ACI MATERIALS JOURNAL

Title no. 108-M38

TECHNICAL PAPER

Linear Polarization Resistance Tests on Corrosion Protection Degree of Post-Tensioning Grouts

by Alexandre R. Pacheco, Andrea J. Schokker, Jeffery S. Volz, and H. R. (Trey) Hamilton III
The current industry practice for acceptance testing of post-tensioning grouts includes an accelerated corrosion test (ACT), as recommended in Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) M55.1-03, Specification for Grouting of Post-Tensioned Structures. The most significant downside of the current ACT method is the length of time required to run the test, which typically ranges from 1 to 2 months to complete. The linear polarization resistance (LPR) technique, on the other hand, requires only a few hours to complete; and the research presented in this paper indicates a strong correlation between the time to corrosion, as measured by the ACT method, and the system polarization resistance, as measured by the LPR technique. Based on the test results to date, the authors recommend the use of the LPR method as a prescreen for very high-quality grouts so that lengthy ACT testing is not necessary.
Keywords: accelerated corrosion test; electrochemical tests; linear polarization resistance; post-tensioning grouts; prestressed concrete.

function of variation in potential), such as potentiodynamic linear polarization resistance (LPR),9 only takes minutes to obtain a measurement (depending on the sweep rate used). This method is already a commonly used laboratory technique to evaluate corrosion activity in reinforced concrete elements, producing accurate and highly repeatable measurements.10,11 The research presented herein investigates the possibility of applying this method as an accelerated diagnostic tool, verifying its capability not only to indicate ongoing corrosion, but also to measure the degree of corrosion protection provided by post-tensioning grouts. The data presented herein were originally obtained during a PhD dissertation in 20036 at the Pennsylvania State University, were further completed during another dissertation period in 2006 at the same institution and, more recently, at the Missouri University of Science and Technology. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE Current industry practice for acceptance testing of posttensioning grouts includes the ACT, as recommended in Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) M55.1-03, Specification for Grouting of Post-Tensioned Structures. The most significant downside of the current ACT method is the length of time required to run the test, which typically ranges from 1 to 2 months to complete. The research presented herein examines the LPR technique as an alternative method for acceptance testing of posttensioning grouts for corrosion resistance, with the benefit of significantly reduced testing times on the order of a few hours compared to 1 to 2 months after standard curing. EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION Experiment setup Figure 1 shows a schematic of the setup used for the electrochemical experiments and the electrode arrangement in the corrosion cells. Each specimen in a cell functions as the cells working electrode (WE), whereas the platinum-clad wires measuring 6.5 in. (165 mm) in length and 0.125 in. (3.175 mm) in diameter worked as the counter electrodes (CEs), and the saturated calomel electrodes (SCEs) worked as the reference electrodes (REs). The electrodes were immersed in an electrolyte solution composed of deionized water and 5% NaCl by mass. The schematic illustrates a computercontrolled potentiostat connected to eight corrosion cells through a channel multiplexer. The potentiostat controlled the voltage difference between the specimens and the reference
ACI Materials Journal, V. 108, No. 4, July-August 2011. MS No. M-2009-281.R1 received October 5, 2010, and reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright 2011, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion including authors closure, if any, will be published in the May-June 2012 ACI Materials Journal if the discussion is received by February 1, 2012.

INTRODUCTION In grouted post-tensioned tendons, the last line of defense against corrosion of the steel strands is provided by the posttensioning groutthat is, the mixture of portland cement and water in which the strands are embedded (fine aggregate and mineral and chemical admixtures can also be present). Adequate flowability, reduced shrinkage and settlement, and minimal bleeding are necessary characteristics that, along with good workmanship, will ensure that the tendon ducts are filled adequately with grout. Another important characteristic, however, is the ability of the grout to protect the tendon from corrosion. The first attempt to measure the degree of corrosion protection of post-tensioning grouts was carried out by Lankard et al.1 using an electrochemical technique known as potentiostatic polarization2 in combination with specially manufactured specimens. This test was subsequently conducted by Hamilton,3 improved by Koester,4 Schokker,5 Pacheco,6 and Pacheco et al.7 and is known today as the accelerated corrosion test (ACT). The Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) currently recommends the ACT for evaluating the corrosion resistance of post-tensioning grouts.8 Many aspects of this method still need to be considered and reevaluated, however, to improve the diagnostic capabilities of test methods that measure the anti-corrosive capabilities of post-tensioning grouts. One of the main difficulties imposed by the ACT method is the length of time required to complete the test. In addition to the standard 28 days necessary to moistcure the grout specimens, a good-quality grout may last upwards of 1000 hours, encompassing nearly 2 months of testing due to equipment downtime. This delay can be very problematic for an already hectic construction schedule when a new grout must be tested prior to use. On the other hand, an electrochemical test of the potentiodynamic type (that is, with readings of current as a ACI Materials Journal/July-August 2011

365

ACI member Alexandre R. Pacheco is an Associate Professor of civil engineering at the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. He received his BS and MS from UFRGS in 1992 and 1996, respectively; and his PhD from the Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, in 2003. His research interests include the durability of reinforced concrete structures. Andrea J. Schokker, FACI, is a Department Chair and Professor at the University of Minnesota Duluth, Duluth, MN. She is Chair of ACI Committee 130, Sustainability of Concrete, and a member of ACI Committees 222, Corrosion of Metals in Concrete, and 224, Cracking, and Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 423, Prestressed Concrete. She is also a member of ACI Subcommittee 318-G, Precast and Prestressed Concrete. ACI member Jeffery S. Volz is an Assistant Professor of civil and architectural engineering at Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO. He received his BAE, MS, and PhD from the Pennsylvania State University and is a member of ACI Committees 130, Sustainability of Concrete; 215, Fatigue of Concrete; and 222, Corrosion of Metals in Concrete, and Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 423, Prestressed Concrete. His research interests include the durability, repair, and material improvements of concrete structures. H. R. (Trey) Hamilton III is an Associate Professor of civil engineering at the University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. His research interests include the durability and behavior of prestressed concrete structures.

Fig. 2Testing in progress.

Fig. 3Schematic of specimen. protection of post-tensioning grouts. The parameter obtained from ACT teststhe time to corrosion tcorris associated with the grouts degree of corrosion protection in a qualitative manner. It is important to note that the value of tcorr does not represent the actual protection period that the tested grout would confer if applied in the field, but because this parameter is obtained from a very harsh test condition, it should provide a relative comparison between grouts, being indicative of a grouts field performance. In addition, the strand itself may also play a role in the time to corrosion initiation,13 and therefore, strands from different reels will add to the tests variability. Following the procedure used for an ACT8 to find the time to corrosion for the grouts selected for testing, a constant anodic voltage of +200 mVSCE was applied in the corrosion cells and automatic electric current readings were taken in intervals of 30 minutes until all the cells indicated corrosion, ending the test (a typical idealized output for one cell is shown in Fig. 4). The time to corrosion tcorr for the tested grout is the average result obtained from the corrosion cells considered in the test (in the ACT, it is recommended that at least six specimens be used). Potentiodynamic LPR test The potentiodynamic LPR test is a common technique in laboratory evaluations of the level of corrosion activity in concrete structures, primarily due to its simplicity, not only in its application, but also in its data interpretation. The LPR method focuses on the slope of the anodiccathodic polarization curve at the free corrosion potential Ecorrthe point at which the curve changes from anodic to cathodic behavior. It is generally regarded that within a small potential range, the slope of the polarization curve is very nearly linear at this transition point.12,14 The method applies ACI Materials Journal/July-August 2011

Fig. 1Schematic of test setup. electrodes with a voltage resolution of 2 V and could read a maximum electric current of 300 mA with a resolution of 1 fA (1 f = 1015). The channel multiplexer was able to maintain the voltage at the specified value in all cells, even while the cells were not being polarized by the potentiostat (typically in between readings). In addition, the system could compensate for voltage drops (IR compensation), a typical phenomenon in electrochemical systems that can strongly skew the measurements taken (the current interrupt12 technique was used to compensate for IR drops). A view of the ongoing test can be seen in Fig. 2. Before starting the measurements, the open circuit potential in each cell would be monitored until satisfactory stabilization, which would take approximately 2 hours (assumed throughout the experiments). Figure 3 shows a schematic of the specimens used, which were manufactured according to the recommendations given by PTI for ACT specimens8 and the procedures recommended by Pacheco6 and Pacheco et al.7 for quality control and cracking minimization. Potentiostatic polarization test As mentioned previously, the potentiostatic polarization method is the basis of the ACT, the test currently recommended by PTI to evaluate the degree of corrosion 366

Fig. 4Typical idealized output plot from potentiostatic (ACT) test. a series of potentials to the specimen, typically sweeping from 20 mV to +20 mV relative to Ecorr, and measures the resulting current (for this study, the researchers used a sweep rate of 5 mV/min and a range of 20 mV to +20 mV relative to Ecorr). It is known from electrochemistry that the response in terms of current due to variations in potential is exponentialthat is, described by the Butler-Volmer equation12 (Eq. (1)), but the linear hypothesis is perfectly acceptable for the small range of potentials applied in a test near the free corrosion potential12,14 i = i 0 exp 2.3 ---- exp 2.3 --- a c (1)

Fig. 5Typical idealized output from potentiodynamic tests with higher potentials.

where is the overpotentialthat is, the difference between the applied potential E and the reactions equilibrium potential E0; i is the current density (the measured current divided by the area of the metal exposed to the electrolyte); i0 is the current density of the system at equilibrium; and a and c are the (anodic and cathodic, respectively) Tafel constantsthat is, the tangents measured when the systems response is considered in a semi-log plot, a typical choice when potentiodynamic tests consider larger potential ranges12 (refer to Fig. 5). The information typically collected in an LPR test is the polarization resistance Rp (shown in Fig. 6), but the corrosion current density icorr could also be estimated. The former is calculated with Eq. (2)12 when the current density i is zero, whereas the latter, which can be considered as a measure of the corrosion rate,15 can be evaluated with Eq. (3).12 E Rp = -----i (2)

Fig. 6Typical idealized output from potentiodynamic tests with lower potentials. equipment adjustments, stabilization of readings, measuring process, and calculation of the polarization resistance Rp. Thus, for six cured specimens (the number of replicates recommended by PTI8), less than 3 hours would be necessary to evaluate a grout. This radically contrasts with the several weeks or months of continuous testing necessary for the current recommended methodology based on the potentiostatic test. Another aspect is that, due to the low level of potentials typically necessary to run LPR tests, there is very minimal conditioning of the specimens, which allows not only retesting on the same specimens, but also their use in other electrochemical tests. Therefore, in this work, immediately after the tests for determination of the polarization resistance Rp, potentiostatic tests were carried out to also find the ACT time to corrosion tcorr of each grout. Grout test variables Table 1 gives the conditions for the different types of grout used in this study. As can be seen, four different grout groups were chosen: a group of grouts with no admixtures (plain), a group of grouts with fly ash, one group containing silica fume, and another group of prepackaged grouts commercially available in the U.S. market. The plain grout group provided baseline results for the studythat is, grout performances without the effects of any kind of admixture. Furthermore, the current PTI specification for the ACT requires a 0.45 water-cement ratio (w/c) plain grout to serve as the control group. The next two groups in the table included either fly ash or silica fume in their formulation. 367

The corrosion current density, however, must be carefully considered, because, as can be seen, it is dependent on the Tafel constants (a and c), which vary according to the system being evaluated. a c 1 - ----i corr = ----------------------------------2.303 ( a + c ) R p (3)

An important aspect of the LPR test is that it does not take more than 30 minutes to provide a result (with the potential sweep rate used in this study), considering preliminary ACI Materials Journal/July-August 2011

Table 1Subjects and conditions of experimental investigation

Grout group Plain grout Fly ash grout (30% of Class F) Silica fume grout (3, 5, and 7%) Three prepackaged grouts Curing period, days 28, 56 28, 56 28, 56 28 Specimen designations PG 28, PG 56 FA 28, FA 56 SF3 28, SF3 56; SF5 28, SF5 56; SF7 28, SF7 56 PP A 28, PP B 28, PP C 28

curing rate, minimizing distress and shrinkage cracking in the specimens. Deionized, potable tap water was used for the mixing water. Deionization reduced the mixing water ions to a consistent baseline amount. Except for the prepackaged grouts, a 0.45 w/b was used, which is the ratio currently specified by PTI for the ACT control mixtures and the ratio recommended by some Departments of Transportation (DOTs) for acceptable plain post-tensioning grouts. The fly ash used was Class F, which is the type less active at early ages (lower calcium oxide amounts than Class C) and was also the type that was available locally. Nomenclature Labels composed of two letters and a third letter or digit followed by two digits were used in this work to easily identify the different grout groups and their specific conditions. Two letters at the beginning of the label indicate the group: PG for plain grout, FA for grout with fly ash, SF for grout with silica fume, and PP for prepackaged grout. A third letter was only used in the prepackaged group to identify one of the three commercial grouts used (A, B, or C) and a digit is used only for the silica fume grouts to indicate the amount of cement mass replaced by silica fume (3, 5, or 7%). The last two digits indicate the curing period of the grout (28 or 56 days). For example, the label PP C 28 refers to the tests run with the prepackaged Grout C, mixed with water (always deionized) at the ratio given on the products instructions (as shown in Table 2), and moist-cured for 28 days, also according to the instructions for minimum satisfactory performance. As another example, the label SF3 56 refers to the tests run with a grout prepared in the laboratory with Type II cement, a w/b of 0.45, a cement replacement of 3% by mass of silica fume, and moist-cured for 56 days. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS For each grout tested, Table 3 lists the polarization resistance Rp, as determined from the LPR test, and the time to corrosion tcorr, as determined from the ACT, which is the current industry standard for determining the measure of corrosion protection. The results are shown beginning with the grout of least protection (Grout FA 28 of only 162 9 h) and ending with the one that showed the highest level of corrosion protection (Grout PP C 28 of 909 85 h). It should be noted that, contrary to what is typically observed in concrete,16,17 supplementary cementitious materials did not improve the level of corrosion protection and, in fact, provided less protection than the plain grout. In Table 3, the variability associated with each average value shown was determined by calculating their respective experimental standard errorthat is, by dividing the standard deviation by the square root of the number of specimens used in each measurement, even though the standard error puts the focus on the mean rather than on the spread. This choice was made because, as shown in Table 3, the number of specimens in some cases was half of the recommended amount (eight) and the standard error would take that into considerationthat is, tests with fewer replicates (below the recommended amount) would tend to have a larger variability (standard error). Based on previous studies3-5 and a number of trial tests for this research, it was possible to establish that, for grouts with a tendency to generate higher levels of corrosion protection (higher tcorr times), and therefore higher variability, the recommended eight specimens were required. This was the case for the prepackaged and control grouts, whereas for ACI Materials Journal/July-August 2011

Table 2Code and w /c of prepackaged grouts

Product code A B C w/c 0.33 0.30 0.27

Table 3Rp and tcorr values measured

Grout FA 28 SF7 28 SF7 56 SF5 28 SF3 56 SF5 56 SF3 28 PG 28 FA 56 PG 56 PP A 28Y PP B 28Y PP C 28Y Rp, kcm2 169 6 251 10 136 20 211 5 172 9 183 6 249 8 325 43 246 13 397 82 641 11 711 9 618 62 tcorr , h 162 9 200 20 223 8 240 17 268 8 267 25 349 40 401 33 435 15 479 55 712 78 793 124 909 85 Specimens 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 4 8 8 8 8

Both of these mineral admixtures are typically used in cementitious compounds for improved durability performance. A significant replacement of the cement mass by fly ash (30%) was specified to enhance the effects of the admixture. Furthermore, previous research on concrete with a 30% flyash replacement has shown a substantial increase in the degree of corrosion protection in terms of chloride diffusion.16,17 For the silica fume group, three different dosages were used: 3, 5, and 7%. These values were chosen based on a recommendation that a 5% replacement provides the optimum placement characteristics for silica fume grouts,18 and effective grout placement has a significant role in the overall corrosion performance of post-tensioning grouts. The last group, which contained only prepackaged grouts, was composed of three different product brands. Only this group had water-binder ratios (w/b) other than 0.45 and only one curing period (28 days), following the instructions by the manufacturers for minimum satisfactory performance. The w/b used for the three prepackaged grouts are presented anonymously in Table 2 and the curing period of 56 days also considered in the tests was chosen to allow enough time for a full admixture response. Materials Type II cement was chosen for the grouts produced in the laboratory due to its relatively low heat generation and slow 368

Fig. 7Variation of polarization resistance Rp for different types of grout. the grouts containing mineral admixtures (silica fume and fly ash) of lower performance, four replicates would suffice. As can be better seen in Fig. 7, where both variables measured for each grout, tcorr and Rp, are shown in the same graph, the prepackaged grouts were indeed the ones that reached the higher levels of protection, also showing a slightly higher variability in their tcorr results. It can be highlighted, however, that both variables show a consistent variability along their series, with only three Rp points standing out more significantly (Grouts PG 28, PG 56, and PP C 28). Leaving aside possible localized experimental problems with those particular measurements (they were mistakenly subjected to higher voltage potentials), the readings taken for Rp indicated a high degree of repeatability throughout the testing. An important observation that can be made from Fig. 7 is that Rp is a variable that seems to be significantly affected by the quality of a grouts corrosion protection tcorr, reaching resistances, according to Table 3, that can be as high as 711 kcm2 or as low as 136 kcm2. This observation suggests a correlation between the two variables Rp and tcorr. Moreover, the small variation in Rp for small tcorr measurements (spikes in current occur early) also suggests a logarithmic relationship between them, whereas small increments in the former would conduct to large variations in the latter. This is illustrated in Fig. 8, where a logarithmic relationship provided a reasonable correlation with the data (R2 value of 0.86). Also, a logarithmic fit would perhaps agree with the behavior of the different variables involved in the phenomenonthat is, tcorr, which may be directly correlated with the level of current, should behave exponentially with Rp because resistance may be directly correlated with the applied potential (thus, logarithmically the other way around). Nevertheless, looking at the data, it seems that a linear correlation could also be applied in the region of interest, even though the logarithmic behavior may be more appropriate from a phenomenological point of view. From the data collected, there appears to be a certain degree of difficulty in obtaining values of polarization resistance below, for example, 100 kcm2, even for grouts of poorer performance. The linear correlation between tcorr and Rp is shown in Fig. 9. As can be seen, a better correlation was found between the two variables. This result also tends to ACI Materials Journal/July-August 2011

Fig. 8Logarithmic correlation between Rp and tcorr .

Fig. 9Linear correlation between Rp and tcorr . be more appropriate than the logarithmic one for practical reasons because the equation of correlation is much simpler to apply. The correlation equation is highlighted in Eq. (4), where Rp is in kcm2 and tcorr is in hours. tcorr = 1.24Rp (4)

Some considerations can be drawn by observing the experimental results and the linear correlation found for the two variables Rp and tcorr. First, the grouts of low and average corrosion protection appropriately fit the curve determined, whereas the grouts with higher corrosion protection (tcorr values of 700 to 1000 hours) experience more variability and are farther from the fitted curve. Second, a gap can be observed between two apparent groups of values: a group of low- and average-performance grouts (tcorr values of 150 to 500 hours) and another of highperformance grouts (tcorr values of 700 to 1000 hours). Moreover, too-few points represent the group of highperformance grouts because these were limited to the available prepackaged grouts on the market. Nevertheless, although further investigation is needed, the results found, together with the simplicity and high 369

repeatability of the LPR method, suggest that there is a chance for this method to be used to complement or perhaps replace current ACT procedures for estimating a grouts corrosion protection. For instance, a minimum polarization resistance value of 700 kcm2 is a possible approval limit because, according to this study, it is likely to be measured on grouts that would produce a tcorr of 868 hours in an IR-drop-compensated ACT test. This would be in accordance with current tendencies for grout approvals because the IR-drop-compensated ACT result of 868 hours should easily surpass the 1000 hours currently specified for (uncompensated) ACTs.7 CONCLUSIONS Considering the results of the experimental program conducted, where different types of grout were subjected to polarization tests of the potentiostatic (ACT) and potentiodynamic types (LPR), the following conclusions can be drawn: 1) grouts of better corrosion protection tend to show a higher variability in tcorr results, requiring more specimens to be tested, whereas Rp measurements, having a high degree of repeatability, demand a smaller number of replicates; 2) above a certain low value of polarization corrosion, apparently at approximately 100 kcm2, Rp seems to be significantly affected by the quality of a grouts corrosion protection tcorr, suggesting a logarithmic relationship between them; and 3) for practical reasons, however, a linear correlation was applied between the two variables and such a correlation allows one to say that the tcorr values found were likely to be higher than the measurements taken for Rp by a factor of 1.24 for the same grout. Nevertheless, this last result must be considered with caution because the data considered were limited and bound to the conditions and experimental setup used. As a direct consequence of this work, although further investigation is needed, considering the satisfactory correlation between the variables investigated, the simplicity of the LPR method, and its high repeatability, this method could be considered as a new accelerated test methodology to complement or perhaps replace current procedures. In this sense, as a suggestion for a possible accelerated test based on the LPR method, a minimum polarization resistance of 700 kcm2 may be recommended for a grouts approval. Although it is based on the limited data studied, there is a satisfactory correlation between the systems polarization resistance, as measured by the LPR method, and the time to corrosion, as measured by the ACT method. The LPR method could also eliminate the most significant downside of the ACT methodnamely, the length of time to run the test. To refine the relationship between the LPR and ACT methods, however, additional comparisons are required for high-performance grouts with times to corrosion ranging from 550 to 700 hours. With this continued refinement, the LPR technique may eventually supplant the ACT method for acceptance testing of post-tensioning grouts.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was made possible with the financial support provided by the Florida Department of Transportation (Contract No. BD535) and the CAPES Foundation (Brazil). Opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the sponsors.

REFERENCES
1. Lankard, D. R.; Thompson, N.; Sprinkel, M. M.; and Virmani, Y. P., Grouts for Bonded Post-Tensioned Concrete Construction: Protecting Prestressing Steel from Corrosion, ACI Materials Journal, V. 90, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1993, pp. 406-414. 2. ASTM G5-94(1999)e1, Standard Reference Test Method for Making Potentiostatic and Potentiodynamic Anodic Polarization Measurements, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1999, 12 pp. 3. Hamilton, H. R., Investigation of Corrosion Protection Systems for Bridge Stay Cables, PhD dissertation, the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 1995, 289 pp. 4. Koester, B. D., Evaluation of Cement Grouts for Strand Protection Using Accelerated Corrosion Tests, MSc thesis, the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 1995, 99 pp. 5. Schokker, A. J., Improving Corrosion Resistance of Post Tensioned Substructures Emphasizing High Performance Grouts, PhD dissertation, the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 1999, 319 pp. 6. Pacheco, A. R., Evaluating the Corrosion Protection of PostTensioning Grouts: Standardization of an Accelerated Corrosion Test, PhD dissertation, the Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 2003, 185 pp. 7. Pacheco, A. R.; Schokker, A. J.; and Hamilton, H. R., Revisions to Accelerated Corrosion Test Method for Post-Tensioning Grout, ACI Materials Journal, V. 104, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2007, pp. 123-128. 8. PTI Committee M-55, Specification for Grouting of Post- Tensioned Structures (PTI M-55.1-03), Post-Tensioning Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2003, 60 pp. 9. ASTM G59-97(2003), Standard Test Method for Conducting Potentiodynamic Polarization Resistance Measurements, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2003, 4 pp. 10. Andrade, C., and Alonso, C., On-Site Measurements of Corrosion Rate of Reinforcements, Construction and Building Materials, V. 15, Mar.-Apr. 2001, pp. 141-145. 11. So, H. S., and Millard, S. G., On-Site Measurements on Corrosion Rate of Steel in Reinforced Concrete, ACI Materials Journal, V. 104, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2007, pp. 638-642. 12. Jones, D. A., Principles and Prevention of Corrosion, second edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1995, 572 pp. 13. Schokker, A. J.; Breen, J. E.; and Kreger, M. E., Simulated Field Testing of High Performance Grouts for Post-Tensioning, Journal of Bridge Engineering, V. 7, No. 2, 2002, pp. 127-133. 14. Stern, M., and Geary, A. L., Electrochemical Polarization: IA Theoretical Analysis of the Shape of Polarization Curves, Journal of the Electrochemical Society, V. 104, No. 1, 1957, pp. 56-63. 15. ASTM G102-89 (1999), Standard Practice for Calculation of Corrosion Rates and Related Information from Electrochemical Measurements, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1999, 7 pp. 16. Montemor, M. F.; Simes, A. M. P.; and Salta, M. M., Effect of Fly Ash on Concrete Reinforcement Corrosion Studied by EIS, Cement and Concrete Composites, V. 22, No. 3, June 2000, pp. 175-185. 17. Smith, K. M.; Schokker, A. J.; and Tikalsky, P. J., Performance of Supplementary Cementitious Materials in Concrete Resistivity and Corrosion Monitoring Evaluations, ACI Materials Journal, V. 101, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2004, pp. 385-390. 18. Diederichs, U., and Schutt, K., Silica Fume Modified Grouts for Corrosion Protection of Post Tensioning Tendons, Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag, and Natural Pozzolans in Concrete: Proceedings of the Third International Conference, SP-114, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, May 1989, pp. 1173-1195.

370

ACI Materials Journal/July-August 2011