerances specified by various codes
of practice vary over a fairly wide range'. For example, the
Indian code specifications are summarised in Table 1 and those
Table 1 Carbonation time (years) for various depth of cover and
water-cement

ratios'

.Waier-cement
ratio

Cover, nun
5

0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70

19
6
3
1.8
1.5
12

10
75
' 25
12
7
6
5

IS

20

25

100+
50
27
16
13
11

100+
99
49
.29
23
19

100+
100+
76
45
36
30

30
100+
100+
100+
65
52
43

197

Table 2a : Concrete cover requirements as per IS:456 - 1978

Sr

Beam

No.

Column

Walls. Slab

and

Founda - At each end

Lions

other
I. Normal
conditions

of
reinforcing

bar

members

mm

mm

mm

25

20

15*

15*

15*

35

30

25

20

Severe

40

30

25

of size less

Very Severe

50+

40+

30

than 20Xlinin.

Extreme

60+

50

25mm if bar

Maximum free water-cement

ratio

Minimum cement content,
(kg/tn')

>25mm or

>40mm or

diameter of
bar

diameter of
bar

> 15 mm
or
diameter
of bar

50 mm - 75
mm (not
specified in
IS code but
in SP:34)

>25mm or

as specified in
item I above
+ 40mm

Fire
period
Hours

Table 2b : Concrete cover requirements as per draft IS:456 - 1978

Concrete cover, nun
25

Very severe

Extreme

0.45

300

325

350

400

M35

M40

M45

M50

275
M30

Nominal cover in mm for normal weight aggregate

Ribs Columns
Floors
Beams
Simply Continuous Simply Continuous SimPIY
Continusupported
supported
ous
sup-
ported

0.5

20

20

15

15

15

15

20

30

20

20

20

25

20

25

1.5

40

35

25

20

35

25

30

50

50

35

25

45

35

35

70

60

45

35

55

45

35

80

70

55

45

65

55

35

30

45
50
75

Note : (i) For main reinforcement upto 12mm diameter bar and for mild exposures
the nominal cover may be reduced by 5mm.

(ii) However for column the specification as given in Table 1(a) col (3) is to
be maintained

of the British code in Table 35. 6 . It can be seen that the Indian
code does not take into account factors such as concrete quality,
water-cement ratio and fire rating of the structure. Compared
to IS : 456 the recommendations of IRC 21 are more
conservative, probably because those recommendations are
applicable to bridge structures'. It has become imperative to
revise the relevant provisions pertaining to concrete cover in
both the IS and IRC specifications.
The requirements of cover as per ACI 318-95 are given in
Table 4 7 . There are other categories and special conditions
relating to concrete cover in ACI 318-95 that are not discussed
here. However it is emphasised that ACI 318-95 requires that
the amount of concrete protection shall be suitably increased
for concrete in corrosive environments or other severe
exposure conditions and the denseness and low permeability
of protecting concrete shall be considered, or other protection

198

0.50

Table 3h : Nominal cover to all reinforcements (including links) to

meet specified periods of fire resistance as per BS:81 II)

Note The IS code specifies a tolerance of 5 mm for the specified cover

Moderate

Severe

0.55

* Increased to 20mm if maximum aggregate size exceeds 15 mm

as specified in
Other
item I above
chemical
environments + l5 to 50mm

0.60

0.65

+ Grade of concrete suitable only if air-entrained mix is used

For concrete
grade M25
and above as
in I + 25mm

Mild

Minimum concrete grade

3 Periodically as specified in
immersed in item I above
sea water
+ 50mm

Exposure

Moderate

bar * 2

For concrete
grade M25
and above as
in I + 20mm

4.

Mild

dia of

diameter =
12mm
immersed in
sea water

Nominal Cover

Conditions of exposure
mm

for columns

2 . Members

Table 3a : Nominal cover to all reinforcements (including links) to

meet durability requirements as per BS:8110

shall be provided. However, ACI 318 does not consider watercement ratio which is equally, if not more, important.
The minimum concrete cover required to be specified as
per Australian Standard Specifications for purposes of
corrosion protection is as per Table 5 8 .
Fig 1 shows the largest minimum covers specified for
reinforced concrete in the design codes of 14 countries 9 . These
apply to members exposed to severe climatic conditions. The
very wide range of permissible covers as seen from this figure
suggest an arbitrary element in their selection.

Devices to ensure specified concrete

cover
Site surveys reported from several countries indicate that the
cover specified is not maintained within the tolerance limits'.
The situation in India is more serious, considering the high
percentage of semi-skilled or unskilled labour ' 5 . It should be
noted that the surveys reported refer only to pre-pour situations, which do not consider the possibility of bars getting
displaced during the concreting operations." ". It is also to
be noted that too large covers will result in the reduction of
effective depths and too little cover may lead to deterioration
of concrete due to corrosion.

The Indian Concrete Journal * April 1997

Table 4 : Minimum cover for reinforcement in concrete not exposed

to weather or not in contact with ground (as per AC1 318-95)
Cast-in-place
(non-prestressed).
nun

Slab, walls & joists :

45mm diameter and
55mm diameter bars

up to 35 mm
diameter bars
Beams, columns :

Primary
reinforcement

Ties, stirrups
spirals

40 (50)*

30

15

20 (40)*

40 (50)*
40 (50)*

Precast
(manufactured
under plant
control).
nun

40

10

Prestressed
(but not precast).

Minimum carer to relevant steel. nun

Exposure classification

Bar, tendon, or duct size. nun

Mitt

< 13 'tun 13 to 20 mm > 20 nun

30

Fully enclosed within a building except for a

brief period of exposure during construction*

15

20

25

Exposed to average humidity < 50 percent

and annual rainfall < 500 min*

20

25

30

20

Exposed to average humidity 50 pecent to

80 percent and rainfall < 1000 me*

20

25

30

Exposed to average humidity 65 percent to

100 percent annual average maximum daily
temperature > 25C and annual average
rainfall > 1200 mm

Very severe conditions***

25

30

40

30

40

50

41)

Table 5 : Minimum reinforcement cover for the protection of

reinforcement, tendons or ducts from corrosion (as per AS 3600-1988)

30

* exposed to weather or in contact with ground

It is essential that proper guidelines are made available to site

engineers and supervisors. BS 8110 : Part 1 : 1985, section
seven has given a thought to this problem and has recommended certain specifications, chief amongst which are the
" wing :
(i) spacers, chairs and other supports should be used
to maintain the specified nominal cover to
reinforcement
(ii) spacers or chairs should be placed at a maximum spacing of lm
(iii) material for spacers should be durable, and it
should neither lead to corrosion of reinforcement
nor cause spalling of concrete cover

* For slabs subjected to this type of exposure, the cover may he reduced by 5mm for
M32 grade concrete or higher.
** For slabs subjected to this type of exposure, the cover may be reduced by 5mm for
M40 grade concrete or higher.
*** Minimum values in some circumstances may be even higher.

as the starting points of corrosion. Blue metal jelly or broken

mosaic tiles are also used as cover blocks. Most often, they
are not placed in regular intervals and are of non-uniform size
and shape. In countries like USA, Germany and Japan, cover
blocks made of cement mortar, asbestos cement, metal or plastic manufactured in factory and available readymade are
used' 4 . Hence, these cover blocks are uniform and their quality
is also of the required standard. As shown in Figs 3 and 4,
they are either tied to the reinforcement bars or placed just
between the bars and the shuttering. According to the required

(iv) mix used for spacer blocks should be comparable

in strength, durability, porosity and appearance
to the surrounding concrete
(v) nominal cover should be checked before and
during concreting
(vi) the position of reinforcement in hardened
concrete should also be checked with the help of
a cover meter.

Maximum
0

At several construction sites, stone chips are used as bar

supports which may get dislodged during concreting operations and the bars may rest directly on the shuttering leaving
little or no cover to the bars. Many times small cover blocks
made of cement mortar are cast before concreting and are
placed below the reinforcing bars. They are usually of poor
quality compared to that of the concrete placed in the member. Hence, instead of protecting the reinforcement, they act

April 1997 * The Indian Concrete Journal

cover _ mm
O

ACI 318 - 95
Austria
Belgium
CEBI F IP model code
Denmark

The British Cement Association has brought out a

publication which gives recommendations to the number and
position of spacers and ties required to provide active cover
to reinforcement in the most common RC members, which
could serve as a reference to site supervisors to readily check
compliance' 3 . Fig 2 shows an illustration from the above
mentioned reference for slab reinforcement.

Ii

France
W. Germany
Netherlands
Nor way
Sweden
Switzer land
U
USSR
India 1S:456 -1978

Fig 1 Minimum covers for worst exposure conditions in

various national codes'

199

Side view of SpaClT

Plan view of stmcer

Front elevation
(a)

(c)

(a) Mortarblmks
(b) Asbesicts cement blcdc
(c) Plastic ring spacer
(d) Plastic clipfor single bor

Fig 3 Devices to ensure good concrete cover

has been found to be more practicable and effective for large

horizontal surfaces such as floor slabs, deck slabs, etc.

Si:racer:at 5(10mrno.c.or lessinboth
horizoritttnections

Plan
Fig 2 Spacers for a slab reinforced with welded fabric with no

edge reinforcement

thickness of cover, the size of the cover blocks may be chosen.

In RC slabs, when reinforcement is provided at top and bottom,
chairs should be provided, so that they are kept at the required
distance. If these chairs are not provided, the reinforcement
bars may be bent or distorted due to the movement of men
during concreting. These chairs also maintain the top cover
for the top reinforcement. They should be placed at sufficient
intervals. In India, such chairs are very rarely provided,
leading to reduced strength of reinforced concrete elements
(especially when the rods are cranked).

Another method has been developed and used in Japan

since 1985 to improve the quality of concrete in the cover region. The idea is based on reducing the water-cement ratio of
concrete in the cover region. This is realised by development
and use of permeable formwork in which the normal
formwork sheeting is lined with double-woven synthetic fabric on the inner face in contact with concrete. When concrete
is placed and vibrated, the excess water is drained off through
the fabric's . This results in a higher impermeability in the
cover region, thus providing effective, long-term protection
to the reinforcement.
The quality of cover also needs to be enhanced by increasing the cement content, reduced water-cement ratio and using
higher grade of concrete for the entire volume of concrete in
the structure. It has to be noted that the draft Indian code has
increased the minimum grade of concrete to M20 for reinforced
concrete, whereas other developed countries do not use less
than M30 concrete in reinforced concrete structures, Table 2.

Super cover concrete

Researchers at the South Bank University, U.1( have proposed
a radical new and patented technique caiitd "Super cover

Enhancing quality of cover

Attempts have been made in the past to reduce the watercement ratio of the surface layers of low/medium strength
concrete in order to improve the protective properties. This is
similar to case hardening of steel. The process of vacuum
dewatering of concrete was thus developed. In this process,
some of the excess water not required for hydration of the
cement is withdrawn by means of a vacuum, subsequent to
placement of the concrete, thus reducing the water-cement
ratio in the region. The system requires a filtering mat to draw
off the excess water without the fine aggregates from the
concrete and a vacuum pump. However, the vacuum process

200

12 to 20

mm 0

(b)

(a) For light teinfocxxxnait

( b ) Heavy chairthr large spicing

Fig 4 Metal chairs

The Indian Concrete Journal April 1997

Hence, instead of simply increasing the thickness of concrete cover, sufficient experimental research should be done
to study the influence of these increased covers on the behaviour of reinforced concrete elements.

Conclusions

Cover to mom
steel 100mm

-r

Steel rebor
Spacer
Glass.Fibre Reinforced
Plastic (GRP) rebar

Cover to GRP rebor 40mm

Adequate concrete cover is very important for durable RC

structures. This aspect has been re-emphasised in this paper.
Certain methods and devices which could improve the quality
of the cover have been included. It is also found that just an
increase in the concrete cover does not ensure durable
structures; on the contrary, it can have a negative result on
some of the desirable properties.
References

Fig 5 Schematic diagram of the Supercover concrete system"

1.

concrete". This aims to combine the advantages of steel and

Fibre Composite Reinforcements (FCR) 16 .

2. PRAKASH RAO, D.S., Design Principles and Detailing of Concrete Structures,

Tata McGraw Hill Publishing Co. Ltd., New Delhi, 1995.

NEVILLE, A., Corrosion of reinforcement, Concrete, V.17, N.6, June 1983,

pp48-50

This technique involves using traditional steel

reinforcement together with concrete covers in excess of
100 , xi thus providing a lifetime barrier to carbondioxide and
chioride attack - with a limited amount of FCR at a nominal
depth of, say 40mm, to control cracking in the cover as shown
in Fig 5. This additional reinforcement is attached to the main
steel and offset with spacers.

3. TADAO NISHI, Outline of the studies in Japan regarding the neutralisation

of alkali (or carbonation) of concrete, RILEM International Symposium on
Testing of Concrete, Prague, 1982.

Preliminary results from tests on super cover concrete

suggests that the structural behaviour is not impaired and that
the surface crack widths are within the BS 8110 limit of 0.3
mm'". Though the cost may increase due to the extra cover
and FCR, it was found to be cheaper than cathodic protection.

6.

Effect of increased cover thickness

Recent work has shown the critical role a 50 to 70 mm concrete cover plays in protecting the reinforcement against corrosion in an aggressive environment". It was also shown that
high concentration of chloride ions reside in thin covers up to
40 mm.
However, it is seen that using a thick cover of 50 to70 mm
will lead to increased crack widths that exceed the maximum
limits permitted by the codes. If the spacing of the wide cracks
are less than twice the cover thickness (S < 2C), which may be
the case for a thick cover, then there will be a reduction in the
effectiveness of the thick cover in protecting the steel bars
against corrosion. Hence both the requirements (crack width
and cover) are to be coupled for meeting durability requirements ' 8 .
Streit and others have shown the negative influence of an
increased concrete cover (specified for durability consideration) upon the resistance of reinforced concrete 19. They examined the influence of an increased concrete cover on the
transverse tensile stress in the case of a cover (with and without
inclined reinforcement) subjected to positive bending
moments and showed that a thick cover leads to substantial
increase of the transverse tensile stresses in concrete and
subsequent decrease of the failure moment, compared to
members with smaller concrete cover.

April 1997 S The Indian Concrete Journal

4. MORGAN, P.R., SMITH, N.M.H. and ZYHAJLO E., Slab reinforcement

location versus code specifications, Civil Engineering Transactions, The
Institution of Engineers (Australia). V. CE28, N.3, 1986, pp 147-152
5.

IS : 456 -1978, Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete, Bureau
of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
BS 8110: Part I - 1985, Structural use of concrete : Code of Practice for
special circumstances, British Standards Institution, London.
ACI Committe 318, Building code requirements for reinforced concrete
MCI 318-95)a nd ionnnentary (AC1318 R-95), American Concrete Institute,

Detroit, 1995.

8. AS 3600-1988, Concrete Structures, Standards Association of

Australia, Sydney, 1988.
9. BEEBY, A.W., Cracking, cover and corrosion of reinforcement, Concrete
International, February 1983, pp.35-40.
10. RANGASWAMY, N.S., and others Corrosion survey of bridges, The Indian
Concrete Journal, V.61, N.6, June 1987, pp.158-160
11. SCHLAICH, J., and SCHAEFER, K., Konstruieren im stahlbetonbau, BetonKalender, Part II, Wilhelm Ernst Sr Sohn, Berlin-Munich, 1984, pp 787-1005
12. PRAKASH RAO, D.S.,ANURADHA, V and MENZES, N., Codes of Practice
and construction practice - A correlation, The Indian Concrete Journal, V.65,

N.12, Dec.1991, pp.607-613

13.
Achieving concrete cover to reinforcement on site, BCA Bulletin,
June 1988, No.2, p.3
14. LOt !MEYER, G., Stahlbetonbau - Bemessung, Konstruktion, Ausfuehrung, B.G.
Teubner, Stuttgart, Germany, 1983.
15. REDDI S.A., Permeable form work for impermeable concrete, The Indian
Concrete Journal, V66, N.1, January 1992, pp.31-35.
16. ARYA, C., Super Cover Concrete, Concrete, July/August 1994, pp. 30-31.
17. SWAMY R N, Durability of reinforcement in concrete, Durability of Concrete,
CP - 131, American Concrete Institute, Detroit 1992, p 67.
18. MAKHLOUF, H.M. and MALHAS, PA., The effect of thick concrete cover
on the maximum flexural crack width under service load, AC! Structural
Journal, V.93, N.3, May-June 1996, pp.257-265
19. STREIT, W., FED( J., KUPFER, H., Transverse tension decisive for compression
resistance of concrete cover, Proceedings of IABSE colloquium on structural
concrete, Stuttgart, April 1991, pp 761-766.

201