Pros and cons of chloride limits: A

comparative summary
Proposals for stricter limits on chlorides added to concrete mixes are being made.
The following arguments from various sources deal with the general idea of
tighter limits, not the exact level at which limits ought to be set.
FAVORING STRICTER LIMITS OPPOSED TO STRICTER LIMITS
• The repair of corroded structures can cost four • Calcium chloride admixtures have not really been
or five times as much as the original structure. Strict shown to be the cause of chloride-promoted corrosion
limitations on use of chlorides would eliminate much in structures. On the other hand, other accelerators
of this need for repair. The cost of nonchloride accel- cost $2 to $6 more per cubic yard, and many of them
erators, even if three or four times that of chloride- are only half as effective as calcium chloride. A policy
containing accelerators, is small by comparison. of severely limitingchlorides would adversely affect
concrete producers and decrease the efficiency and
versatility of contractors.

• The ACI committees studying limitations on chlo-
ride are not trying to single out calcium chloride or
admixtures containing calcium chloride; what they
are trying to do is to establish safe limits on chloride
ion ion from whatever source.
• There is some difference in both amount and ef-
fect between chlorides from admixtures and other
chlorides that find their way into hardened concrete.
The amount of chloride introduced by an admixture
tends to be small compared with the amount that can
intrude hardened concrete. Fu rt h e rm o re a large por-
tion of the chloride from the admixture soon becomes
insoluble and mostly unavailable for corrosion.

• If chloride from the environment intrudes con • Evidence that calcium chlorideand admixtures
crete, any calcium chloride that has been intentional containing calcium chloride have contributed seri-
ously added to the mix will augment the action of the in ly to corrosion is scarce. Many times, howe ve r, corro-
truded chloride inpromoting corrosion. sion caused by penetration of chloride deicers into
concrete has been wrongly attributed to calcium chlo
ride introduced as an admixture.

• Concrete suppliers are not always aware that • Where it is important to know the chloride con
many proprietary admixtures contain calcium chlo- tent of all ingredients of concrete this can be required
ride. A supplier who uses calcium chloride plus an without establishing stricter chloride limits on all con
admixture may unknowingly exceed chloride ion lim crete used in contact with steel.
its. Strict limitations on chloride would force disclo-
sure of the chloride content of all materials used in
concrete.

• Strict limits on chloride are needed because the
environment of a structure can change during its life
time if its use changes. It is also true that concrete in
service often contains considerable moisture, even
though it appears to be dry, and so is often more sub-
ject to potential corrosion than might be thought.
• Reinforced concrete containing calcium chloride
admixtures has proven to be trouble-free when 2 per-
cent or less calcium chloride by weight of cement is
used and where adequate cover of dense concrete is
provided.

• The industry has other methods than using calci-
um chloride to decrease setting time or increase the
rate of gaining strength: steam curing; use of hot wa
ter, insulation, or both; use of Type III cement; use of
water reducers or superplasticizers; or use of nonchlo-
ride accelerators. Although the use of nonchloride
accelerators is relatively new, there has now been a
considerable amount of experience with them.
• Calcium chloride is often the handiest, most eco-
nomical means of achieving accelerated setting and
accelerated strength gain. There are no long-term data
on most of the new nonchloride accelerators.If the
nitrite inhibitors in some of these should finally ox-
idize, perhaps these nonchloride accelerators might
also promote corrosion.
 FAVORING STRICTER LIMITS
20• Calcium chloride is not safe for use with pre
stressed concrete and it has been prohibited for that
purpose for some time.
• Strict limits on chloride are needed as an effec
tive safeguard against corrosion where there may be
inadequate compaction. Inadequate compaction can
enhance corrosion by allowing moisture and oxygen
to gain access to the reinforcing steel. Inadequate
compaction can also cause moisture to move toward
the cold face of the concrete, carrying soluble chlo-
ride and creating differences in chloride concentra
tion within the concrete; these concentration differ-
ences further enhance the rate of corrosion.
• Some added chloride remains soluble, no matter
how small the amount of admixture added. Cements
low in tricalcium aluminate permit more soluble chlo-
ride than those high in tricalcium aluminate.
• Calcium chloride is often used in varying
amounts in the same structure to accommodate
changes in weather during construction. The result
ing differences in chloride ion concentration pro
mote corrosion. Very strict limits on chloride could
p re vent these wide variations in chloride content.
• Where concrete is subject to sulfate attack the
attack is greater in concretes containing significant
amounts of chloride. The reaction between cement
alkalies and reactive aggregates is also made worse
by significant amounts of chloride.
• Corrosion can occur when the chloride ion con
centration is above the threshold value. Depending
on conditions, the threshold value is commonly con-
sidered to be about 1.0 to 1.5 pounds per cubic yard.
This amount of chloride could be exceeded if only 0.5
percent calcium chloride dihydrate (flake) by weight
of cement were added to a mix made with 400 to 600
pounds of cement per cubic yard.
• Nonchloride accelerators have proliferated in re
cent years because engineers are increasingly fearful
of corrosion. If it is expected that the concrete in one
small part of a job might become subject to corrosion,
the engineer sometimes bans calcium chloride from
the whole job for fear that it might accidentally getd
use in the critical area.
OPPOSED TO STRICTER LIMITS
• Proponents of calcium chloride admixtures gen-
erally agree that these admixtures should not be used
in prestressed concrete. (There is some evidence, how
e ve r, that even in prestressed concrete calcium
chloride can be safe if used with certain precautions.)
• Standard specifications should emphasize that
special attention should be given to compaction of
mixes containing chlorides.
• The amounts of soluble chloride from admixtures
are generally very small compared with potential
amounts from other sources. One reason that a ban
was established on calcium chloride admixtures in
England is that much sea-dredged aggregate is used
there. Even after washing, this aggregate is likely to
contribute about 0.30 percent chloride ion in the con
crete—not large in itself, but significant.
• The industry should not be prevented from find-
ing and choosing other, more economical means than
strict chloride limitation to resolve the problem of dif-
ferences in chloride ion concentration in a structure.
• Special requirements can be established for spe-
cial cases like sulfate attack and alkalai-aggregate re-
action without limiting chloride in all circumstances.
• Incorporation of normal amounts of calcium chlo-
ride as an admixture does not automatically mean
that the 4 to 6 pounds per cubic yard of chloride added
will be available to promote corrosion. Indeed, the
amount of soluble chloride rapidly diminishes within a
week.
• The fears or precautions of some specifiers
should not govern the practice of those who know that
they can design and build safely and efficiently with
mixes containing calcium chloride. This inexpensive
admixture can contribute faster setting, reduced
bleeding, earlier finishing, shorter curing time at all
temperatures, higher early strength with less energy
consumption than steam curing, improved early resis
tance to weathering, an extended construction season
and earlier use of a structure.
 Those who favor stricter limits tend to be con-
vinced that putting a severe limitation on the chlo-
ride used in concrete can eliminate much of the seri-
ous problem of corrosion, and that any extra cost
that results would be a small price to pay for reduc-
ing the problem in some places and eliminating it in
others.
Those who are against making the limits stricter
tend to believe that (a) such requirements would
p re vent the advantageous use in reinforced concrete
of calcium chloride (or admixture containing sub-
stantial amounts of calcium chloride), and (b) that
calcium chloride as an admixture is not really a sig-
nificant source of the corrosion associated with

PUBLICATION #C820811
Copyright © 1982, The Aberdeen Group
All rights reserved