Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cement and Concrete Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cemconres

Durability, service life prediction, and modelling for reinforced concrete T

structures – review and critique
⁎
Mark Alexander , Hans Beushausen
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Cape Town, South Africa

A B S T R A C T

Ever increasing attention is being paid to deterioration prediction and service life modelling of reinforced concrete structures. Research has progressed to a stage
where service life models and design philosophies are, to varying degrees, included in some codes and standards, such as the fib Model Codes and ISO 13823. This has
helped to base practical durability design on sound engineering approaches. This paper reviews service life modelling and prediction, and service life design, covering
limit state design philosophies and deterioration models. An overview on recent developments, and a critical review on common assumptions in service life modelling
and on the application and limitations of the various approaches, are presented. It is emphasised that design approaches and models need to be validated with field
observations. It is argued that a performance-based approach is the most suitable engineering tool for durability design.

1. Introduction Even well-designed and -constructed concrete structures, which

This paper addresses durability, service life prediction, and model-
ling for reinforced concrete (RC) structures. These are reviewed holi-
stically, and the links between them are explored. The main focus of the
paper is on durability and reinforcement corrosion of RC structures,
since this represents by far the majority of field problems.
Most concrete structures are durable and perform satisfactorily, at
least within current service life expectations of 50 years or so. The ‘new’
challenge is that of extending RC durability to service lives of 100 years,
or even several hundred years in the case of nuclear-containment
structures. However, before tackling the technical aspects of this issue,
questions need to be asked: what are societal expectations in regard to
the durability of concrete structures that dominate the built environ-
ment?; what do modern societies and communities require in terms of
longevity of their structures, particularly public infrastructure, which
represents their shared heritage?; is it a reasonable expectation that
such structures should last much longer than the usually specified
50 years, even indefinitely? These questions, together with issues of
sustainability and the environmental impact of concrete construction,
need to be carefully thought through for lasting solutions to emerge.
Achieving adequate RC durability and longevity requires not only good
science and engineering to solve the technical problems, but also an
appreciation of the role of concrete infrastructure in the broader soci-
etal context - the ‘social’ worth of infrastructure. Here, engineers need
to play a much greater role in advocating for a ‘higher-value’ approach
to infrastructure provision, taking durability and longevity into account
directly.
generally behave acceptably over their service lives, slowly deteriorate.
Of concern is that many modern structures have deteriorated un-
acceptably and prematurely, giving rise to poor durability performance.
Further, with the stock of RC structures in much of the developed world
(and parts of the developing world) now approaching lifespans of half-
a-century or more, we can expect increasing numbers of such structures
to display symptoms of deterioration, and in many cases, these struc-
tures may already be in a state that will be difficult and costly to repair
with associated societal and economic consequences. Therefore, we
must ensure that key serviceability limit states, including durability
limit states, are not exceeded during the service life of a structure; since
expectations of extended service life are increasing, these problems and
challenges will progressively become dominant in the future in terms of
RC design and operation.
The greatest threat to RC durability is corrosion of reinforcing steel,
with associated cracking, staining, and spalling of the concrete cover
(Fig. 1). This leads to structural unserviceability in regard to safety,
stability, and aesthetics, and also poses an economic liability to owners
or managers. These structures are also unsustainable, since to retain
them in service requires use of further valuable natural resources.
Particularly for public infrastructure that requires substantial public
funding, increasing attention needs to be paid to proper stewardship of
such structures, and to developing engineering solutions that give
confidence in future infrastructure provision.
The service life of a RC structure depends on it withstanding the
dominant deterioration mechanisms over an acceptable and ‘pre-
dictable’ time period. The schematic in Fig. 2 shows the progress of

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mark.alexander@uct.ac.za (M. Alexander).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2019.04.018
Received 9 February 2019; Received in revised form 1 April 2019; Accepted 24 April 2019
Available online 07 May 2019
0008-8846/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
Fig. 1. Corrosion-induced damage on a concrete bridge exposed to air-borne
chlorides close to the shore in Cape Town.
Expected
service life
A ment over the design life, without undue loss of serviceability or need
Quality of structure
B deterioration over the service life of the structure in a given environ-
Minimum quality Unplanned
required Rehabilitation
Time
Fig. 2. Schematic illustration of the concept of ‘service life’ of a structure.
deterioration over time in two structures, A and B. Structure A has
adequate durability and is better able to resist deterioration before
reaching unacceptable quality at the end of its expected service life. In
contrast, Structure B displays a more rapid rate of deterioration with
inadequate durability, and will need repair during its service life. Both
deterioration and the subsequent need for repair are often un-
anticipated by many infrastructure owners and managers, who then
find it difficult to obtain adequate resources to maintain and extend the
life of the structure. This emphasises the need to be able to ‘predict’ the
durability performance of concrete structures, for rational infra-
structure management and maintenance. Such predictive tools are in-
creasingly required for design and management of concrete structures.
These tools vary from simple models with limited parameters, to very
sophisticated models requiring substantial input data, not all of which
can be obtained easily. They also differ in whether they are based on
deterministic or probabilistic deterioration modelling. These issues are
addressed later in the paper.
A distinction needs to be drawn between ‘design’ and ‘prediction,
modelling’, and the like, as discussed in this paper. ‘Design’ is essen-
tially what engineering is about, that is, producing something by de-
sign, a product, a building, or similar. By contrast, ‘prediction and
modelling’ refer to the area of engineering science, of knowledge. Both
are essential in providing durable and sustainable concrete infra-
structure.
A previous review paper by the first author addressed service life
prediction and performance testing for concrete structures [1]. Similar
to this paper, it covered performance specifications, developments in
code approaches, and durability indicators. It also gave practical ap-
plications of the performance approach to marine concrete, based on
18
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
laboratory and site-based test data, and showed that rapid indicators
based on electrical properties could be used as inputs to models to
provide reasonably reliable predictions of performance with certain
limitations. Predictive models could also be used to determine perfor-
mance parameters to evaluate candidate mixtures to ensure required
performance in a given marine-exposure condition. This paper builds
on the previous review by addressing the issues more broadly, and by
providing up-to-date information and a general critique of current
service life models and their application. A thorough knowledge of
concrete durability, deterioration mechanisms and rate factors, is re-
quired for service life modelling and prediction. Therefore, it is neces-
sary also to review current durability design and specification.
Some review material herein originates in other publications of the
authors dealing with similar themes, giving some overlap, similar ideas,
arguments, and descriptions. In particular, the following publications
were used in preparing this review: [2–6].
2. Durability of reinforced concrete structures; steel corrosion
Durability of reinforced concrete structures can be defined as the
ability of a structure or component to withstand the design environ-
for major repair. Durability is concerned with material performance or
ment, and is not an intrinsic material property: concrete that is durable
in one environment may not be durable in another.
A review of the literature shows that a large volume of durability
research has been carried out, which has expanded our understanding
of the underlying phenomena and permitted better durability design
and specification; despite this, there is still limited understanding, and
more importantly, limited implementation and application of the re-
search findings in actual structures, most of which are still designed by
inappropriate ‘rules of thumb’ and outdated methods. For example, a
recent (2018) Nanocem Consortium workshop1 showed how far we still
need to progress in our understanding of even key deterioration me-
chanisms, let alone applications to real construction situations. Infra-
structure research commonly takes very long to move into practice,
highlighting the urgent need for workable codes and standards. This is
exacerbated by inappropriate embedded attitudes and practices and
sometimes failure to keep up-to-date with new knowledge. In reality,
deterioration and durability of concrete are among the most complex of
engineering problems, and they cannot be separated from structural
and exposure aspects. Materials performance is predominant, but
structural aspects are also important for the durability of a concrete
structure.
2.1. Corrosion of reinforced concrete structures
As mentioned, most current RC durability problems relate to cor-
rosion of reinforcing steel, which is a substantial threat to the service
life and economic value of corrosion-affected structures. Actual struc-
tural collapses and major failures are becoming more common, witness
for example the August 2018 Morandi bridge collapse in Genoa, Italy.
[7].
Corrosion is an electro-chemical process requiring certain condi-
tions, which the scope of this paper does not permit to review in detail.
Simplistically, RC corrosion occurs due to a change in the nature of the
pore solution surrounding the steel, whereby the normally passivating
action of the pore solution is prevented, leading to a breakdown of the
protective oxide layer on the steel. The main processes altering the pore
solution are concrete carbonation (due to ingress of atmospheric CO2)
causing acidification, and ingress of chloride ions, which cause local
1
Nanocem Workshop: Deterioration mechanisms. Portmarnock, Ireland,
November 2018.
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
CONCRETE SURFACE
COVER CONCRETE
Fig. 3. Schematic of cover layer of concrete.
pitting of the steel. Since these external agents must penetrate to the
steel for corrosion to be initiated, the concrete cover layer becomes the
single ‘line of defence’, and the quality of this layer largely governs the
service life of the structure (together with the cover depth). Durability
design is concerned with the ‘trade-off’ between quality and quantity of
the concrete cover. Further, the quality of the cover layer depends not
only on mix ingredients and proportions, but equally importantly on
construction processes, i.e. the influences of compaction, curing, early-
age drying, and early penetration of aggressive environmental agents.
Fig. 3 gives a schematic of the concrete cover layer, illustrating the
important elements.
The durability problem in RC is therefore a function of both design
and construction decisions and actions. Designers must be provided
with tools permitting quantification of the properties of the cover layer,
specifically transport properties of gases, liquids, and ions; designers
must also be able to undertake service life prediction, which reduces to
rate equations describing the kinetics of deterioration. For constructors,
the issue is to select appropriate concrete materials and proportions,
and to implement site practices that ensure the specified cover prop-
erties are achieved in actual construction. Quality control during con-
struction is very important, and should aim at assessing in-situ concrete
quality and comparing it to the design and specification requirements.
2.2. Durability design & specification
2.2.1. Current approaches
Durability design of RC structures should ensure that the structure,
as-built and in its design environment (exposure conditions), can
withstand the various aggressive influences over its design life, justi-
fying the economic investment and satisfying the serviceability re-
quirements. In essence, durability design involves selecting an appro-
priate combination of materials and structural details to ensure
durability (serviceability) of the structure [8]. Most current durability
design - when it is carried out - is deterministic, providing typically
single-value answers. The overall goal is to frame reliability-based so-
lutions, giving acceptable probability of the structure performing sa-
tisfactorily. The problem involves weighing the risk of undue dete-
rioration with the economics of ensuring durability, including planned
maintenance and repair.
Durability design and specification are closely linked. The design
19
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
REBAR
BULK CONCRETE
intent is expressed in the specifications, which should give clear in-
formation on the desired outcomes of the construction. Current speci-
fications are largely prescriptive, setting out methods, materials, pro-
cesses, and procedures such as limiting values for binder content, w/b
ratio, compressive strength, amount of entrained air, etc., that instruct
how to carry out the work. The constructor has few options and must
simply carry out the specification instructions, leaving no room for
innovation. Prescriptive specifications therefore are restrictive, and
cannot accommodate modern materials, demands for rational dur-
ability design, service life prediction, modelling, and the like.
Consequently, performance-based specifications are being developed,
which outline what is required as a finished product, i.e. the desired
outcomes of construction defined in terms of measurable performance
criteria.
Currently, there is little true durability design, as described above,
carried out for RC structures. Deterioration may be conceptually pre-
sent, but rational modelling of deterioration rates or prediction of
quantitative service life, which are essential for durability design, are
largely absent in engineering practice. A prescriptive specification is
usually relied on to give some ‘guarantee’ of durability, and compres-
sive strength is regarded as the main parameter that governs all the
important properties of concrete including durability. Compressive
strength is still often the ‘proxy’ for durability [9]. This is inadequate:
different methods of achieving the same concrete strength do not all
result in the same durability; also, strength of fully compacted, fully
cured laboratory specimens cannot account for construction processes
such as placing, compaction and curing, which profoundly affect the
quality of the concrete cover. An example of the inadequacy of using
compressive strength as a proxy for in-situ durability is shown in Fig. 4,
which gives results for oxygen permeability index (OPI) values (log
scale) measured on actual structures, and cube compressive strength
measured on standard moist-cured lab cubes from the same concrete
mixes placed in the structures. The oxygen permeability index is mea-
sured in a falling head permeameter, yielding a D'Arcy permeability
coefficient ‘k’ (m/s). The OPI is the negative log of ‘k’ and used in
performance-based approaches for design, specification and quality
control of concrete durability in South Africa [4,56].
The lack of any sensible correlation in Fig. 4 illustrates that mea-
surements on actual structures are the only reliable way to assess and
verify concrete durability.
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
10.80
10.70
10.60
10.50
OPI (log scale)
10.40
10.30
10.20
10.10
10.00
9.90
9.80
30 35 40 45
Compressive strength (MPa)
Fig. 4. Lack of correlation between compressive strength (measured in the laboratory on standard cube specimens), and oxygen permeability (log scale), measured on
actual structures built from the same concrete [10].
Durability design must therefore focus on both aspects of materials
and the quality of construction, and employ service life models and
appropriate durability performance criteria [11]. Such performance-
based approaches will allow innovative and responsive durability de-
sign.
2.2.2. Critique of prescriptive specifications
Prescriptive specifications work on a ‘deemed-to-satisfy’ basis, i.e. if
the requirements of the specification are met, the structure is ‘deemed-
to-satisfy’ the durability requirements. The European Standard (EN
206-1 [12]) adopts a deemed-to-satisfy approach and prescribes
minimum cement content, maximum w/c ratio, and minimum com-
pressive strength class, for various environmental exposure classes. The
problems with this approach are:
• The requirements are often obscure, lack clear details on exposure
conditions, and are frequently not verifiable in practice and there-
fore not enforceable.
• It assumes that as-delivered concrete quality is the same as in the as-
built structure. Usually, once the concrete has been mixed and
placed, only the compressive strength is measured to ensure com-
pliance with the specification, using samples made, cured and tested
under conditions that bear little resemblance to those in the actual
structure.
• The approach limits adopting or developing new approaches and
materials, thereby stifling innovation in concrete [13].
In short, prescriptive specifications hark from a previous period
when there was less material complexity, knowledge on deteriora-
tion mechanisms was limited, and durability was not considered a
critical issue.
2.2.3. Performance-based approach for durability design and specification
An alternative approach to prescriptive durability design is perfor-
mance-based design and specification. Key durability-related para-
meters should be measured on the as-built structure to account for the
influences on durability of construction processes and quality of
workmanship. However, some performance-based specifications only
require key properties to be measured at the design stage or at the point
of delivery of the concrete, and do not include conformity assessment of
the completed structure or its components. In the opinion of the au-
thors, this largely defeats the object of performance-based approaches,
which is to verify that the structure as built satisfies the requirements of
the specification and design.
Lobo et al. [14] define performance specifications as ‘a set of clear,
measurable, and enforceable instructions that outline the application-
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
50 55 60 65 70 75 80
specific functional requirements for hardened concrete’. They stress
that performance-based specifications also clearly separate and allocate
risk and responsibility among owner/designer, concrete producer, and
constructor [15], whereas in prescriptive specifications, the primary
risk is placed on the owner/designer. By specifying and testing the
concrete at the point of supply, and subsequently after placement and
early hardening in the structure, risks and responsibilities between the
concrete supplier and constructor are clearly distinguished.
Encouragingly, there are now concerted efforts worldwide to craft
performance specifications, for example the P2P initiative of the US
National Ready-mix Concrete Association [16] and the French
PERFDUB Programme [17]. The major benefits in moving from pre-
scriptive to performance-based specifications are:
• Performance-based approaches represent a more rational approach
to improving concrete performance [13,18,19].
• In their proper form, they help ensure that the as-built structure
fulfils the intentions of the design.
• They permit modelling and service life predictions to be carried out
(see later).
• They provide a means of ‘rewarding’ good construction, and ‘pe-
nalising’ poor construction.
Performance specifications require an informed approach to un-
derstanding and applying concrete materials and appropriate con-
struction measures to ensure adequate durability. Although the general
philosophy of performance-based specifications is now established
[14,20], divergence remains on definitions and reliable measures of
quality parameters, obstructing fuller implementation. This is also
hindered by lack of agreement, consistency, or standardisation on tests
for measuring concrete cover properties (or other specification criteria).
For example, EN 206-1 [12], dealing with specification, performance,
production and conformity for concrete construction, ‘avoids’ a per-
formance-based approach on the ground of lack of agreement on test
methods. Tests and parameters are needed that reflect rate-controlling
deterioration factors, such as material constituents, the cover quality of
the finished concrete, and the aggressiveness of the environment.
Durability specifications for RC must rely on measuring transport
properties of the cover zone, which will permit innovative perfor-
mance-based specifications.
Regarding appropriate test methods, these have been reviewed by
RILEM TC-NEC [21] and RILEM TC-PSC [4]. Some tests are well es-
tablished internationally and included in performance-based design.
Test methods can generally be divided into performance-simulation
tests, and durability indicator tests. The former encompass direct
20
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
measurement of the concrete's resistance against the ingress of con-
taminants, such as chlorides (e.g. NT BUILD 443 [22], NT BUILD 492
[23], ASTM C1556 [24]), or carbon dioxide (accelerated carbonation
chamber [25]), typically under accelerated conditions. The latter refer
to material properties, such as electrical resistivity (e.g. rapid chloride
penetration [26] or migration [23]), and the South African Chloride
Conductivity Index test [27]), gas permeability (e.g. the Torrent Tester
[28], or the South African Oxygen Permeability Index test [29]), which
can be used to predict the concrete's resistance against deterioration.
The challenge is to standardise existing or new test methods, where
required, and to achieve general acceptance in the concrete industry.
The development of an integrated system, in which the key test para-
meters can be used for durability design and specification, on-site
conformity assessment, and as a basis for payment for achieving dur-
ability, is also important.
The key to improving reinforced concrete durability is that as-built
structures meet critical performance criteria in respect of probable
modes of deterioration. The purpose is to ensure that the structure,
during its service life, does not approach a “limit state” of serviceability
(see later). The goal of performance-based specifications is to ensure
that an acceptable probability of durability performance is achieved. A
shift from prescriptive to performance specifications is one of the im-
portant steps necessary to address the current shortcomings in re-
inforced concrete design and construction.
3. Service life prediction
3.1. Introduction
‘Service life’ of a concrete structure can be defined as ‘the assumed
period for which a structure or part of it is to be used for its intended
purpose with anticipated maintenance but without major repair being
necessary’ [30]. Service life relates to a serviceability limit state con-
dition (SLS). This can be extended to consider a durability limit state
condition (DLS) as a sub-limit of the SLS criteria [3,31]. Increasingly,
infrastructure owners require extended service life, and so ensuring that
limit state criteria are met during the service life will dominate future
RC design and operation. This raises the more general question: how
does one design for a service life of, say, 50 or 100 years, when there is
limited objective evidence on which to base engineering decisions? The
challenge of rational service life prediction is further complicated by
changing environments (e.g. global warming due to increasing atmo-
spheric CO2 concentrations), rapidly changing materials (e.g. newer
cements, modern chemical admixtures, recycled aggregates, etc.), in-
adequate knowledge and models, variable construction quality, dif-
fering perceptions of what ‘service life’ means, and the impossibility of
verification in the long term. The ‘societal value’ placed on concrete
infrastructure, where society (through various social and political
processes) needs to understand and assign a ‘value’ on the built infra-
structure, is equally important. The problem is not simple!
3.2. Definition, purpose, and scope of service life prediction
Service life prediction (SLP) is the ability to estimate quantitatively,
with a defined level of reliability, how long a given structure will fulfil
its intended function without approaching serviceability or durability
limit states. The required service life should be defined by the owner in
consideration of the interests of other stakeholders, which may include
users, concessionaires, or society as a whole. The definition of design
service life needs to consider, with clearly defined target reliability
levels, what constitutes the end of service life in the structure or its
individual parts [32]. Ultimately, the purpose and scope of SLP is the
provision and management of infrastructure that realises its full eco-
nomic and functional value. This requires performance-based ap-
proaches.
Engineers need tools for service life prediction, implying
21
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
deterioration modelling. ‘Service Life Modelling’ (SLM) (see later) offers
such quantitative tools, covering aspects such as economic optimisa-
tion, operational efficiency, and sustained structural and aesthetic
performance. Thus, ‘service life prediction’, ‘service life modelling’, and
‘service life design’ are closely related, in fact inseparable: rational
design needs good models, and models inform design and permit pre-
diction. Developments in service life prediction are closely linked with
developments in service life design, which is therefore reviewed in the
following sections.
3.3. Service life design and limit states
Service life design (SLD) aims at an economical and ‘safe’ solution
for a structure whereby the structure ‘predictably’ fulfils all functional
and durability requirements over its design life, allowing for all the
‘actions’ on the structure (including environmental actions) [31]. SLD
should ‘predict’, with reasonable precision, critical junctures when
certain interventions might be necessary (such as maintenance, partial
replacement, etc.); it can be extended to undertaking Life Cycle As-
sessment to quantify environmental impacts and economic costs over
the life of the structure. For practical application, SLD requires skill and
knowledge by the designer, and a knowledgeable client or facility
owner/manager who can grasp the full complexities of the design and
operational sequences for a structure.
An important caveat, however, is that many structures or portions
thereof do not experience severe deterioration, in which case attention
to good construction practices, including good mix design, compaction,
curing, attention to achieving cover, and so on, should help to ensure
adequate durability. For example, exposure category XO of EN 206-1
[12] indicates “Concrete with reinforcement or embedded metal: Very
dry”, which is described as “Concrete inside buildings with very low air
humidity”. This will normally not be aggressive to concrete and the
concrete can be expected to last virtually indefinitely. Such cases make
up a significant proportion of structures and structural elements glob-
ally, and overly sophisticated design approaches are not required here.
However, good construction techniques are always required, and this is
where the problems usually arise.
With this background, SLD approaches can be evaluated. Engineers
work to codes of practice and other ‘standards’, although they must
resort to ‘first principles’ when needed including undertaking advanced
modelling using all available information such as laboratory tests,
analytical approaches, etc.. The following section reviews codified ap-
proaches to SLD.
3.4. Codification of service life design
The importance of codes of practice makes it essential that viable
new approaches are codified. Codes reflect the current status of design,
in this case durability design, and expected future developments; they
should also clearly define the concepts of durability design and the
means to achieve the expected long-term performance [33]. Un-
fortunately, codes, including durability provisions, are often slow in
being updated, so that new knowledge from research and practice takes
a long time to appear in the standards. Inevitably, research runs ahead
of implementation, and it is perhaps an indictment of researchers that
they often have little feel or concern for practical research im-
plementation. Code-writing is hard work and always involves com-
promises between different views – something researchers are not al-
ways good at!
According to Walraven [34], practical application of performance-
based approaches for service life design and codification requires the
following elements: (i) limit state criteria, (ii) a defined service life, (iii)
deterioration models, (iv) compliance tests, (v) maintenance and repair
strategies, and (vi) quality control systems. Limit state criteria for
structural performance in regard to durability should have clear phy-
sical meaning such as percentage of cracking or loss of surface.
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
Deterioration models, which are generally mathematical, are useful for
designers only if the model parameters conform to the performance
criteria that are used. Thus, the key model parameters should be
measurable in site-practice, implementable in construction, and in-
corporated into the project specifications such that they are verifiable
on site. There are very few such approaches in practice presently.
According to Bentur [33], the design process involves four steps: (1)
quantification of the deterioration mechanism using realistic models to
describe the process with sufficient accuracy either physically or che-
mically, (2) definition of the limit states for the particular project,
which might include depassivation of the reinforcement, cracking due
to corrosion of the steel, spalling of the concrete, collapse due to loss of
cross-section of the reinforcement, etc., (3) calculation of the prob-
ability that the limit states defined in Step 2 will be exceeded, by ap-
plying the models adopted in Step 1, and (4) definition of the type of
limit state, with reference to the limit states defined in Step 1 (i.e. a
serviceability limit state (SLS), which refers to the point beyond which
the specified service requirements are no longer met, and an ultimate
limit state (ULS), which is associated with collapse or similar forms of
structural failure).
The concepts and definitions discussed above are embedded in
standards and codes, such as the fib Model Code for Service Life Design
(fib Bulletin 34 [30]), fib Model Code 2010 [32], ISO 13823 [35], ISO
16204 [36], Eurocode 2 (EN 1992-1:2004 [37]), and the ACI 365.1R-17
[38] report. These documents seek to establish an approach to concrete
design to provide durability. The following sections review some of the
current code approaches for limit state design.
3.4.1. ISO 13823
ISO has provided a limit-state methodology [35] summarised in
Fig. 5, which is related to different service life design approaches. The
methodology is based on quantitative models for the “loading” (i.e.
environmental actions) and the “resistance” (i.e. resistance of the
concrete against the considered environmental actions). The design
options, which are also replicated in the fib Model Code for Service Life
Design (fib [30]) are: full probabilistic approach; semi-probabilistic
approach (partial factor design); deemed-to-satisfy rules; and avoidance
of deterioration.
The first two options involve quantitative evaluation of the perfor-
mance of a structure using limit-state theory, documented in ISO 2394
[39], with three limit states: ultimate limit-state (ULS), serviceability
limit-state (SLS), and durability-limit-state (DLS). The ULS addresses
Design criteria
Deemed-to- Avoidance of
satisfy approach deterioration
Prescribed values, Expert judgement,
exposure classes exposure classification
Design Design
parameters parameters
Design verification through assessment or expert judgement
Quality plan for execution and material selection
Supervision/Inspection
Condition control during
service life
Fig. 5. Summary of service life design approaches [35].
22
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
structural safety and stability (see e.g. [40]). The SLS considers servi-
ceability ‘failure’ due to material deterioration (e.g. ASR, sulphate at-
tack) or excessive deflection, cracking and vibration. The DLS describes
the point at which durability ‘failure’ occurs, e.g. corrosion initiation in
a RC structure. It could be argued that the DLS is a subset of the SLS, so
that ‘material failure’ is regarded as a durability issue, since it reduces
the service life of the structure.
The full probabilistic approach should be used for exceptional
structures only. It is based on probabilistic models for deterioration and
material resistance (Fig. 6). These models should be validated to give
realistic, representative, and reliable results. The method should also be
based on appropriate test methods with statistical evaluation. Con-
siderable research is still required to produce reliable models.
Fig. 6 shows that limit state design is formulated in terms of an
‘inequality’: that the time-dependent performance (R(t)) (‘Resistance’)
of the structure should be larger than the target design requirements (S
(t)) (‘Loading’, in this case, environmental loading), expressed by Eq.
(1).
R(t) − S(t) > 0 (1)
The designer must carry out performance verification of a structure
to ensure that the specified limit-state is not reached within the an-
ticipated service life. The performance verification depends on the
probabilistic approach used i.e. full probabilistic or partial factor (semi-
probabilistic). This requires ‘service life prediction’, that is, use of sui-
table models or predictive tools that describe the deterioration state of
the structure with time.
The partial factor approach, using statistically derived partial fac-
tors, is intended to be a practical, statistically reliable design tool.
However, the partial factors must be derived using the same models as
the full probabilistic approach, that is, considering the variability of
material resistance and ‘load’ data. Such data are often not sufficiently
available or reliable.
The ‘deemed-to-satisfy approach’ is conceptually similar to current
prescriptive durability specifications, based on selection of design va-
lues (e.g. dimensioning, material and product selection, execution
procedures). The difference between the ‘deemed-to-satisfy’ approach
and the conventional design rules, is that it should be based on physical
and chemical models for concrete, rather than only on practical ex-
perience; it is thus more ‘performance-based’. It should also be cali-
brated against the full probabilistic approach, ensuring a self-consistent
set of design ‘rules’ for durability and service life prediction. The
Partial safety Full probabilistic
factor
Characteristic value, design Probabilistic
value and partial safety factor models
Design equations, numerical Statistical
models parameters
Maintenance
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
R, S
Failure Probability
Target service
Mean service life
Fig. 6. Schematic representation of probabilistic service life design.
Adopted from DuraCreteR17 [41]; Siemes and Visser [42]; ISO 13823 [35].
limiting values for design, material selection and execution, are de-
termined either from statistical evaluation of experimental data and
field observations, and/or calibration with long-term experience of
building tradition. A service life estimate is not required in the ‘deemed-
to-satisfy’ approach, making it not a true performance-based approach,
since key material and construction factors are not verified during ac-
tual construction. It is a positive step forward, however, if the specified
limits relate to actual performance criteria such as a relevant durability
indicator [43].
The fourth approach to service life design, avoidance of deteriora-
tion, requires the use of deterioration-resistant materials such as
stainless steel, or concrete protection systems such as coatings, thus
limiting or eliminating deterioration of the structure. Maintenance may
still be required, such as renewal of coatings from time to time.
3.4.2. fib Model Codes (MC 2010 and MC SLD)
Fig. 5 is also reflected in the fib Model Code (MC) 2010 [32], which
contains several approaches to service life design. In principle, the
design approaches in fib MC 2010 avoid or minimise deterioration from
environmental actions in similar ways to design for loading and are
therefore ‘intelligible’ to structural design engineers. Another fib
document, fib Model Code for Service Life Design (fib MC SLD) [30]
predates fib MC 2010, but reflects similar thinking. For example, it also
categorizes approaches for service life design as: full probabilistic,
partial factor design, deemed-to-satisfy, and avoidance of deterioration,
as in MC 2010 and the ISO documents discussed earlier. Any of these
approaches can be used, although a full probabilistic approach is de-
sirable for large public infrastructure projects or prestigious structures.
Such projects usually can afford to undertake considerable material
testing and in-situ characterization during construction, thus allowing
some of the needed data to be generated and used in the modelling, in
an iterative way.
The fib MC SLD defines ‘Design service life’ as the period for which a
structure or part of it is to be used for its intended purpose, and in
which:
• deterioration and material performance are quantified as far as
possible (including kinetic or rate effects),
• a suitable ‘risk’ approach is adopted, based on reliability (i.e.
probability), and
• quantifications, costs, interventions (e.g. maintenance) and so on
23
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
_
Time
Service life distribution
can be rationally considered.
Both documents, fib MC 2010 and fib MC SLD, present prediction
models for deterioration (e.g. carbonation and chloride ingress) and the
related limit states associated with reinforcement corrosion (depassi-
vation, cracking, spalling, and collapse). Based on the observation that
there is generally little international consensus on models predicting
the length of the corrosion period until cracking, spalling or collapse of
the structure, MC 2010 states that service life designs are commonly
based on the corrosion initiation period, i.e. the limit state of depassi-
vation.
Design engineers can use the given prediction models to select
combinations of design cover and concrete material properties. For
deterioration modelling, the designer should obtain suitable material
parameters (carbonation resistance, chloride ingress) from field ex-
perience of similar structures. Additionally, test methods are proposed
for performance-based characterization of concrete material properties.
For carbonation resistance, the accelerated carbonation test is proposed
(e.g. BS EN 13295 [25]), prescribing specimen dimensions, curing
conditions, testing age, test duration and exposure conditions. For
characterization of chloride resistance, fib MC SLD states that various
methods can be used to assess diffusion characteristics, and specifically
mentions the Rapid Chloride Migration Method [23]. Notably, MC 2010
states that the models are valid only for uncracked concrete, but does
not provide guidance on how to modify the predictions for cracked
concrete.
The above aspects have been comprehensively summarised and
detailed in Bentur [33] i.e. limit state approaches for durability; prob-
abilistic limit state approach; partial factor design approach; applica-
tion of the limit state design methods; deemed to satisfy approach; and
life-cycle cost analysis.
4. Modelling (reinforced concrete deterioration)
This section covers modelling of deterioration in RC structures, and
mainly considers contaminant ingress causing reinforcement corrosion.
‘Modelling’ is here defined as a quantitative estimate of the time-de-
pendent state of a concrete structure in regard to deterioration, with
sufficient accuracy that the outputs can be used for engineering design
or assessment. These models can be mathematical, analytical, numer-
ical, or empirical, and now also based on artificial intelligence (AI),
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
artificial neural networks, and so on. Increasingly, transport-interaction
models or reactive transport models (see later), are being developed.
As mentioned, service life prediction, service life design, and dur-
ability design, are inherently linked with deterioration modelling, and
all are essential for a performance-based approach. ‘Service life pre-
diction’ is also often used interchangeably in the literature with ‘service
life modelling’.
4.1. Service life modelling
Service Life Modelling (SLM) ideally combines deterioration mod-
elling and damage modelling. (Damage modelling is not needed if
corrosion initiation is taken as the end of service life criterion, how-
ever). SLMs should give quantitative estimates of the time to un-
acceptable damage (e.g. corrosion-induced cracking, spalling, loss of
section, etc.). It is possible that concrete can ‘deteriorate’, e.g. suffer
substantial carbonation even beyond the level of the steel without much
damage occurring, depending on the exposure environment. Damage
modelling takes deterioration modelling one step further, by assessing
the impact of deterioration on the performance of the concrete structure
itself. The overall purpose is structural assessment and management,
and to give infrastructure owners the tools to assess and manage the
‘risk’ aspects.
Most current service life models (SLM) are semi-empirical, con-
structed from laboratory and site data that are also used for calibration.
SLMs are also useful in ‘back-analysis’ of existing structures when the
penetration of contaminants such as chlorides is known for a particular
concrete, environment, and time; the model can then be used to de-
termine the time to corrosion and damage, using a linked damage
model. For a full probabilistic approach, variability also needs to be
considered.
SLMs can also be constructed from ‘first principles’, such as reactive
transport models. These are based on thermodynamic and geochemical
principles [44], and principles of flow in porous media [45]; they at-
tempt to describe ‘transport-interaction’ aspects of fluid or ionic flow in
concrete, that is, they model changes to the concrete pore and micro-
structure as a consequence of transport mechanisms and resultant re-
actions, which then further influence the transport processes. Regarding
predictions, such models should not be assumed necessarily to be ac-
curate, and the added complexity does not always justify the results
obtained. In any event, these models must also be calibrated from la-
boratory and site data. Thus, where reliability of model predictions is
critical, concretes with a range of mix constituents and proportions still
need to be tested in appropriate environments to collect data which can
be used to calibrate or construct the models, and to predict the ingress
of harmful substances.
4.1.1. Conceptual service life models for corrosion-affected RC structures
Service life models for corrosion-affected RC structures are most
frequently used to predict the rate of chloride penetration or carbona-
tion, and hence the time to corrosion initiation [5,6]. The entire
structure does not reach this state at the same time, due to differences
in structural aspect, concrete cover quality and depth, micro-exposure
conditions, and so on; indeed, there will be large data scatter – some-
thing that current SLMs do not always incorporate - meaning that a
probabilistic approach taking statistical variability into account is
needed. Further, there is increasing recognition that corrosion initiation
is inadequate as an end-of-service life criterion. Therefore, more effort
is now being directed to modelling corrosion propagation mechanisms,
which allows estimating how long it will take before major damage
occurs, or when the structure will need repair or maintenance.
Many SLMs adopt the two-stage service life model first proposed by
Tuutti [46], in which the deterioration is split into two distinct phases:
initiation and propagation, shown in Fig. 7. The initiation phase is the
time for ‘contaminants’ such as carbon dioxide or chlorides to penetrate
through the concrete cover to reach the steel, fulfilling any threshold
24
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
criteria. This causes breakdown of the passive layer on the steel, ren-
dering the steel liable to active corrosion. This period depends on the
concrete quality, depth and condition of cover, exposure conditions,
and the nature of the ingressing agents. Insignificant damage to the
concrete is assumed to occur during this period.
During the propagation period, steel corrosion takes place, usually
resulting in progressive damage to the concrete matrix. The propaga-
tion period can be sub-divided into different limit states, such as for-
mation of cracks as a result of expanding corrosion products, delami-
nation and spalling of the concrete cover, and loss of structural
capacity, followed by ultimate collapse of the structure.
4.1.2. Practical service life models
Various service life models exist in different global regions, largely
in response to conditions in those localities. Most models cover both
chloride and carbon dioxide ingress into concrete, such as the European
model “DuraCrete” [47] and the North American “LIFE-365” [48]. In
Spain and South Africa, carbonation and chloride ingress models have
also been developed [11,49], as well as in Scandinavia, “ClinConc” [50]
and DuraCon [51]. Table 1 provides a summary of some of the pro-
minent service life models related to corrosion in RC structures.
“LIFE-365” is based only on computer simulations, not involving
testing, using input parameters such as mix proportions, constituent
materials, preventative measures (corrosion inhibitors, coatings, stain-
less or epoxy-coated steel) and environmental conditions. The other
models usually require measurement of key concrete mix properties,
with the corrosion initiation predicted using Fick's Laws of diffusion
(for chlorides), typically giving chloride profiles from the relevant dif-
fusion coefficient of the concrete, environmental influences and surface
chloride concentration. They tend towards being performance-based.
For estimating chloride diffusion coefficients, various test methods are
applied: the European and Scandinavian models use the Rapid Chloride
Migration (RCM) test [23], while the chloride conductivity test is used
in South Africa [57]. For carbonation models, the effective carbonation
resistance of concrete is commonly determined through accelerated
carbonation tests, in which laboratory-cured specimens are tested
under defined conditions at a selected reference time [30].
The STADIUM model is an example of a reactive transport model. It
has a transport module for movement of ionic species in time steps
using coupled-species diffusion, moisture/temperature coupling, and
time-dependent transport properties; and a chemistry module simu-
lating reactions between species in the pore solution and the hydrated
paste, using dissolution/precipitation equilibria. The model can be used
for durability design and service life prediction, as well as analyses of
existing structures for remaining service life using field data from the
affected structure(s). Gaps include lack of agreement over character-
ization methods for field concretes (e.g. porosity, diffusion coefficients,
permeability), and oxygen effects on electrochemical steel properties
and hence corrosion propagation.
Bentur, evaluating the above models, makes the salient comment
that the assumptions and the algorithms are difficult to verify in-
dependently, particularly since they often involve proprietary software
and “in-house” databases, making review of their validity difficult [33].
4.2. Developments in contaminant ingress and deterioration modelling –
recent literature
4.2.1. Chloride ingress and chloride-induced corrosion modelling
Angst [58] argues that improving the accuracy of chloride ingress
models may not be the best way of improving prediction of actual onset
of corrosion. Equally crucial is the chloride threshold value, Ccrit, which
is very variable and depends on many factors not always represented in
laboratory tests, for example localised corrosion. His work also argues
for the importance of real structural assessments to measure the critical
parameters.
Another parameter that is sometimes not fully recognized is the
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29

Initiation period Propagation period 4

Level of deterioration
1 Depassivation of the reinforcement

2 Formation of cracks

31 Spalling of concrete cover

1
3 4 Significant reduction of structural capacity of the
structure or its individual components through
2 bond failure or reduction in cross section of the
load bearing reinforcement

Time of exposure (years)

Condition can be assessed
Deterioration recognizable through non-
by suitable monitoring
destructive measuring methods

Fig. 7. Deterioration process of reinforcement corrosion: two-phase model for service life.
Adapted from Tuutti [46] and from fib bulletin 34 [30].

Table 1
Summary of selected service life models for corrosion in RC structures.
Model Characteristics Reference

DuraCrete Probabilistic modelling of carbonation and chloride ingress. Performance-based approach for [41]
material characterization.
Life-365® Chloride diffusion model, based on Fick's law. Semi-probabilistic. Provides life-cycle cost Free software (www.Life365.org)
analysis. [48]
Stadium® Multi-ionic model, based on Nernst-Planck equation. Provides chloride ingress rate and Proprietary software (www.
corrosion initiation. Also provides carbonation and sulphate profiles. Full probabilistic. simcotechologies.com)
[52]
fib Bulletin 34 – Model code for Based on Fick's 2nd law. Deals primarily with chloride ingress and carbonation. Used in fib
service life design Model Code 2010. Full probabilistic. Performance-based approaches are included.
Concrete Works Based on Fick's law. Predicts strength, chloride ingress, thermal cracking. Variant of Life- www.texasconcreteworks.com
365® [53]
LIFEPRED Based on Fick's Law. Andrade and Tavares [54]
ClinConc Chloride diffusion model. Tang [50]
DuraCon Based on Fick's law and the RCMT; also used for quality control and quality assurance, and Gjørv [51]
condition assessment during operational life.
Durability Index Approach Performance-based design and quality control based on durability indicators for carbonation Mackechnie [55]
and chloride diffusion Alexander et al. [56]

surface chloride value, Cs. This also varies with time, but is often as-
sumed not to. If time-variance is required, it is not clear for how long
such variation should be permitted [59]. This is compounded since the
apparent chloride diffusion value, Da, is dependent on the Cs value – the
one cannot be computed without making assumptions about the other.
Petcherdchoo [60], using a sensitivity analysis, showed for example
that the chloride content in concrete is most sensitive to the time-de-
pendent surface chloride value.
There is also much interest in constructing probabilistic, and not
just deterministic, models (e.g. [61]). The more ambitious of the newer
developments deal with probabilistic sustainability design frameworks
for design of concrete repairs and rehabilitations intended to achieve
targeted improvements in quantitative sustainability indicators [62].
These approaches consist of service life prediction models, combining
deterioration mechanisms with limit states, and life-cycle assessment
models for measuring the impact of repair or rehabilitation.
With the advent of newer binders and materials such as Limestone-
Calcined Clay cement (LC3), predictions become more difficult, and
laboratory and preferably, site testing are needed [63]. This permits
material-related parameters such as diffusion coefficients and exposure
conditions to be evaluated. Fundamental models that could handle
these variables would be very useful, but all models need validation
including field validation, information on which is currently very lim-
ited.
4.2.2. Carbonation modelling
The literature shows a growing interest in carbonation modelling,
particularly relating to SCMs in concrete [4,64–69]. This is under-
standable, in view of increasing use of SCMs in concrete. These models
should account for SCM chemistry (carbonatable material) and re-
activity, considering the ‘trade-off’ between physical and chemical re-
sistance to the ingressing CO2 (the same applies to Cl−). Thus, some
metakaolin concretes can have similar or even greater resistance to
carbonation than equivalent plain PC concretes, despite less carbona-
table material [65,70]. Actual corrosion rates in such concretes are also
likely to be lower due to their higher resistivities. This latter point also
raises the issue that carbonation per se is usually not of concern, but
rather carbonation-induced corrosion; the former typically receives
much attention, the latter, not much.
Studies of reactive transport modelling of carbonation are also ap-
pearing. For example, Kari et al. [67] argue for an approach beyond
‘simple diffusion’, considering ion–ion and ion–solid interactions in
carbonating concrete. In the absence of long-term studies incorporating
parameters needed for a full thermodynamic characterization of the
phenomena, they argue that carbonation depths might be significantly
underestimated in existing models.
A different approach using statistical modelling is represented by
the work of [71], who studied carbonation considering the contribution
of the environmental factors. Using a large number of results (964 case

25
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
studies) collected from the literature, they derived a statistical model,
which gave linear relationships between the variables, including the
carbonation coefficient. Such models have some merit in view of ad-
dressing the large variability inherent in the data.
4.2.3. Modelling the effect of damage on transport processes in concrete
The effect of damage on transport processes in concrete is clearly
very important, but to date has received little attention, although there
is evidence of increasing work. All concrete suffers from flaws and
cracks, and work on ‘undamaged’ concrete must be regarded as ‘idea-
lized’. Investigations are considering the influence of cracks on
moisture transport, sensitivity of transport mechanisms to damage, and
so on. Ghasemzadeh et al. [72], for example, showed that saturated
hydraulic conductivity is much more sensitive to damage than sorption
or electrical resistivity. Also, large differences exist between corrosion
rate measurements in laboratory and field-based specimens [73], which
might be accounted for partially by natural exposure ‘damage’.
Ožbolt et al. [74] investigated transport of capillary water, oxygen
and chloride through concrete cover, immobilization of chloride in the
concrete, transport of OH– ions through electrolyte in concrete pores,
and cathodic and anodic polarization, using a 3-D numerical model
based on continuum mechanics and thermodynamics (hygro-thermal-
mechanical models) for damaged and undamaged concrete. Such work
is usually ‘validated’ by a set of experimental results, but extension to
‘real’ situations in field structures is an urgent task. Beníteza et al. [64],
likewise attempted to relate ingress modelling to actual damage in
structures, with a view to the increasing rates of degradation likely due
to climate change effects (greater CO2, possible greater moisture, etc.).
Corrosion damages the concrete structure, and the effect of this
damage on further damage is important going forward. For example,
Bossio et al. [75], tackle the issue of corrosion-related damage, con-
sidering steel cross-section loss, and extending the current approaches
to more realistic geometrical conditions.
4.2.4. Improving existing models using field data
The importance of using data from condition assessments of existing
structures to improve existing models must be empathised. This is seen
in the work of Samindi et al. [76] and Otieno et al. [73], with a further
contribution from Sylvia et al. [77], where the focus is on using po-
tential mapping to update the life prediction, and not merely the con-
taminant ingress model.
RILEM TC 270-CIM [78] is working on benchmarking currently
available models on chloride ingress in cracked or uncracked concrete,
using real-life case studies from marine, road or near-shore chloride
exposure environments [79]. In this way, the performance and applic-
ability of the different models will be critically evaluated as to their
practical usability, and also their accuracy. Ultimately, the benchmark
will serve as a reference to evaluate chloride ingress models. As might
be expected, the main differences in the models result from differences
in boundary conditions, the ‘ageing’ factor, the type of model used
(numerical or analytical), and whether chloride binding is explicitly
taken into account. The link between the apparent diffusivity and the
ageing factor is important, since both parameters govern reliability and
hence accuracy of chloride ingress predictions. The TC is attempting to
back-calculate the benchmark data so as to elucidate the underlying
mechanisms governing change of pore structure or pore morphology
and the related impact on diffusivity.
5. General critique of service life design, modelling, and
prediction, going forward
The two main aims of SLD and SLM are, firstly, to assist in delivering
durable concrete structures, and secondly, to provide engineering tools
on which to base (and justify) rational design decisions. The traditional
alternative to SLD is the use of prescriptive approaches for concrete
durability. Based on earlier discussions in this paper, it is clear that
26
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
prescriptive approaches are not able to achieve the above two aims, as
they are largely based on outdated assumptions and fail to account
properly for deterioration of concrete structures in their respective
exposure conditions. In this regard, SLD approaches are a useful de-
velopment as they allow addressing durability design more realistically
and directly, considering environmental exposure conditions and actual
concrete material properties in a limit state design procedure. However,
current SLD approaches have many limitations, discussed in the fol-
lowing sections, that need to be kept in mind if they are to be applied
sensibly.
In modelling service life, some approaches and codes allow the
material's resistance to be based on experience gained from existing
structures and field observations; this is for example explicitly stated in
the fib MCs. This neglects that modern binder types may have very
different durability performance in the same environmental exposure,
compared to the older reference structure. It is therefore more sensible
to verify the material properties of the concrete using suitable test
methods. The performance simulation tests (carbonation chamber, bulk
diffusion) stipulated in the MCs are generally well accepted inter-
nationally and have delivered reliable results with regard to carbona-
tion and chloride ingress of concrete. These methods are extensively
applied in research and can also be used for performance-based service
life modelling in probabilistic or deterministic frameworks. However,
the limitation of these performance simulation tests is that they can
generally be applied only in the design stage; due to the long test ex-
posures required to obtain results (typically 6–12 weeks for bulk dif-
fusion and at least 4 weeks for accelerated carbonation), they would be
inefficient for quality control and conformity assessment of the as-built
structure. Since SLD models are based on the concrete's resistance
against deterioration, relevant material properties should be verified at
least on the as-supplied concrete, ideally on the as-built structure as
well, in order to verify modelling assumptions. This philosophy has for
many decades been successfully applied to the structural design of re-
inforced concrete members, for which test specimens and test certifi-
cates are required to verify the compressive strength of the supplied
concrete and tensile strength of the steel reinforcement. In fact, struc-
tural design models would not be acceptable without implementation of
adequate quality control procedures for the materials used in con-
struction. The same philosophy still needs to be fully adopted for dur-
ability design and verification of input parameters in SLD models.
Consequently, SLD can only develop its true potential in a full perfor-
mance-based framework. This should be considered and more implicitly
stated in the respective codes and standards.
For performance-based design and conformity assessment, alter-
native test methods have been developed in many countries worldwide,
typically measuring so-called durability indicators relating to perme-
ability, sorptivity and electrical conductivity (see for example RILEM
TC NEC [21]). While these methods allow time-efficient determination
of durability-related concrete properties and provide useful means of
quality control during and after construction, most of them have not
been developed to a level where they can be used in service life mod-
elling (RILEM TC PSC [4]). Therefore, in order to use existing service
life models in a performance-based design and quality control scheme,
research is still needed on the use of practical test methods in service
life modelling.
Most SLD models make use of diffusion laws to characterize chloride
ingress into concrete, requiring information on chloride surface con-
centrations and diffusion coefficients as input parameters. However,
codes and standards provide little clarity on the long-term development
of diffusion coefficients and chloride surface concentrations, with the
result that the modelling of long-term chloride ingress is rather spec-
ulative. There is also a serious lack of models for different chloride
exposure conditions, such as the atmospheric zone, which makes it
difficult to identify suitable boundary parameters for the modelling of
environmental exposure classes. Another significant shortcoming of
existing SLD models is that none of them is able reliably to account for
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
the effects of cracking on the durability of concrete structures.
Considering that most concrete structures crack under service condi-
tions, for example due to shrinkage or flexural stresses, one could argue
that most SLD models fail to represent realistic conditions. In addition,
most accepted SLD models use depassivation of the steel reinforcement
as the design limit state. For uncracked concrete, this is probably an
overly conservative assumption. For cracked structures in marine en-
vironments, depassivation can be assumed to occur very rapidly, which
would theoretically reduce the service life to zero [73] and render the
SLD model redundant altogether. In absence of suitable and reliable
models for corrosion propagation, the existing limit state design com-
monly used in SLD of concrete structures is therefore very tentative.
Probabilistic approaches allow to take into account variability in
input parameters, such as cover depths, material resistance, environ-
mental factors, etc. In service life design of concrete structures, this
allows for rational consideration of these parameters. However, it could
be argued that an accurately defined and detailed probabilistic SLD
model has very limited merit if the model input parameters are based
on often uncertain and overly simplified assumptions that may not
accurately reflect the real situation on site. Concerning modelling un-
certainties, the same limitations apply to deterministic SLD approaches.
However, these have the advantages of being less cumbersome and
easier to apply in practice. In selecting and applying suitable ap-
proaches for SLD, engineers need to obtain appropriate model input
parameters and weigh the anticipated accuracy of the method against
the effort required for its application.
The importance of studies of actual structures, to validate or im-
prove existing models, must again be stressed. It is vital to inspect and
measure performance of structures, preferably at regular intervals after
construction, to update the service life prediction model(s) and to
schedule proactive maintenance [76]. Such work leads to greater con-
fidence and reliability of the existing models, and takes research out of
the lab and into the field.
Software packages, now virtually ubiquitous, are becoming ever
more sophisticated, often with claims of being able to facilitate a ‘full
durability design process’ of reinforced concrete structures, based on
predictive, reactive transport models [80]. With inputs of sometimes
only the concrete mix design and environmental conditions, the models
claim to make predictions of service life, compressive strength, and
other parameters. Such approaches may have merit for comparative
analysis, but at this stage, they cannot truly represent all the multiple
variables in real situations. Computer-aided modelling is important, but
its limitations should not be underestimated. Engineering modelling
should be verified by comparing its deductions with real-world out-
comes. Further, since many of the packages used are written by other
parties, for whom different contexts might be valid, the question is how
the designer can safely assume that the results and the modelling are
correct, and that the engineer can use the program properly.
In practice, SL models might be mistaken as reliable tools for pro-
viding adequate resistance against deterioration. This can result in the
misconception that no further maintenance is required during the ser-
vice life of the structure. Experience has shown that durability cannot
be achieved without proper management, which includes regular in-
spections and maintenance. For the provision of adequate durability to
concrete structures, SLD models therefore need to be considered as one
tool among many. It could even be argued that, for critical infra-
structure and other important structures, an ‘avoidance of deteriora-
tion’ approach might be the most viable.
As Bentur [33] has pointed out, specifying a service life requires
that, simultaneously, there is specification of the predictive models, the
concrete tests to be used, the schedule of inspections, and circumstances
under which repairs or rehabilitation are required. The problem is one
of trying to predict long-term behaviour on the basis of short-term tests,
in conjunction with predictive models that inevitably are simplifica-
tions of the real situation to which the concrete will be subjected. What
is needed is a ‘best practice’ approach utilising the best available
27
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
knowledge, models, practical experience, and so on, ‘flexible’ enough to
accommodate changes in use of the structure and environment, and
considering maintenance and retrofitting actions. Researchers have a
critical role to play by providing the ‘best practice’ tools needed by
practitioners. There also need to be ‘feedback loops’ between practice
and research, where practitioners provide information on performance
of constructed facilities, and researchers build this information into
further scientific, analytical and numerical approaches.
Nobel Laureate Nils Bohr once said that “Prediction is very difficult,
especially if it is about the future”!, which suitably summarizes the state
of currently available SLMs for concrete structures. Notwithstanding
extensive international research efforts, existing models are still largely
based on unreliable and often vague postulations concerning (i) ade-
quate limit states (initiation versus various stages of propagation), (ii)
chloride ingress characteristics, (iii) environmental exposure condi-
tions, (iv) corrosion threshold values, (v) the influence of cracks on
service life, (vi) the validity of existing models for modern materials,
(vii) the correlation between durability indicators and actual chloride
ingress or carbonation, (viii) the variability of cover depths and cover
concrete quality, and (ix) synergistic effects of multiple deterioration
mechanisms occurring at the same time. However, when attempting to
critique service life design approaches, one needs to be mindful of what
these approaches are actually trying to achieve. The two main aims of
SLM and SLD, as mentioned, are to assist in delivering durable concrete
structures, and to provide engineering tools for design decisions. It is on
these premises that design approaches should be judged, and their
usefulness assessed. The authors certainly are of the opinion that ser-
vice life modelling, despite all the discussed shortcomings and limita-
tions, has made a very positive contribution to both these aspects, i.e.
promoting durability of concrete structures and providing the basis for
related engineering design. These obvious practical benefits are prob-
ably the reasons for the increasing popularity of service life approaches.
Concerning popularity, it was Mark Twain, who said that “Everything
popular is wrong”. But then, what did Mark Twain really know about
concrete?
6. Closure
This paper has critically reviewed the important questions of re-
inforced concrete durability, service life prediction, and modelling,
considering reinforcement corrosion as the main deterioration me-
chanism. The discussions have been with a view to practical applica-
tions of these approaches, and not just from a purely research-or-
ientated perspective. The paper has also stressed that durability design,
specification, performance-based approaches, and service life predic-
tion and modelling are inseparable. One cannot be considered in the
absence of the others.
Despite their current shortcomings, service life design approaches,
taken broadly, provide rational methods for durability design of con-
crete structures, compared to traditional prescriptive design for dur-
ability. This can help not only to create more durable structures, but
also to permit more economic and innovative design and construction.
However, all model approaches need to be evaluated against their va-
lidations (if existing), and should be regarded as tools that assist in
better definition of the problem; the final outcome must incorporate
engineering judgment and experience, as has been the case up to now.
With continued and focused efforts from both researchers and practi-
tioners alike, major progress in service life modelling and prediction
can be expected in coming years; if this is accompanied by a substantial
effort to study performance of existing structures to validate the
models, great progress can be made.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge with gratitude financial support
received from: CoMSIRU, The University of Cape Town, The Concrete
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
Institute, The National Research Foundation (NRF), Sika (SA) Pty Ltd,
PPC Ltd, AfriSam, Haw & Inglis Civil Engineering (Pty) Ltd, Aveng
Grinaker-LTA Ltd, The Tertiary Education Support Programme (TESP)
of ESKOM, and the Water Research Commission (WRC).
The assistance of postgraduate students, notably Mr. Emmanuel Leo
and Mr. Valontino James, of CoMSIRU at UCT, is gratefully acknowl-
edged.
The many useful and pointed discussions with numerous colleagues
over the years is also acknowledged; they have stimulated our thinking
on these matters.
References
[1] M. Alexander, M. Thomas, Service life prediction and performance testing – current
developments and practical applications, Cem. Concr. Res. 78 (1) (2015) 155–164.
[2] M.G. Alexander, Service life design and modelling of concrete structures – back-
ground, developments, and implementation, Revista ALCONPAT 8 (3) (2018)
224–245, https://doi.org/10.21041/ra.v8i3.325.
[3] M.G. Alexander, A. Bentur, S. Mindess, Durability of Concrete: Design and
Construction, CRC Press (Taylor & Francis Group), 2017.
[4] Performance-based specifications and control of concrete durability, in:
H. Beushausen, L. Fernandez-Luco (Eds.), RILEM State-of-the-Art Report TC 230-
PSC, Springer, 2015, p. 373.
[5] H. Beushausen, M. Otieno, M.G. Alexander, Durability of concrete, Fulton's
Concrete Technology, 10th edn, The Concrete Institute, Midrand, 2019.
[6] H. Beushausen, R. Torrent, M. Alexander, Performance-based approaches for con-
crete durability: state of the art and future research needs’, Cem. Concr. Res. 119
(2019) 11–20 May.
[7] Engineering.com, Italy's Morandi bridge collapse—what do we know?,
Engineering.com, Available at: https://www.engineering.com/BIM/ArticleID/
17517/Italys-Morandi-Bridge-CollapseWhat-Do-We-Know.aspx, (2018) , Accessed
date: 21 January 2019.
[8] M.G. Alexander, M. Santhanam, Achieving durability in reinforced concrete struc-
tures: Durability indices, durability design and performance-based specifications,
Keynote Paper at International Conferences on Advances in Building Sciences &
Rehabilitation and Restoration of Structures, IIT Madras, Chennai, India, 2013,
p. 21.
[9] M.G. Alexander, Y. Ballim, K. Stanish, A framework for use of durability indexes in
performance-based design and specifications for reinforced concrete structures,
Mater. Struct. 41 (45) (2008) 921–936.
[10] G. Nganga, M.G. Alexander, H. Beushausen, Practical implementation of the dur-
ability index performance-based design approach, Constr. Build. Mater. 45 (August)
(2013) 251–261.
[11] J.R. Mackechnie, M.G. Alexander, Durability predictions using early age durability
index testing, Proceedings: 9th Durability and Building Materials Conference, 2002.
[12] EN 206-1:2013, Concrete — specification, performance, production and con-
formity, European Standard (2013).
[13] K.W. Day, Perspective on prescriptions, Concr. Int. 27 (7) (2005) 27–30.
[14] C. Lobo, L. Lemay, K. Obla, Performance-based specifications for concrete, The
Indian Concrete Journal 79 (12) (2005) 13–17.
[15] P. Taylor, Performance-based specifications for concrete, Concr. Int. 8 (2004)
91–93.
[16] NRMCA (n.d.) P2P Initiative, National Ready-mix Concrete Association. Available
at: www.nrmca.org/P2P (Accessed: 31 January 2019).
[17] L. Linger, F. Cussigh, PERFDUB: a new French research project on performance-
based approach for justifying concrete structures durability, High Tech Concrete:
Where Technology and Engineering Meet, vol. 1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-319-59471-2.
[18] J.A. Bickley, D. Hooton, K.C. Hover, Performance specifications for durable con-
crete, Concr. Int. 28 (9) (2006) 51–57.
[19] B. Simons, Concrete performance specifications: New Mexico experience, Concr.
Int. 26 (4) (2004) 68–71.
[20] CAN/CSA-A23.1-04/A23.2-04, Concrete Materials and Methods of Concrete
Construction/Methods of Test and Standard Practices for Concrete, Canadian
Standards Association, Toronto, 2004, p. 516.
[21] Non-destructive evaluation of the penetrability and thickness of the concrete cover,
in: R. Torrent, L.F. Luco (Eds.), State of the Art Report (STAR): RILEM TC 189-NEC,
RILEM Publication S.A.R.L, 2007, p. 246.
[22] NT BUILD 443, Concrete, hardened: Accelerated chloride penetration, Nordtest
method, 1995.
[23] NT BUILD 492, Concrete, mortar and cement-based repair materials: Chloride mi-
gration coefficient from non-steady-state migration experiments, Nordtest Method,
1999.
[24] ASTM C1556, Standard Test Method for Determining the Apparent Chloride
Diffusion Coefficient of Cementitious Mixtures by Bulk Diffusion, American Society
for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 2004.
[25] BS EN 13295:2004 (2004) ‘Products and Systems for the Protection and Repair of
Concrete Structures. Test Methods. Determination of Resistance to Carbonation’,
British Standards Institute, (July).
[26] ASTM-C1202-12, Standard test method for electrical indication of concrete's ability
to resist chloride ion penetration, ASTM Annual Book of Standards, V.04.02, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA USA, 2012(100 Barr Harbour Dr., P.O. Box
28
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
C-700).
[27] SANS-3001-CO3-3, Civil engineering test methods: Part CO3-3: Concrete durability
index testing - chloride conductivity test, South African Bureau of Standards -
Standards Division, Pretoria, South Africa, 2015 978-0-626-32800-9.
[28] R. Torrent, A two-chamber vacuum cell for measuring the coefficient of perme-
ability to air of the concrete cover on site, Mater. Struct. 25 (150 July) (1992)
358–365.
[29] SANS-3001-CO3-2, Civil engineering test methods: Part CO3-2: Concrete durability
index testing - oxygen permeability test, South African Bureau of Standards -
Standards Division, Pretoria, South Africa, 2015 978-0-626-32800-9.
[30] fib, Model code for service life design, Switzerland, fib bulletin 34 (2006).
[31] K. Li, Durability Design of Concrete Structures, Wiley, Singapore, 2016.
[32] fib, fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010, Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn, Berlin,
Germany, 2013.
[33] A. Bentur, Chapter 5, in: M.G. Alexander, A. Bentur, S. Mindess (Eds.), Durability of
Concrete: Design and Construction, CRC Press (Taylor & Francis Group), 2017.
[34] J. Walraven, Design for service life: how should it be implemented in future codes,
international conference on concrete repair, rehabilitation and retrofitting,
Proceedings ICCRRR 2008, Cape Town, 24–26 Nov. 2008, 2008, pp. 3–10.
[35] ISO 13823:2008, General Principles on the Design of Structures for Durability,
International Organization for Standardization, 2008.
[36] ISO 16204:2012, Durability - Service Life Design of Concrete Structures,
International Organization for Standardization, 2012.
[37] EN 1992-1-1:2004, Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures. Part 1–1: General
Rules and Rules for Buildings, European Standard, 2004.
[38] ACI 365.1R-17, Report on Service Life Prediction, American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, MI, 2017.
[39] ISO 2394:2015, General Principles on Reliability for Structures, International
Organization for Standardization, 2015.
[40] EN 1990-1:2002, Eurocode - Basis of Structural Design, European Standard, 2002.
[41] DuraCreteR17, Final technical report, DuraCrete – probabilistic performance-based
durability design of concrete structures, The European Union–Brite EuRam III, 2000
((Document BE95-1347/R17)).
[42] T. Siemes, J. Visser, Low tensile strength in older concrete structures with alkali-
silica reaction, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Alkali-
Aggregate Reaction in Concrete, Quebec City, Canada, June 2000, 2000, pp.
1029–1038.
[43] M.G. Alexander, Chapter 6, in: M.G. Alexander, A. Bentur, S. Mindess (Eds.),
Durability of Concrete: Design and Construction, CRC Press (Taylor & Francis
Group), 2017.
[44] E. Guillon, P. Le Bescop, B. Lothenbach, E. Samson, K. Snyder, Modelling de-
gradation of cementitious materials in aggressive aqueous environments, Part II in
Star 211-PAE, Performance of Cement-based Materials in Aggressive Aqueous
Environments, Springer, 2013, pp. 1–39.
[45] J. Van der Lee, L. De Windt, V. Lagneau, Application of reactive transport models in
cement-based porous media, Proceedings in the International RILEM Symposium on
Concrete Modelling – CONMOD’08, Delft, the Netherlands, 2008.
[46] K. Tuutti, Corrosion of Steel in Concrete, Report No.CBI Research 4, Swedish
Cement and Concrete Research Institute, Stockholm, 1982, p. 82.
[47] DuraCrete, Probabilistic performance-based durability design: modelling of de-
gradation, Document, D. P. No. BE95-1347/R45, 1998 (The Netherlands).
[48] LIFE-365, Service life prediction model, computer program for predicting the ser-
vice life and life-cycle costs of reinforced concrete exposed to chlorides, ACI
Committee, vol. 365, 2005.
[49] C. Andrade, Calculation of chloride diffusion coefficients in concrete from ionic
migration measurements, Cem. Concr. Res. 23 (3) (1993).
[50] L. Tang, Chloride Transport in Concrete: Measurement and Prediction, Chalmers
University of Technology, 1996.
[51] O.E. Gjørv, Durability Design of Concrete Structures in Severe Environments, CRC
Press (Taylor & Francis Group), London and New York, 2014.
[52] STADIUM®, available at: www.simcotechnologies.com (proprietary software).
[53] K.J. Folliard, M. Juenger, A. Schindler, K. Riding, J. Poole, L.F. Kallivokas,
S. Slatnick, J. Whigham, J.L. Meadows, Prediction Model for Concrete
Behavior—Final Report, CTR-Technical Report 0-4653-1, Center for Transportation
Research at the University of Texas, Austin, TX, 2008.
[54] C. Andrade and F. Tavares, (2012) ‘LIFEPRED Service Life Prediction Program’,
Ingeniera de Seguridal Y Durabilidad S.L., Madrid, Sp.
[55] J.R. Mackechnie, Predictions of Reinforced Concrete Durability in the Marine
Environment (Research Monograph No. 1), Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Cape Town, 2001.
[56] M. Alexander, J. Mackechnie, Y. Ballim, Guide to the Use of Durability Indexes for
Achieving Durability in Concrete Structures (Research Monograph no.2),
Universities of Cape Town and Witwatersrand, 1999.
[57] T. Gardner, H. Beushausen, Rapid chloride tests for concrete – an international
overview, Concrete Plant International CPI 1 (Germany) (2006) 62–70.
[58] U.M. Angst, Predicting the time to corrosion initiation in reinforced concrete
structures exposed to chlorides, Cem. Concr. Res. 115 (2019) 559–567.
[59] M. Shakouri, D. Trejo, A time-variant model of surface chloride build-up for im-
proved service life predictions, Cem. Concr. Compos. August (2017) (2018).
[60] A. Petcherdchoo, Pseudo-coating model for predicting chloride diffusion into sur-
face-coated concrete in tidal zone: time-dependent approach, Cem. Concr. Compos.
74 (August) (2016).
[61] G. de Vera, et al., Depassivation time estimation in reinforced concrete structures
exposed to chloride ingress: a probabilistic approach, Cem. Concr. Compos. 79
(May) (2017) 21–33.
[62] M.D. Lepech, M. Geiker, H. Stang, Probabilistic design and management of
M. Alexander and H. Beushausen
environmentally sustainable repair and rehabilitation of reinforced concrete
structures, Cem. Concr. Compos. 47 (March) (2014) 19–31.
[63] R. Gettu, R. Pillai, S. Manu, R. Sundar, Service life and life-cycle assessment of
reinforced concrete with fly ash and limestone calcined clay cement, Conference
Proceedings: International Conference on Durability of Concrete Structures; Leeds,
UK, 2018.
[64] P. Beníteza, F. Rodriguesa, S. Talukdarb, S. Gavilánc, H. Varumd, Analysis of cor-
relation between real degradation data and a carbonation model for concrete
structures, Cem. Concr. Compos. 95 (January) (2019) 247–259.
[65] R. Bucher, P. Diederich, G. Escadeillas, M. Cyr, Service life of metakaolin-based
concrete exposed to carbonation: comparison with blended cement containing fly
ash, blast furnace slag and limestone filler, Cem. Concr. Res. 99 (September) (2017)
18–29.
[66] S.O. Ekolu, Model for practical prediction of natural carbonation in reinforced
concrete: part 1-formulation, Cem. Concr. Compos. 86 (February) (2018) 40–56.
[67] O.P. Kari, J. Puttonen, E. Skantz, Reactive transport modelling of long-term car-
bonation, Cem. Concr. Compos. 52 (September) (2014) 42–53.
[68] R. Neves, R. Torrent, K. Imamoto, Residual service life of carbonated structures
based on site non-destructive tests, Cem. Concr. Res. 109 (July) (2018) 10–18.
[69] B. Salvoldi, H. Beushausen, M. Alexander, The correlation between oxygen per-
meability and the carbonation of concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 85 (2015) 30–37.
[70] A. Bakera, M.G. Alexander, Durability properties of concrete containing metakaolin,
in: G. Ye, et al. (Ed.), Proceedings, 4th International Conference on Service Life
Design for Infrastructures (SLD4), vol. 125, RILEM PRO, Paris, 2018(2018).
[71] A. Silva, R. Neves, J. de Brito, Statistical modelling of carbonation in reinforced
concrete, Cem. Concr. Compos. 50 (July) (2014) 73–81.
29
Cement and Concrete Research 122 (2019) 17–29
[72] Farnam Ghasemzadeh, S.M. Mohammad Pour-Ghaz, A. M, Effect of damage on
moisture transport in concrete, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 27 (9) (2015).
[73] M. Otieno, H. Beushausen, M. Alexander, Chloride-induced corrosion of steel in
cracked concrete – part I: experimental studies under accelerated and natural
marine environments, Cem. Concr. Res. 79 (2016) 373–385.
[74] J. Ožbolt, G. Balabanić, G. Periškić, M. Kušterc, Modelling the effect of damage on
transport processes in concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (9) (2010) 1638–1648.
[75] A. Bossio, T. Monetta, F. Bellucci, G.P. Lignola, A. Prota, Modeling of concrete
cracking due to corrosion process of reinforcement bars, Cem. Concr. Res. 71 (May)
(2015) 78–92.
[76] S.M. Samindi, M.K. Samarakoon, J. Sælensminde, Condition assessment of re-
inforced concrete structures subject to chloride ingress: a case study of updating the
model prediction considering inspection data, Cem. Concr. Compos. 16 (July 2015)
(2015) 92–98.
[77] K. Sylvia, F. Johannes, S. Daniel, G. Christoph, Updating of service-life prediction of
reinforced concrete structures with potential mapping, Cem. Concr. Compos. 47
(March) (2014) 47–52.
[78] RILEM TC 270-CIM, Benchmarking Chloride Ingress Models on Real-life Case
Studies: Theory and Practice, RILEM: International Union of Laboratories and
Experts in Construction Materials, Systems and Structures, 2018.
[79] E.A.B. Koenders, Modelling of chloride ingress in concrete based on benchmarking
field results, ICCRRR2018, Cape Town, Nov 2018. MATEC Web of Conferences,
199, 01005, vol. 7, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819901005.
[80] D. Sotiris, E. Maria, V.G. Papadakis, Computer-aided modelling of concrete service
life, Cem. Concr. Compos. 47 (December) (2013).