SEC18: Proceedings of the 11th Structural Engineering Convention - 2018

Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India, December 19 - 21, 2018

Paper No. 20180380

STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING OF CORROSION DISTRESSED

HIGH RISE RCC BUILDINGS BY CORRELATING VARIOUS RESULTS

SayantanBosuChoudhury1*, Susmita Choudhury2, Jafar Sadak Ali3,

Debasish Bandyopadhyay4

1,2,4
Department of Construction Engineering, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
email:ronnie.sayantan@gmail.com*, csusmita848@gmail.com , dban65@yahoo.com
3
Department of Civil Engineering, Aliah University, Newtown, Kolkata, India
email:jafarsadakali@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Reinforced concrete structures often experiences premature distress and damages due to poor construction
technique, use of poor quality materials, lack of quality control etc. Corrosion distress in RCC buildings
seems to be one of the most significant reasons responsible for structural deterioration. Several Non-
destructive Test (NDT) techniques are available for condition assessment of RCC structures to understand
the existing strength, quality of concrete in terms of development of internal cracks and susceptibility to
reinforcement corrosion in concrete. However, there is no direct correlation between these different test
results of structural properties of the existing structure. The present study aims to correlate these different
NDT results with respect to corrosion distress in RCC buildings. Extensive non-destructive test data and
chemical analysis of concrete is studied to estimate the corrosion damage of the building. Subsequently,
the corrosion distress is discussed to address the issue of structural health monitoring in a statistical
framework.
Keywords: Half-Cell Potentiometer, Statistical Analysis, Structural Health Monitoring, Ultrasonic.

1. INTRODUCTION chlorides, carbon dioxide, moisture along with

Early deterioration of concrete structure is quite
common in today‟s world. There are several
factors responsible for this concrete deterioration
includes absence of good quality ingredients of
concrete & its production process, aggressive
environment, improper design and construction,
bad workmanship, inadequate quality control
etc. Corrosion is one of the most common and
frequent causes responsible for the early
deterioration of RCC structures. Even if concrete
is good in terms of strength, the corrosion of
reinforcement bars in concrete due to ingress of
inadequate cover can be a great concern of
structural reliability, which even lead to
structural failure. Corrosion of reinforcement
bars in reinforced cement concrete structure is
one of the alarming issues for damage of RCC
structures. Cracking, spalling, reduction in
cross-sectional area & change in elastic modulus
of reinforcement and loss of bond between
concrete & corroded reinforcement are the major
outcome of distresses in concrete structure due
to corrosion. Fig.1 shows corrosion distress of a
column & stair waist slab of a housing complex.

SHM32 | P a g e

Fig-1: Corrosion Distress in a RCC Structure
Several test for corrosion in concrete structures
is conducted. Extensive NDT is necessary for
proper diagnosis of distressed structure.
2. CORROSION MECHANISM
The Corrosion is an electrochemical process that
occurs at anodic spots on the steel surface within
parent concrete. Anode & cathode regions are
develop on the surface due to slight composition
differences of metal and/or due to variations in
the surrounding concrete conditions. The
following reaction occurs at anode and cathode.
Anode: Fe → Fe2+ (Metallic iron) + 2e-
Cathode: ½ O2 + H2O + 2e- → 2OH-
There are several parameters essential to initiate
the corrosion mechanism. Two important
parameters, presence of oxygen and humidity
acts as an electrolyte without which corrosion is
not possible. The rate of corrosion is slow if the
amount of water or oxygen is limited. Presence
of humidity, moisture and oxygen acts as
catalyst for occurrence of corrosion thus forms
more OH- ions and thereby producing more rust
component Fe(OH)- as shown in Fig 2.
The reactions represent the formation of rust
after the iron dissolution occurs at the anodic
sites in the reinforcement.
Fe2++2OH− → Fe(OH)2 (Ferrous Hydroxide)
4Fe(OH)2+2H2O+O2 →4Fe(OH)3 (Ferric
Hydroxide)
2Fe(OH)3 → 2H2O+Fe2O3 · H2O (Rust)
Above electrochemical equation shows the
process is a cyclic one which release water
molecule after formation of rust on
reinforcement which again forms OH-ions at
cathode.
SHM33 | P a g e
SEC18: Paper No. 20180380
Fig-2: Typical Electro-Chemical Process in RCC
Factors affecting the corrosion are listed below.
 pH value of concrete  Free Moisture
 Severity of exposure  Oxygen
 Quality of materials  Carbonation
 Reinforcement Cover  Chlorides
 Initial curing conditions
 Quality of concrete
 Ambient temp & humidity  Formation of cracks
3. ASSESSMENT OF CORROSION
The simplest way to assess the susceptibility of
corrosion by measuring the potential difference
between a standard portable half-cell, normally
copper (Cu) / copper sulphate (CuSO4) electrode
placed on the surface of concrete with
reinforcement underneath. The reference
electrode is connected to the positive end of the
voltmeter and the reinforcement to the negative
end as shown in Fig 3. The test gives the
susceptibility of corrosion activity at the point
where the measurement of potential is taken
place. An electrical connection is to be
developed with the reinforcement and the half-
cell is moved across the saturated concrete
surface.
Fig-3: HCPT Assess Corrosion Susceptibility
The risk of corrosion is evaluated by means of
potential gradient obtained. The test result may
 SEC18: Paper No. 20180380

be interpreted in accordance to ASTM as Pulse velocity

follows referred to Table 1.
Table 1: HCPT Range Accordance to ASTM
Susceptibility to
HCPT (mV)
Corrosion
≥ -200 Low to extent of 10%
-200 to -350 Medium in tune of 50%
≤ -350 High to extent of 90%
Ultra Sonic Pulse Velocity Test is a non-
destructive test method which indicates the
quality of concrete in terms of cracks, voids,
honeycomb etc. The test doesn‟t have any direct
relation to corrosion but at early stage of
corrosion, micro-cracks are developed within the
concrete near to the reinforcement bars. Thus
susceptibility to corrosion of reinforcement
within the concrete can indirectly identified
from the UPV values.
In this test procedure, the ultra-sonic pulse is
produced by the transducer which is held in
contact with one surface of the concrete and the
pulse of vibration is converted into an electrical
signal received by the receiver which is held in
contact with another surface of the concrete as
shown in Fig 4. The pulse velocity (V) is given
by V=L/T where, L is the path length and T is
the time taken by the pulse to travel within the
concrete from the transducer to the receiver.
Quality of concrete
(Km/sec)
≥ 4.5 Excellent
4.5 to 3.5 Good
3.5 to 3.0 Medium
≤ 3.0 Doubtful
Chemical test includes the measurement pH of
the concrete. Since, concrete is alkaline in nature
having pH around 13 at its early stage after
construction but with time pH value fall as
reaction occurs between carbon dioxide of the
atmosphere and alkalis in concrete. However,
pH of concrete relates to carbonation, alkali-
silica reaction, reinforcement corrosion etc.
Dilute phenolphthalein is poured on a fresh
concrete core which shows the change of pH of
concrete and gives a direct measure to the
carbonation depth as shown in Fig 5.
Fig-5: Carbonation Measured on Concrete Core
5. NUMERICAL ANALYSIS:

A multi-storey frame in STAAD & MATLAB

platform is considered as shown in Fig 6 & Fig
7. Static and dynamic analyses are performed to
understand the behaviour of the frame under
different corroded state of reinforced steel.

Fig-4: UPV Assess Quality of Concrete

The quality of concrete is evaluated by means of

velocity obtained. The test result may be
interpreted in accordance to IS Code as follows
referred to Table 2.
Fig-6: Mathematical Model of the Frame
Table 2: UPV Range Accordance to IS Code

SHM34 | P a g e

Fig-7: Numerical Model generated in MATLAB
The degree of degradation, D used to measure
the corrosion severity, which is defined as:
D = ( Vc - Vo / Vo) x 100% ......................... (1)
Where, Vo is the intact volume and Vc denotes
the corroded volume. The modulus of Elasticity
(E) and yield stress (Y), has been evaluated
based on the equation as suggested by Jurisic et
al.
E(D) = -1.0349D + 206, GPa ...................... (2)
The yield stress Y results fit to a quadratic
regression equation (3) as shown below.
Y(D)= 0.0229D2 + 0.5551D + 235, GPa ........ (3)
Degree of corrosion is varied 1% to 50% and the
change in the Modulus of Elasticity (E) and
yield stress (Y) are computed based on the
correlation equations as shown in Eq. 1 to Eq. 3
and shown in Fig 8 and Fig 9 respectively.
Fig-8: Plot of degraded E (N/sqm) values
SHM35 | P a g e
SEC18: Paper No. 20180380
Fig-9: Plot of degraded Y (N/sqm) values
The change in the static output parameter like
deflection at selected degree of freedom and
dynamic parameters like natural frequencies are
noted using conventional static and Eigen value
solution. The overall programme for parametric
identification is shown below.
Modify the Model F.E Modeling of the structure
Estimate Degree of Deterioration (D)
Insert „D‟ & calculate E(D),Y(D)
Static Parameter like deflection (δ)
Modal Parameter like frequency (ω)
Fig-10: Flowchart for Parametric Analysis
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Extensive field test for corrosion susceptibility is
performed at a multi-storied RCC residential
complex. The building has suffered premature
corrosion distress. Extensive Half Cell
Potentiometer Test (HCPT), Ultra Sonic Pulse
Velocity Test (UPV), carbonation test and
chemical analysis at randomly selected concrete
& reinforcement samples has conducted. The
maximum & minimum HCPT values at different
floor levels and at basement of different tower
buildings are shown in Fig 11 & Fig 12.
 SEC18: Paper No. 20180380

-600
HCPT Max. HCPT Min. From the above figure we may conclude that the
susceptibility of corrosion can be confirmed
from the UPV results in addition to the HCPT
values. The developed micro-cracks near to the
-300
corroded reinforcement bars may be indicated
from the deteriorated value of UPV. It may be
inferred that greater risk of corrosion is indicated
0
by the lower UPV values at a greater rate.
Similarly, a relationship between results of
HCPT with pH has also been attempted.
Fig-11: Corrosion Susceptibility of Columns
Assuming the degree of degradation due to
HCPT result of -600mV as 100% & -200mV as
HCPT Max. HCPT Min.
0% and in case of pH test the degree of
-600
degradation for pH reading of 10.5 as 100% &
12.5 as 0%, Fig 14 is drawn between these
-300 normalised pH (NU) & normalised HCPT (NH).
100 y = 0.0007x3 - 0.1044x2 + 5.9206x - 84.4180
R² = 0.9783
0 75
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9
NH 50
Fig-12: Basement Columns of the Towers
It is observed from the Fig 11 & Fig 12 that the 25
corrosion susceptibility is more at basement
columns at most of the towers may be due to 0
0 25 50 75 100
greater moisture movement. It seems that the
corrosion distress not only depends on the NP
exposure condition alone but also on the quality Fig-14: Relation between HCPT & pH
of concrete, cover to reinforcement, temperature
stress and composition of reinforcements. From the above figure we may conclude that
A relationship between results of HCPT with susceptibility of corrosion can also be confirmed
UPV has been attempted. Assuming the degree from the pH results as alkalinity of concrete
of degradation due to HCPT result of -600mV decreases. Combining these two correlations, the
as 100% & -200mV as 0% and in case of UPV degree corrosion degradation (DH) with respect
test the degree of degradation for UPV reading to HCPT in terms of UPV & pH values may be
of 3km/s as 100% & 4.5 km/s as 0%, Fig 13 is DH= aU4+bU3+ cP3+dU2+ eP2+ fU + gP + h
drawn between these normalised UPV (NU) and Where, a, b, c, d, e, f, g & h are constant.
normalised HCPT (NH).
The changes in horizontal deflection of the
100.0 y = 5E-05x4 - 0.0093x3 + 0.6889x2 - 21.22x + corner ground floor column (node 7) & first
258.08
R² = 0.9966
floor column (Node 13) are plotted in Fig 15 &
80.0 Fig 16 respectively.
NH

60.0

40.0

20.0
0.0 25.0 50.0 75.0 100.0
NU
Fig-13: Relation between HCPT & UPV

SHM36 | P a g e
 SEC18: Paper No. 20180380

can be reaffirmed with greater confidence from

the UPV & pH results in addition to the HCPT
10 Node 7,DOF=37
Deflection (m) x 10^-7
values. It may also be inferred that greater risk
of corrosion is indicated with greater confidence
9 towards the lower UPV values. A correlation
equation of the degree of corrosion degradation
8 with respect to HCPT indicator (DH) from the
0 10 20 30 40 UPV & pH values is proposed. The lateral
Degree of Corrosion (%)
deflection of the considered corner column of
the sppecified building model gradually
Fig-15: Plot of deflection change increases for all DOF.
The lateral deflection of the considered building
model increases with the increase of corrosion
Deflection (m) x 10^-7

degradation. The deflection increases as the

11.5 Node 13,DOF=73
degree of corrosion increases. However, it is
observed that the rate of this deflection
10.5 increment is more up to 10% corrosion than
beyond 10% degree. It seems that the deflection
9.5 check may be an important estimater of the
0 10 20 30 40 reliability and remaining life of the structure,
Degree of Corrosion (%) particularly considering the earthquake. The
natural frequency are also reduced due to
Fig-16: Plot of deflection change corrosion but at a constant rate.
It is observed that the deflection increases as the
degree of corrosion increases. The rate of 6. REFERENCES
increment of this deflection is more up to 10%
[1] Ioannis Balafas; and Chris J. Burgoyne
corrosion than beyond 10% degree.
“Modeling the Structural Effects of Rust in
Similarly, the change in natural frequency is also
Concrete Cover” ASCE, August 2010.
studied for the first few modes as shown below.
[2] J. G. Cabrera “Deterioration of Concrete
Table 3: Change in Natural Freq. with Corrosion Due to Reinforcement Steel Corrosion”
Cement & Concrete Composites 18 (1996)
Degree of Corrosion (%) 47-59 0 1996 Elsevier Science Limited
Mode
No without [3] Néstor F. Ortega & Sandra I. Robles
5 10 20 40
corrosion “Assessment Of Residual Life of Concrete
1st 1.2592 1.2514 1.2434 1.2270 1.1921 Structures Affected By Reinforcement
2nd 1.8209 1.8095 1.7980 1.7742 1.7236 Corrosion”, HBRC Journal Volume 12,
3rd 2.7227 2.7058 2.6886 2.6530 2.5773
Issue 2, August 2016, Pages 114-122.
[4] P. Jurisic and J. Parunov “Influence of
4th 2.9500 2.9317 2.9130 2.8745 2.7925
corrosion-related degradation of
5th 3.3311 3.3104 3.2893 3.2458 3.1532 mechanical properties of shipbuilding steel
It is observed that the frequency of all the on collapse strength of plates and stiffened
considered mode reduces with the increment of panels” ISBN 978-1-138-02887-6
the degree of corrosion almost at a constant rate. [5] Quraishi MA, Nayak DK, Kumar R, and
Kumar V “Corrosion of Reinforced Steel in
5. CONCLUSION Concrete and Its Control: An overview”.
Journal of Steel Structures & Construction
Base on the experimental data and subsequent 2:124. doi: 10.4172/2472-0437.1000124
numerical study, it may be concluded that most (2017)
of the towers basements have suffered greater
corrosion risk. The susceptibility of corrosion

SHM37 | P a g e