Paper No.

08302

ARRESTING AND PREVENTING CORROSION OF STEEL IN CONCRETE.*

Nigel Davison and Adrian Roberts

Concrete Preservation Technologies
6 William Lee Buildings, Nottingham Science & Technology Park
Nottingham, NG7 2RQ, UK

Gareth Glass
Department of Civil Engineering
University of Birmingham
Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK

ABSTRACT

Corrosion of steel reinforcement is a major factor affecting the durability of reinforced

concrete structures. To address this problem an improved electrochemical treatment consisting of
two phases has been developed. Firstly a high current is briefly driven to the steel to arrest
corrosion. In the process corroding sites are moved from the steel to an installed anode system. This
first phase lasts about 1 week. Galvanic protection is then provided. This is low maintenance and
requires no user intervention to function. A single anode system consisting of a hybrid of impressed
current and sacrificial technologies is installed to deliver the protection current in both phases. The
anode system will typically contain enough charge to provide galvanic protection current for 50
years. This depends on the aggressive nature of the environment. The two phase treatment has now
been applied to more than 10 structures around the world including bridges, car parks, marine
structures and buildings and the first laboratory trial in heavily chloride contaminated concrete
continues to deliver outstanding performance. Monitoring has been tailored to meet end user
requirements and in every case tested steel passivity has been achieved.

Copyright
©2008 by NACE International. Requests for permission to publish this manuscript in any form, in part or in whole must be in writing to NACE
International, Copyright Division, 1440 South creek Drive, Houston, Texas 777084. The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are
solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association. Printed in the U.S.A.

1
INTRODUCTION
Steel in concrete is normally in a passive state as the result of the high alkalinity of the concrete
environment. However in the presence of chloride ions, localised passive film breakdown can occur,
accompanied by a local reduction in pH and corrosion induced deterioration (1, 2). Hydrochloric
acidl is produced by the dissolution of iron in the presence of chloride and water. The local
reduction is pH is considered to be an essential feature leading to significant deterioration and pH
values as low as 4 have been measured at corroding sites on steel in what is otherwise a very alkaline
concrete environment.
This work evaluates the use of a hybrid electrochemical treatment to arrest and prevent such
deterioration.

MODEL OF CORROSION AND PROTECTION

Figure 1 shows a section of the patential/pH stability diagram for iron and its oxides in water (3).
Steel in concrete is initially located in a region of pH greater than 12 where a passive oxide film will
form. The addition of chloride to the water does not thermodynamically affect this high pH
behaviour. However as a result of chloride contamination, a local pH reduction in an otherwise
highly alkaline environment can occur and corrosion induced deterioration, usually accompanied by
a fall in steel potential is the result.

1.8
1.6
1.4
Fe3+
1.2 b
Potential (V vs SHE)

1
0.8
Fe2O3
0.6
0.4 Corrosion Initiation
0.2
0
-0.2 Corrosion Arrest
-0.4 Fe2+
-0.6 Fe3O4
-0.8 Fe
-1
Fe
-1.2
-1.4
-1.6
-1.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
pH
Figure 1 Thermodynamic model of corrosion initiation and corrosion arrest.
One of the effects of an electrochemical treatment is to produce hydroxyl ions on the steel raising the
pH. A brief high current treatment may therefore be used to re-alkalize the acidic corrosion sites.
This pit re-alkalization process would lead to a restoration in steel passivity which is normally
accompanied by a rise in steel potential (4).

To sustain passivity a small galvanic current may be used to maintain the high pH at the steel. The
basis for this technology is provided by the inhibitive properties of hydroxyl ions. They are first
generated at a rapid rate on the steel to arrest the corrosion process and then maintained with a low
level galvanic treatment. This two phase treatment is referred to as a hybrid treatment.

2
HYBRID ELECTROCHEMICAL TREATMENT
Figure 2 shows a practical installation during the impressed current phase of the hybrid
electrochemical treatment. In this case the Duoguard 500 product has been used. Further details of
this product are provided elsewhere (5). It consists of a discrete sacrificial anode installed in a putty-
like backfill in a cavity in the concrete as a permanent installation. Figure 2 (inset) shows the
installation of the anode system in the in the putty in holes drilled into the sides a bridge beam (6).
This system has also been used on soffits.

A temporary power supply is for a period of one week during the impressed current phase to arrest
corrosion. In practice a fixed voltage is applied to restore the alkalinity of acidic corrosion sites.
The charge delivered is dependent on the aggressive nature of the concrete environment and is very
sensitive to the presence of chloride ions as these have a strong influence on the reaction kinetics at
the installed anode.

Hybrid Anodes in
Drilled Holes

Temporary DC
Power Supply
(present for ~ 1 week)

Figure 2 Impressed current stage of the hybrid electrochemical treatment (photo courtesy CPT Ltd).

After this brief initial treatment, the anode is connected directly to the steel to deliver galvanic
protection and the cables and anode are covered with a repair mortar. The putty hardens slowly to
form a week porous material containing an electrolyte. None of the components need be accessible
(7) as user intervention is limited. An example of this on a car park column is shown in Figure 3.

The galvanic generation of hydroxide sustains steel passivity. Current output is strongly affected by
the aggressive nature of the environment and increases with concrete temperature, chloride content
and moisture content. In benign environments, the current output decays to low values, while in
aggressive environments, a high current output has been sustained for years. The system has been
applied to more than 10 reinforced concrete structures to date and including bridges, car parks,
marine structures and buildings. The rate of consumption of charge in the anode system indicates
that current output will typically be sustained for 50 years.

3
 Anodes Embedded in
column in drilled holes

Figure 3 Galvanic stage of the hybrid electrochemical treatment (photo courtesy CPT Ltd).

Acceptance Criteria

Acceptance criteria are preferably based on inducing and maintaining negligible steel corrosion rates.
The focus of such a criterion is on the performance of the structure. Corrosion rates are commonly
assessed using a technique known as the polarization resistance method. The current required to
induce a small potential perturbation is used to calculate corrosion rate. The small perturbation
requirement may be relaxed if the complex equations that provide the basis for this method are
solved by iteration. This allows the use of more measurable potential shift data from site (8). Figure
4 shows an example of the calculation of the corrosion rate as a function of potential shift when the
applied current density is 2mA/m2. It includes the identification of corrosion rates commonly
considered to represent passive and active steel.
100
Corrosion
Risk
Active
Corrosion Rate (mA/m2)

Corrosion
10
Rates

1
Passive 2 mA/m 2
Dissolution
Rates
0.1
Passive
Steel
0.01
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Potential Shift (mV)

Figure 4 Calculated corrosion rate as a function of potential shift at an applied current of 2mA/m2.

Another criterion that might be applied is the 100mV potential decay criterion used in cathodic
protection. This criterion assesses the performance of the protection system. However this criterion
is dependent on the current output of the anodes and in benign environments with a low chloride

4
content, galvanic anode current output is low. Thus the 100mV potential decay criterion may only
be achieved in some situations.

It should be noted that monitoring is not critical to system function and while monitoring is always
advisable, monitoring intervals can be tailored to fit in with other structure requirements. For
example the monitoring interval can be tailored to fit in with annual or principle bridge inspections.

The life of the sacrificial anode system can be estimated from the charge and current output of the
anode system. One typical anode (Duoguard 500) holds a charge of approximately 130 Amp.hrs. 50
years of cathodic prevention at a current density of 1mA/m2 is equivalent to a charge of 450
Amp.hrs/m2. Utilization and efficiency need also to be considered in this calculation. The system
can be targeted to the area of need. It may also be noted that some of these anodes may still be
operated as impressed current anodes at the end of their life as galvanic anodes.

FIELD AND LABORATORY DATA

Laboratory Study

The hybrid system was tested in a concrete block containing 4% chloride by weight of cement. One
anode and 0.25m2 of steel were embedded in the concrete block. The anode and the steel were
connected to a 12 Volt DC power supply for a period of 18 days. At the end of this period, the DC
supply was removed and the anode was connected to the steel. The current delivered off the anode is
shown in Figure 5.

1000
Impressed current (pit re-alkalisation)
Current per anode (mA)

100

Galvanic current (galvanic cathodic prevention)

10

0.1
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time (days)
Figure 5 Current output from a hybrid anode embedded within a concrete block containing steel.

The current impressed off the anode by the power supply decayed to 50mA (8500 mA/m2 of anode
surface) in this aggressive environment. After this treatment, the current decayed to approximately
1mA (170 mA/m2 of anode surface) in galvanic mode. This relatively high current output has been
sustained for more than a year. It is in part attributed to the very aggressive nature of the
environment. The anode current output responds to the chloride content in the surrounding concrete
and chloride drawn to the anode depolarizes the anodic reaction kinetics.

5
A steel potential decay measured after 60 days is shown in Figure 6. Also included in this graph is
the potential of the steel prior to applying the treatment. It is evident that the open circuit potential of
the steel has shifted to significantly more positive values indicating that the steel is going passive.
-200

-250
Steel Potential (mV vs SCE)

-300 Potential Decay After Period of

Treatment
-350

-400 Potential Prior To Treatment

-450

-500

-550

-600
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Elapsed Time (min)

Figure 6 Potential decay of steel 60 days after initiating the hybrid electrochemical treatment.

Car Park Structure

A car park which contained the first site trial of the hybrid system is shown in Figure 7. The current
output of the system varies with temperature and also decays to a steady state within a few months of
the pit re-alkalization treatment. After 1 month the current output was approximately 3 mA/m2 of
steel.

Figure 7 Car park treated in part with a hybrid electrochemical system (photo courtesy CPT Ltd).

The potential decay determined on the steel in the trial area 1 month after the pit re-alkalization
treatment is given in Figure 8. In this instance 100mV of potential decay was achieved. However it
should be noted that this was not always the case. The magnitude of the potential decay combined
with the applied current indicates that the steel corrosion rate was substantially less than 1mA/m2
(0.001mm/yr).

6
 -280

-300
Steel Potential (mV vs MnO2)

-320

-340

-360 Potential decay to passive values

-380

-400

-420

-440
Reference-Steel IR drop = 28 mV
-460 at 3mA/m2 to the steel
-480
-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (min)

Figure 8 Steel potential decay determined after 1 month of galvanic protection.

Another method of monitoring applied to this structure used close interval potential mapping. Figure
9 shows a potential map determined on a segment of the structure after 1 month. The positions of the
installed anodes are clearly evident and no corrosion hot spots were identified on the steel (5).

Anode Anode

Cathode

Cathode
Anode Anode Anode

Figure 9 Potential map determined on a segment of the hybrid anode system.

Power Generation Plant, Saline Estuary

Figure 10 shows a photo of a power generation plant on a saline estuary subject to treatment with the
Duoguard 500 system. Data was obtained during an initial trial on this structure. Photos of the trial
area are shown in Figure 11. The soffits of reinforced concrete beams were repaired and the hybrid
anode system was installed in a targeted location just above the repair area.

During the galvanic phase, potentials in a line around the circumference of the treated beam
including the repaired soffit and two adjacent sides were measured. The measured potentials crossed
the line of the anodes on each side of the beam and the repaired soffit. The data is given in Figure
12. The location of the anodes is clearly evident and the data shows that the steel potential was
influence by the anodes at all locations between the installed anodes.

This and other data obtained on this trial were used to design a full scale repair for the structure. A
further contingency was added to the design of this system. The connection between the sacrificial
anodes and the steel were formed at an accessible location elsewhere on the structure. This
facilitates the re-application of the brief impressed current treatment in the future if the monitoring
data indicated that a risk was corrosion present.

7
Figure 10 Hydroelectric power generation plant in a saline estuary (photo courtesy CPT Ltd).

Figure 11 Corroded supporting beams treated with hybrid electrochemical treatment (photo courtesy
CPT Ltd).

Anode Locations
-200
Steel Potential (mV vs Cu/CuSO4)

-300

-400

-500

-600
Soffit Repair
-700

-800
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Distance (mm)

Figure 12 Potential map across anodes either side of a concrete repair.

8
Bridge

Figure 13 shows a photo of a bridge structure subjected to large scale hybrid electrochemical
treatment using the Duoguard 500 hybrid system. The bridge suffered from chloride induced
corrosion (Figure 13 - inset) arising from the use of de-icing salts and approximately 300m2 of steel
was targeted to receive protection.

Figure 13 Bridge suffering from chloride induced corrosion and treated with hybrid electrochemical
treatment (photo courtesy CPT Ltd).

Figure 14 shows the potential of the galvanic anode - steel couple and the measured corrosion rate
recorded during the first year after the initial pit re-alkalization treatment. The steel corrosion rates
were calculated from the applied current density and the steel potential decays. The data suggests
that the steel is passive and the environment is no longer an aggressive environment.

0
Steel corrosion rate (mA/m²)
Mixed potential ref Ag/AgCl (mV)

-50
0.32 0.34
0.24
0.59
-100

-150

-200

-250

-300
0 28 56 84 112 140 168 196 224 252 280 308 336
Time (days)

Figure 14 Steel potentials and corrosion rates in a treated bridge structure.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid electrochemical treatment comprising an impressed current phase followed by a sacrificial

phase has successfully been used to arrest and prevent reinforcement corrosion in concrete structures.
Corrosion is arrested with a powerful short term impressed current treatment that is followed by long
term galvanic prevention to ensure durability.

A sacrificial anode may be used in both the impressed current and sacrificial phases of the treatment.
An initial high current may be driven off the sacrificial anode to rapidly arrest corrosion damage by

9
inducing a more passive environment at the steel reinforcement. Corroding sites are effectively
moved from the protected steel to the sacrificial anode material during this process.

Protection is achieved by changing the chemistry at the concrete steel interface. Re-alkalization of
acidic corrosion sites is an important factor promoting passive film formation and a small galvanic
current maintains the high alkalinity at the steel.

Performance may be monitored using corrosion rate data calculated from potential shifts and applied
current densities. Potential mapping with the anode system connected to the steel may also be
undertaken. The detection of anode areas at the location of the installed anodes and the absence of
anodic areas between the installed anodes indicates that the system is functioning and there is
negligible corrosion risk.

Advantages of the treatment include the rapid inhibition of steel corrosion eliminating further
concrete spalling, the brief on site treatment time limiting structure downtime, no regular
maintenance requirement and an inspection regime that can be tailored to fit in with other inspection
requirements for the structure.

REFERENCES
1. ‘Mechanism of corrosion protection in reinforced concrete marine structures’, C.L.Page
Nature, 258(5535): pp.514-515, 1975.
2. ‘Deterioration of Steel Reinforced Concrete’, G.K.Glass, Encyclopedia of Comprehensive
Structural Integrity, Volume 6, Environmentally Assisted Failure, Eds. I Milne, R Ritchie, B
Karihaloo, (Elsevier Science, Oxford) Chapter 7, pp. 321-350, 2003.
3. ‘Thermodynamics and Corrosion’, M.Pourbaix, Corrosion Science, 30 pp.963-988, 1990.
4. 'Pit realkalisation and its role in the electrochemical repair of reinforced concrete', G.K.Glass,
N.Davison and A.C.Roberts, Journal of Corrosion Science and Engineering, Volume 8, Paper
10, 2006
5. ‘Hybrid electrochemical treatment in the repair of corrosion damaged concrete’, in Concrete
Platform 07 - Proceedings of the International Conference, Queens University Belfast, Glass,
G. K., Roberts A. C. and Davison N., pp 489-501, 19-20 April 2007.
6. 'Electrochemically induced passivation of steel reinforcement in concrete' A.C.Roberts,
G.KGlass, and N.Davison,in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Concrete
Repair, St-Malo, Brittany. 27th to 29th June 2006.
7. 'Inhibiting chloride induced reinforcement corrosion', N.Davison, G.K.Glass, and A.C.Roberts,
Corrosion 2006, NACE, Paper No. 06353, (March, 2006).
8. ‘Criteria for novel electrochemical treatments of steel in concrete’, , Proceedings of the 7th
International Conference on Concrete in Hot and Aggressive Environments, G.K.Glass,
A.C.Roberts and N.Davison, Volume 2, p.477-492, 13-15 October 2003.

10