MEASURING WATER PERMEABILITY OF

CONCRETE AND ITS APPLICATIONS

A.P. MESIC BE(HoNs), GRADIEAusT
PosToP.ADo A TP Sil TDPNT
SCHOOL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

D.L. BEAL BEQLD, MENoScNSW, DIC, MSCLOND, MIEAUST

SENIOR LECTURER
SCHOOL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

R.J. HEYWOOD BE(HoNs), MENGSC, PHD, MIEAusT

SENIOR LECTURER AND HEAD OF THE DESIGN CONSTRUCTION GROUP
SCHOOL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

Anthony Mesic completed a part-time Bachelor of

Engineering Degree with First Class Honours at
QUT in 1991. While studying, he worked for
Q'Build Project Services and worked there for a
year after graduation. Anthony was awarded a QUT
Postgraduate Research Award in 1992 and is
currently working full-time on a PhD program at the
University. His interests include concrete durability
and in particular, surface coatings.

David Beal has lectured in concrete technology and

design at QUT since 1973. His research and
consultation areas include materials and the
durability aspects of concrete structures. Prior to
joining QUT, David was a bridge design and
construction engineer for the Main Roads
Department, NSW and Travers Morgan and Partners,
England.

Rob Heywood is a Senior Lecturer at the School of

Civil Engineering and a Principal Researcher of the
Physical Infrastructure Centre at the Queensland
University of Technology. The first decade of his
career was spent designing and supervising the
construction of bridges, buildings, dams and
industrial projects with Cameron McNamara Pty Ltd
and Bomhorst and Ward Pty Ltd. The bridge design
theme has continued with a bridge research focus
since joining QUT in 1985. His research interests
include the loads applied to bridges, their testing,
evaluation, design, and detailing as well as their
efficient and safe utilisation for the benefit of
industry and the community.

PAPER NO. 18
ABSTRACT: Concrete durability is increasingly becoming of major concern to the
practising engineer today. Structures are required to withstand harsh environments while
still performing to community expectations.
Test methods for determining concrete durability are available, with one such test being
Water Permeability. The apparatus, as currently available at QUT, is capable of measuring
Coefficients of Water Permeability as low as K = 10-16 m/s. The cell can also be modified
to test for Gas Permeability.
This paper introduces the testing apparatus as used to measure Water Permeability, and
demonstrates its abilities and limitations to the design, construction and management of
concrete structures.

PAPER NO. 18
 1. INTRODUCTION

Concrete durability is of major concern to the practising engineer today. With the diverse
climate that Australia possesses, concrete structures are being subjected to hostile
environments with a large probability of having durability problems.

Various methods of testing for concrete durability are available, with Water Permeability
being one of the most well known. The test, as the name suggests, determines the flow of
water under pressure through a concrete specimen.

A Water Permeability rig developed in Canada and refined in England is currently

available and in use at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT). The rig has the
ability to measure Coefficients of Water Permeability as low as K = 10-16 m/s. The
equipment is versatile in that Gas Permeability can also be measured with no modifications
to the permeability cell. The focus of this paper is to introduce the Water and Gas
Permeability testing apparatus and demonstrate its abilities and limitations to the design,
construction and management of concrete structures.

2. GENERAL

Most of the aggressive elements that can cause concrete deterioration are transported into
concrete via the medium of water. It would seem reasonable that calculating the Water
Permeability of concrete would give a good indication of how well a concrete structure
could resist these water borne elements and hence an indication of the concrete's durability.

Typical durability problems encountered by concrete where the presence of water is a

necessary condition (I) include: Chloride attack, Sulphate attack, Frost Resistance, and
Alkali-Aggregate Attack. For other forms of deterioration, eg. Carbonation, water vapour
still needs to be present at the level of the reinforcement to cause corrosion.

There is quite a history of Water Permeability testing apparatus development since the late
1800's. Most of these are documented by Collins et al (2) and by The Concrete Society (3).
Like those of today, they mostly followed the principles of Darcy's Law by attempting to
measure flows under pressure through saturated samples of concrete or cement paste.
Obviously, the measuring devices and data collection systems used were not as advanced
as those used today. They however serve to illustrate that the testing techniques used to
measure concrete Water Permeability, in principle, have not changed much in the last 100
years.

It should also be noted that there are problems inherent in permeability measurements (4).
The permeating fluid is probably the most critical. For Water Permeability measurements,
the water will react with the concrete, continuing hydration, especially when testing
incompletely cured samples. This will cause blocking of the pores and therefore reduce the
sample's permeability. Water can also dissolve some solids in one location and precipitate
these out in another location. Again, this has the effect of reducing permeability.

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-1

Other factors such as what part of a sample do you take for permeability measurement, the
effect of the amount of confining pressure, how the sample is prepared and how you
actually measure the flow, all have an effect on the value of permeability obtained.

Even the concept of measuring flow under pressure should be questioned. Most methods
of water uptake into concrete are by diffusion techniques and generally, not by pressure.
The tester should be aware of what they are trying to achieve with their measurements (3).
If you are testing a submerged structure, Water Permeability is probably applicable
whereas, if the structure is in the atmospheric zone, gas or water vapour diffusion
techniques would be more applicable.

Even when procedures may be followed systematically, the coefficient of variation

reported for the same sample of concrete is large. Coefficients as large as 51.9% have been
noted by Hooton (4 ) using 3 replicates per test for 22 year old mass concrete.

3. WATER PERMEABILITY APPARATUS

The Water Permeability testing apparatus as located at QUT, was developed to its current
status by Hearn and Mills (5). A general layout of the apparatus is shown in Figure 1. The
permeability cell is enlarged for more detail in Figure 2.

Outflow Cylinder Permeability Cell Loading Arm

1
Screw hick
LVDT 0

Bleed

Wei Ms
nflow Cylinder
Cai

C
V
For Vacuum Nosing Preasure Transducer

Figure 1: General Layout of the Water Permeability Apparatus

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-2

The apparatus consists of a loading arm with free weights, which pressurises the water in
the inflow cylinder via a piston. The pressurised water then flows into the permeability
cell. In the cell, the saturated sample is restrained by an external stainless steel ring with
Room Temperature Vulcanised (RTV) Silicone rubber ring seals which do not allow any
water to flow down the sides of the sample. The water flows under pressure through the
sample and is collected in an outflow cylinder. The outflow piston is free floating,
allowlf* outflow to be constantly monitored.

All data necessary for calculations is collected automatically by the use of Linear Voltage
Displacement Transducers (LVDT's) and a pressure transducer. LVDT's are placed on the
inflow cylinder and the outflow cylinder. Any movement in the pistons can be detected
and these are constantly monitored to calculate inflow and outflow data. A pressure
transducer is used to measure the pressure on the inflow stream. This information is
collected by a data logger and stored for use in calculations at a later date.

\/
Bleed Valve Inflow Point

Top Plate

S.S. Outer ring

Outer RTV Silicone Rubber Seal

Inner RTV Silicone Rubber Seal

Bottom Plate

Base

Outflow Point

Figure 2: Detail of the Permeability Cell

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 8-3

 This test, like most other Water Permeability tests, utilises Darcy's Law (Equation 1) in the
calculation of Water Permeability.

Q k dP
= (1)
A T1 l

By Integration, the Intrinsic Permeability k is defined as:

= (2)
AP

where:

k= Intrinsic Permeability (m2)

Q = Flow Rate = Volume / Time (m3/s)

L= Length of Sample (m)

A = Cross Sectional Area of Sample (m2)

P = Applied Pressure (Pa)

= Viscosity of Fluid (Pa.$) (Water at 20 C = 1.002 * 10-3 Pa.$)

The Intrinsic Permeability (m2) depends purely upon the characteristics of the porous
medium and is independent of the characteristics of the fluid. The value, Coefficient of
Permeability, K is dependent upon the fluid characteristics and has the units of (m/s). To
convert between Coefficient of Permeability and Intrinsic Permeability, Equation 3 is used.

k (3)
Pg

where:

k= Intrinsic Permeability (m2)

K = Coefficient of Permeability (m/s)

= Viscosity of Fluid (Pa.$) (Water = 1.002 * 10-3 Pa.s at 20 C)

p = Density of Fluid (kg/m3) (Water = 998.2 kg/m3 at 20 C)

g = Acceleration Due to Gravity = 9.81m/s2

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-4

Substituting the values into Equation 3, the following conversion factor can be used for
Water Permeability.

k=1.023*10- K (4)

By using Intrinsic Permeability, either water or gas flow may be used to characterise the
concrete's permeability. In reality, it has been noted that this does not always occur.
Intrinsic Permeability values measured by gas are generally greater than the values
measured using a liquid. The phenomenon of gas slippage is said to be responsible for this
occurrence. A correction factor should be applied to the gas values to obtain the "true"
Intrinsic Permeability of the sample.

4. TEST PROCEDURE

4.1 Samples

Samples used are generally 150mm (6") or 100mm (4") in diameter. Other sizes may be
used, however this requires the casting of different RTV rings. If the 150mm sample is
used, only one RTV Silicone rubber seal is required whereas for the 100mm sample, two
rings are required. The sample is generally 50mm thick. Fifty millimetres is generally
seen as being the minimum value required when testing a concrete with a maximum
aggregate size of 20mm nominal.

Before samples can be placed into the permeability cell, they must be vacuum saturated.

4.2 Vacuum Saturation

Samples are placed in a desiccator and submitted to a vacuum of 760mm Hg for 3 hours.
After the 3 hour period, de-aired water is introduced into the desiccator, fully submerging
the samples. The vacuum is then applied for another 1 hour. Samples are ready for testing.

4.3 Equipment Setup

Once vacuum saturation is completed, the sample is placed in the cell as shown in Figure 2.
To do this, the sample is placed in the RTV Silicone rubber seals and then placed into the
stainless steel ring. All rings must be greased with Silica grease only. Vaseline is not
adequate as it may perish.

Once the sample is in the cell, the top plate is lowered onto the seals and the screw jack
tightened. This ensures that a seal is created between the sample and the rings.

All air must be removed from all lines and cylinders. This is done using a vacuum pump
and bleeding of the cell. Extreme care should be taken to ensure ALL air is removed
from ALL lines. Only de-aired water should be used when testing. Once all air is
removed from the lines, de-aired water is introduced into all lines from a reservoir.

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-5

Pressure can now be applied to the system. This is done by placing free weights onto the
loading arm. For the loading arm used, 40kg relates to approximately 950 kPa pressure.
The pressure can be adjusted by varying the loading arm radius or by varying the amounts
of weights applied.

After the weights are applied, the valves can be opened. If all air has been removed from
the system and all seals are working, there should be NO movement in the loading arm. If
movement does occur in the loading arm, further bleeding of the system is required.

The electronics required for monitoring the inflow, outflow and pressure need to be started,
as well as the program to run the data logger to collect the information. The test can be left
as is without supervision. Every 10 minutes, the data logger records a burst of 10 readings
over a period of about 2 seconds from the LVDT's and the pressure transducer. The 10
values are averaged and the average value is passed by the data logger to the storage
module for retention. This is used to minimise any noise in the system.

The only supervision required is to inspect the loading arm and the outflow cylinders daily.
If the loading arm has nearly reached the end of its travel, the valves should be closed and
the cylinder refilled, using the reservoir. This operation only takes 30 seconds. The
outflow piston should also be checked to ensure there is no leakage past the piston or that
the travel of the piston has not expired.

Data from the storage module should be taken daily and calculations to determine the
permeability made. The data can be retrieved in a form that facilitates direct transfer to a
spreadsheet where calculations are carried out and diagrams can be drawn.

4.4 Calculations

Equation (2) is used to determine the intrinsic permeability of the concrete.

5. TIME TO DO A TEST

The testing time obviously varies depending upon the sample of concrete being tested and
the pressure being applied. Generally for a 25MPa concrete, tested at 28 days, the test
would run approximately 1 week.

The most reliable method of determining when the value of permeability should be
calculated is when the rates of inflow and outflow are equal. At this point, the test
condition of inflow equalling outflow is satisfied and Darcy's Law can be implemented.

A typical plot, Figure 3 (from Collins (2) after Ruettgers et al), shows how the rates of
inflow and outflow change with time and eventually come together. For pure equilibrium,
the graph should be horizontal after inflow equals outflow but the rates of inflow and
outflow tend to decrease with time. The decreasing rates of inflow and outflow can most
likely be attributed to continual hydration and migration of fines within the concrete
specimen.

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-6

The test will practically run for 24 hours maximum after the condition of inflow equalling
outflow is reached.

111 , 11 , , i 1
280,000 Concrete Permeability Tests
X
Typical Rate of Flow Curves
) Mean of 3-6 -X6" Specimens-#91,192,193
240,000 Mix:4.04 w/C 0.67,Pressure:4007/inl
No.e.OutfIcw is Corrected for Evaporation--
200,000
0.

160,000
a.

120,000

0 80,000 , Inflow
a.
0 40,000
0 0 c
.--- 3-41t"*-
Outflow
0 ,
0 100 200 300 400 500
Time on Test in Hours

Figure 3: Typical plot of Permeability (m/s) versus Time (hours)

(Collins (2) after Ruettgers et al)

6. TYPICAL VALUES

The apparatus has only had limited use at QUT. Preliminary results of some tests carried
out so far are contained in Table 1.

The test program involved determining the effect that curing has on the Water Permeability
of various mixes. Three mixes, an Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC), OPC and Flyash, and
an OPC with Flyash and Slag were tested. Each mix was cast into standard cylinders and
placed in the fog room at 27 2 C after demoulding. The cylinders were left in the fog
room until tested. At testing, a 50mm slice was taken from the cylinder using a diamond
saw. The Water Permeability testing was carried out as outlined earlier in this report.

These tests show that as a concrete ages and has more curing, the value of Water
Permeability decreases, as would be expected.

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-7

 Mix Age at Compressive Coefficient of Intrinsic
Test Strength Permeability Permeability

(Days) MPa K (m/s) k (m2)

OPC 3 13.9 1.52 * 10-11 1.55 * 10-18

OPC 14 21.5 8.97 * 10 -12 9.18 * 10-19

OPC 28 22.3 1.70 * 10-12 1.74 * 10-19

OPC + Flyash 3 10 2.69 * 10-11 2.75 * 10-18

OPC + Flyash 14 16 1.21 * 10-11 1.24 * 10-18

OPC + Flyash 28 20 2.67 * 10-12 2.73 * 10-19

OPC + Flyash + Slag 3 8 1.99 * 10-11 2.04 * 10-18

OPC + Flyash + Slag 14 18 2.74 *10-12 2.80* 10-19

OPC + Flyash + Slag 28 24.5 7.85 *10-13 8.03 * 10-20

Table 1: Results of Wafer Permeability Tests at QUT

More significant testing of the equipment has been carried out by Bin Ahmad (6) in
Canada. From this work, conclusions were made that categorised concrete depending upon
the mode of curing. Values of Intrinsic Permeability denote whether the concrete has a
high, average or low permeability value, (Table 2). No mention is made as to how this
relates to the expected life of the concrete.

Air Cured Moist Cured

Rating Intrinsic Rating Intrinsic

Permeability (m2) Permeability (m2)

High > 10-17 -

Average 10-17 - 10-19 Average > 10-19

Low < 10-19 Low < 10-19

Table 2: Characterisation of Concrete using Water Permeability (Bin Ahmad)

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-8

7. ALTERNATIVE DURABILITY TEST METHODS

There are seen to be two methods of testing for concrete durability. These are classified as
Permeability tests or Absorption tests. The Permeability tests include Water Permeability,
Gas Permeability and Rapid Chloride Permeability (ASTM C1202-91), while the
Absorption tests include Sorptivity, ISAT (BS 1881) and Absorption (ASTM C642-90).

7.1 Gas Permeability

As noted earlier, the apparatus is able to be used for Gas Permeability measurements. The
loading arm is replaced by a Nitrogen gas cylinder with regulator and the outflow cylinder
is replaced by a soap bubble flowmeter. The cell itself remains untouched. This
equipment is currently being assembled and tested at QUT.

The test compared to that for Water Permeability is extremely fast. The test only takes
about 15 minutes to perform compared to the days or weeks required for a Water
Permeability result. Problems are encountered in this test as moisture acts as a barrier to
the gas. The sample must be dried or all samples must be conditioned to a constant
moisture content before testing. The preferred method of drying is by solvent exchange
(using Propanol) and drying in a vacuum oven at reduced temperatures, about 50 C.

7.2 Rapid Chloride Permeability Test

Of the Permeability tests, this is the only one recognised as a standard test method, ASTM
C1202-91. The test involves applying 60 0.1 Volts across a concrete sample with one
end of the sample immersed in Sodium Chloride and the other Sodium Hydroxide. The
test runs for a period of 6 hours and measures the current flowing through the completed
circuit. Integrating the current versus time plot yields the total amount of charge
(Coulombs) passed through the sample in that 6 hour period. The standard gives definite
limits on a concretes rating, depending upon the total amount of charge passed (Table 3).

7.3 ISAT

This test is recognised by the British Standards in BS 1881 and can be used on laboratory
or field concrete. The test measures the rate at which water is absorbed into the surface of
concrete. It does not measure the bulk permeability of concrete. The method of preparing
the specimen must be questioned as oven drying to 105 5 C is used until constant mass
is achieved. Field samples can only be tested if no water has fallen onto the test surface in
the previous 48 hours. This still does not ensure that a constant moisture content has been
obtained within the concrete over all field samples tested.

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-9

 Charge Passed Chloride Ion Penetrability

(Coulombs)

> 4000 High

2000 - 4000 Moderate

1000 - 2000 Low

100 - 1000 Very Low

< 100 Negligible

Table 3: Chloride Ion Penetrability based on Charge Passed (ASTM C1202-91)

7.4 Absorption

This test is recognised by the American Standards in ASTM C 642-90. The test method
involves oven drying of concrete samples for not less than 24 hours at a temperature
between 100 - 110 C, immersion of these samples into water to obtain a saturated weight
and then boiling the sample for 5 hours. The immersed weight is then measured after the
sample has been cooled after boiling. Again, the effects of oven drying must be questioned
as this will change the microstructure of the concrete and can lead to erroneous results.

7.5 Sorptivity

This is a simple test with minimal equipment requirements that is gaining increased
attention by concrete specifiers. It is also contained as a draft standard in the ASTM (7).
The test has advantages over other absorption test methods as the conditioning of the
samples is not harsh. Solvent exchange with Propanol is used followed by drying the
sample in a vacuum oven at 50 C. Tests at QUT (8) have shown this method as being
quick, simple and can be used in lieu of permeability testing as a method to evaluate the
quality of a concrete mix and curing efficiency.

8. CONCLUSION

The ability to measure concrete durability accurately is difficult. As water is a common

mechanism for transporting aggressive elements into concrete, the thought has been that
the measurement of Water Permeability of Concrete would reflect the durability of the
concrete. This is true to a certain degree, but caution must be taken to ensure that the test
is used in its correct capacity.

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-10

One Water Permeability testing apparatus is currently in use at QUT which has the ability
to measure Coefficients of Water Permeability as low as K = 10-16 m/s. Initial trials
indicate that reasonable results are achieved with the equipment. More testing is required
before the equipment should be used as a tool for the acceptance or rejection of concretes
as the ability to rate concretes with this equipment has not been fully researched.

Other testing methods are available for concrete evaluation, but all have their limitations.
It is a case of determining what mechanism is required to be measured and selecting the
appropriate test method.

9. REFERENCES

1. Young, J.F. (1988), "A review of the Pore Structure of Cement Paste and Concrete and
its Influence on Permeability", Permeability of Concrete, ACI SP-108, David Whiting &
Arthur Waite editors, pp. 1-18.

2. Collins, J.F. et al. (1986), "Permeability of Concrete Mixtures. Part I: Literature

Review", Civil Engineering for Practicing and Design Engineers, Vol. 5, pp. 579-638.

3. Concrete Society. (1987), Permeability Testing of Site Concrete: A Review of Methods

and Experience, Technical Report No. 31.

4. Hooton, R.D. (1989), "Problems Inherent in Permeability Measurement", Proceedings

of Advances in Cement Manufacture and Use, Engineering Foundation, N.Y, pp. 143-154.

5. Hearn, N. and Mills, R.H. (1991), "A Simple Permeameter for Water or Gas Flow"
Cement and Concrete Research, Vol 21, pp. 257-261.

6. Bin Ahmad, R. (1991), "Characterization of Concrete Quality by Absorption and

Permeability Tests", Masters Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Toronto.

7. Hooton, R.D. (1992), "Proposed Test Method for Measurement of Absorption Rate of
Hydraulic Cement Mortars and Concretes", ASTM Committee C09.69 Task Group on
Permeability.

8. Hooton, R.D., Mesic, A.P. and Beal, D.L. (1993), "Sorptivity Testing of Concrete as an
Indicator of Concrete Durability and Curing Efficiency", Third Canadian Symposium on
Cement and Concrete, The Citadel Inn Ottawa, August 3 to 4, pp. 264-278.

Mesic, Beal, and Heywood 18-11

 -
f.
Rt.

R3,

yl

L.

T r.

- -