790 PIERS Proceedings, Marrakesh, MOROCCO, March 2023, 2011
Detection and Quantication of Corrosion Damage Using Ground
Penetrating Radar (GPR) Shahid Kabir 1 and Ahmad Zaki 2 1 Sustainable Materials and Infrastructure (SMI) Cluster Collaborative -electronic Design Excellence Centre (CEDEC), Engineering Campus Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Malaysia 2 School of Civil Engineering, Engineering Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Malaysia Abstract This research aims to detect the damage due to corrosion of reinforcing steel in concrete structures using ground penetrating radar (GPR) and conventional method, half-cell potential (HCP). A method to accelerate corrosion of steel rebar in concrete samples to dierent degrees is applied, the method consists of introducing a direct current (DC) power supply and 5% sodium chloride (NaCl) solution as an electrolyte to the rebar to induce signicant corrosion within a short period of time. The 2 GHz GPR is used to detect the corrosion in the reinforced concrete slabs after 28 days of standard moist preservation. The results are compared with those obtained using the HCP method. Both of the GPR and the HCP show good performance in determining the degree of corrosion. 1. INTRODUCTION Corrosion is a worldwide problem facing the concrete structures [1]. Many reports have highlighted that concrete structures are damaged by corrosion all over the world [25]. Major cause of dam- ages are inadequate planning, wrong estimation, and bad workmanship. The damages need to be repaired and maintained [6, 7]. The structures need to be repaired after a short service life [8]. The repair and maintenance of concrete structures are nearly as important as new constructions. Consequently, visual inspection of whole structure is regular inspection to asses the condition of corrosion in concrete structures. However, if there are no conclusions can be obtained by visual inspection, a reliable inspection method is needed before the functionality of a structure is seriously damaged [811]. Non-destructive testing (NDT) is objective corrosion inspection method. The NDT method should be done without damaging the concrete. The NDT methods can be applied to both new and old structures. For new structures, the principal applications are likely to be quality control of materials or construction. In the old structures, the NDT methods are expected to provide the needed feedback in monitoring for detection and identication of the deterioration [12]. Half-cell potencial, one of NDT methods were used widely to test the rebar corrosion. This paper presents applicability of GPR that allows the detection of rebar corrosion in concrete. The GPR results are compared with half-cell potential results in order to provide a more in-depth evaluation of corrosion of concrete structures and to increase the accuracy and reliability of deterioration assessment for monitoring and safety analysis. 2. REVIEW 2.1. Half-cell Potential (HCP) The HCP is the mostly useful method for assessing corrosion of the rebars. Basically, the HCP measurements are simple, inexpensive and virtually NDT to provide a condition of the corrosion activity and identify risk of corrosion zones. These measurements can be used to estimate the corro- sion risk of steels even if there are no signs of corrosion on the concrete surface, which is a signicant advantage for inspecting existing concrete structures. The HCP could localize the chloride-induced corrosion of the rebars and improve the quality of condition assessment [13]. The HCP provides information to calculate the probability of corrosion degree and in some cases information on the possible presence of damage if this corrosion is in advanced stage [8, 10]. Interpretation of HCP test results is carried out as per the ASTM C876 guidelines [15] The ASTM C876 states that the probability of corrosion is less than 10% if the potential is greater than 200 mV, whereas potential values lower than 350 mV indicate a high probability of corrosion (> 90%) However, this test does not allow the detection of delamination in a direct manner. Progress In Electromagnetics Research Symposium Proceedings, Marrakesh, Morocco, Mar. 2023, 2011 791 2.2. Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) The GPR is an electromagnetic investigation method. It is also known as surface penetrating radar or electromagnetic reection method. Mostly it is used in reection mode where a signal is emitted via an antenna into the structure under investigation. Reected energy caused by changes in material properties is recorded and analysed [7]. The GPR is a potential method for periodic inspection and maintenance of concrete structures [9, 16, 17]. GPR has become a valuable tool for the NDT of concrete structures for technological advancements over the past decade [9]. In detail, GPR technology is employed for: localization and estimation of reinforcing bars, localization and the dimensions of voids, localization of cracking, localization and dimensions of voids, localization of honeycombey or cracking, corrosion detection, and estimation of bar size [1821]. GPR is capable for direct and early detection of corrosion. However, most of corrosion detection are accomplished in laboratory and need advances study related to corrosion and the GPR universally [22]. 3. METHODS In sample preparations, rebars are immersed in a solution of 5% sodium chloride (NaCl). The rebars is exposed to the solution using DC power supply with some duration of rebar exposure (0, 1, 3, and 7 days). 0 day for no corrosion rebar, 1 day for corrosion, 3 days for middle corrosion and 7 days for high corrosion. The corrosing rebars is dened as the anode while a rebar facing the corrosing rebars is dened as the cathode. The current of 10 V (Volt) and 1 A (Ampere) are applied in the corrosion process. Furthermore, the corroded rebars are induced to concrete mixture. The concrete slab dimension are l = 1 m, w = 1 m, and h = 0.3 m. The concrete grade is C30. Portland cement, uncrushed sand, crushed limestone with a maximum aggregate size of 20 mm are used to prepare the concrete mixture. The y-type reinforced bars (rebars) with 20 mm diameter is selected. The 2 GHz of GPR manufactured by IDS (Ingegneria Dei Sistemi S.p.A) Italy and the digital half-cell manufactured by SCRIBE, were employed to detect the corrosion in reinforced concrete slabs after 28-days of standars moist curing. The GPR results could be proposed in a-scan, b- scan, c-scan, and 3D image. In this paper, authors used 3D image as the GPR data for corrosion detection. In the other hand, the HCP is adjusted at 10 mV. Desired grid on the 1 m 2 surface of concrete slab is marked out. The grid size is 10 10 cm. The four rebars are placed in b, d, f, and h to represent no corrosion, low corrosion, middle corrosion, and high corrosion, respectively. Eight points is taken for each rebar for HCP test. The point is taken from point 1 until the end of rebar on concrete structure in point 8. The grid of b 1 b 8 for no corrosion rebar, d 1 d 8 for low corrosion rebar, f 1 f 8 for middle corrosion rebar, and h 1 h 8 for high corrosion rebar. 4. RESULTS B-scan is the raw data from scanning that already been ltered. Figure 1 shows the b-scans at dierent location of scanning but in same direction of tranverse. Figures 1(a) and (c) are the location of rebar at the end and beginning. There is no corroded rebar in that gure. Figure 1(b) is the location of corroded rebar in three rebar with dierent degree of corrosion, but the wave shows same characteristic for the all four rebar with Figures 1(a) and (c). The view of corroded rebar also can be seen in Figure 2. C-scan at depth 0.10 m can view the clearly rebar but the image is not clear to view the dierent degree of corrosion. The 3D image of GPR data showed that the corrosion can be detected for high corrosion. However, the GPR could not visualized for low and middle corrosion because the image is not clear, as shown in Figure 3. The unclearness image of rebar in low and middle corrosion was caused by human error in sample (a) (b) (c) Figure 1: B-scans data, (a) at the end of rebar, (b) at corroded rebar, (c) at beginning of rebar. 792 PIERS Proceedings, Marrakesh, MOROCCO, March 2023, 2011 Figure 2: C-scan data. Figure 3: The 3D image of GPR. Table 1: Digital half-cell grid. 1 2 3 155 162 178 201 4 152 152 185 205 5 150 153 182 201 6 151 158 184 202 7 150 157 185 205 8 157 166 187 203 9 155 173 187 205 10 155 173 184 206 A B C D E F G H I J K preparation. The error is especially in use of the vibrator stick to compact the rebars. Therefore, the end of rebar is not same high with the beginning of rebar. Table 1 below shows the grid and the potential reading on pre-determined grid. Test area is 1 m 2 and the grid size is 10 cm, horizontally and vertically. As presented in Section 3, number of points taken is 8 for each rebar. For rebar exposure times 0, 1, and 3 days the percentage chance of corrosion activity is 5%. And for 7 days exposure time, the value for percentage chance of corrosion activity is 50%. 5. CONCLUSION This paper shows the detection corrosion of GPR and half-cell potential. The 3D image of GPR data showed that the corrosion can be detected for high corrosion. There is dierent pattern on corroded rebar and the diameter of corroded rebar less than uncorroded rebar. The GPR give results that are compared with half-cell potential. The half-cell potential give results that 7 days of exposure time of rebar (high corrosion) have 50% probability in value and 5% chance of corrosion activity for no corrosion, low corrosion and middle corrosion. Therefore, the GPR have applicability to detection corrosion of corroded rebar in advance stage base on the image. The authors of this paper believe that image proceesing techniques should be used to get best classication and interpretation the GPR images of corrosion. REFERENCES 1. Badawi, M. and K. Soudki, Control of corrosion-induced damage in reinforced concrete beams using carbon ber-reinforced polymer laminates, Journal of Composites for Construction, Vol. 9, No. 2, 195201, 2005. 2. Ahmad, S., Reinforcement corrosion in concrete structures, its monitoring and service life prediction-a review, Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 25, Nos. 45, 459471, 2003. 3. Yingshu, Y., J. Yongsheng, and P. S. Surendra, Comparison of two accelerated corrosion techniques for concrete structures, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 104, No. 3, 344, 2007. Progress In Electromagnetics Research Symposium Proceedings, Marrakesh, Morocco, Mar. 2023, 2011 793 4. Capozucca, R., Damage to reinforced concrete due to reinforcement corrosion, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 9, No. 5, 295303, 1995. 5. Cleland, D. J., K. M. Yeoh, and A. E. Long, Corrosion of reinforcement in concrete repair, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 11, No. 4, 233238, 1997. 6. Nagi, M., Corrosion evaluation of reinforced concrete bridges, ASCE, 1616, 2005. 7. Hugenschmidt, J. and R. Mastrangelo, GPR inspection of concrete bridges, Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 28, No. 4, 384392, 2006. 8. Elsener, B., C. Andrade, J. Gulikers, R. Polder, and M. Raupach, Hall-cell potential mea- surements Potential mapping on reinforced concrete structures, Materials and Structures, Vol. 36, No. 7, 11, 2003. 9. Wiggenhauser, H. and H. W. Reinhardt, NDT in civil engineering: experience and results of the for 384 research group, AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1211, 4754, 2010. 10. Rhazi, J., O. Dous, and S. Laurens, A new application of the GPR technique to reinforced concrete bridge decks, Proceedings of 4th Middle East NDT Conference and Exhibition, King- dom of Bahrain, December 2007. 11. Arndt, R. and F. Jalinoos, NDE for corrosion detection in reinforced concrete structures A benchmark approach, Proceedings of Non-destructive Testing in Civil Engineering, Nantes, France, June 30July 3, 2009. 12. Bu yu ko ztu rk, O, Imaging of concrete structures, NDT and E International, Vol. 31, No. 4, 233243, 1998. 13. Elsener, B., Half-cell potential mapping to assess repair work on RC structures, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 15, Nos. 23, 133139, 2001. 14. ASTM C876-09, Standard test method for half-cell potentials of uncoated reinforcing steel in concrete, 1991. 15. Clemena, G. G., Short Pulse Radar Methods, CRC Press, 1991. 16. Laurens, S., J. P. Balayssac, J. Rhazi, G. Klysz, and G. Arliguie, Non-destructive evalua- tion of concrete moisture by GPR: Experimental study and direct modeling, Materials and Structures/Materiaux et Constructions, Vol. 38, No. 283, 827832, 2005. 17. Maierhofer, C. and S. Leipold, Radar investigation of masonry structures, NDT and E International, Vol. 34, No. 2, 139147, 2001. 18. Barrile, V. and R. Pucinotti, Application of radar technology to reinforced concrete structures: A case study, NDT and E International, Vol. 38, No. 7, 596604, 2005. 19. Maierhofer, C., Nondestructive evaluation of concrete infrastructure with ground penetrating radar, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 3, 287297, 2003. 20. Bungey, J. H., Sub-surface radar testing of concrete: A review, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 18, No. 1, 18, 2004. 21. He, X. Q., Z. Q. Zhu, Q. Y. Liu, and G. Y. Lu, Review of GPR rebar detection, PIERS Proceedings, 804813, Beijing, China, March, 2327, 2009. 22. Kim, W., Ground penetrating radar application for non-destructive testing: Bridge deck inspection and dowel bar detection, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Missouri-Rolla, 2003.