Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
~~ \ I Ct t
~S
ABSTRACT
Primers are customarily used to preventjurther corrosion of
rebar during the repair process for corrosion-damaged concrete structures on the coast ofYUt:atn. However, there are
not enough data about their effectiveness l this enviroronent.
TIlis work presents laboratory data of mortar specimens
where primers to the relforcement were used as they are
currently llocalized repairs ltropical marine coasts. Four
different. locaIly available primers were used accordlg to
their hypotheticaL protection mechanism (banier, cathodic protection. inhibition. and repassivation). Primers were applied to
the rebars and then embedded lmortar and subjected to two
exposiffe conditions: partiaI immersion to different solutions
of sodium chIoride (NaCl; 0.4, 2.0, and 5.0%) and wet and
dry cycles (12 h wet and 12 h dry) to a NaCl solution (3.5%)
at 50C. Th.eelectrochemicaL behavior of the specimens was
followed through polarization resistance, corrosion potentiaI.
and electrical resistance. In p~ticaL terms, the use of primers proved to be a good optiort'for economicaL andfast repairs
or in cases where concrete was of bad quality (for example,.
concrete with a water-to-cement [wfc] ratio higher than 0.5). A
degree of primer eifectiveness was obtained according to the
electrochemicaL behavior of the repair. Banier-type primers
were more degradation-resistant than the others. Although
primers proved to be a reasonable optionfor ocalized repair,
juture behavior must befollowed carejully.
Submitted for publ1cation March 2006: in revised form, August
2006.
. Crresponding
author. E-mail: pcastro@inda.cinvestav.mx.
Centro de Investigacin y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN-Unidad
CORROSION-Vol.
63, No. 3
INTRODUCTION
Primers used as a corrosion prevention method have
behaved well after 30 years in service, as observed
iI! Figure l. This structure was located in fue Port of
Progreso. Yucatn, at about 200 m from fue seashore,
It corresponds to a part of an intemal column from
an office that was demolished to construct a shopping mall, Primers were only used in fue longitudinal
reinforcing bars (called rebars). Despife being used as
a corrosion prevention method, fue apparent state of
fue rebars was very good. This situation has encouraged constructors about fue advantages of using this
kind of method to protect fue reinforcement under
similar conditions,
Currently. primers are being used in concrete
under several environments as a method to protect
fue reinforcement from corrosion in localized repairs, I
The use of primers to fue reinforcement as a repair
method has been reported in fue literature.2-4 As a
localized repair method, fue use of fue primer involves
its application in Borne specific parts of fue reinforcement while others remain uncoated. Therefore. depending on fue exposure environment, type ofprimer.
extent of fue zone primed. concrete quality, electrical
contact with uncoated parts. etc.. primers have shown
to cause, or not, galvanic coupling between fue rebars from fue repaired zone and fue rebars from fue
areas surrounding fue repaired zone.5-7Some ofthem
0010-9312/07/000033/$5.00+$0.50/0
@ 2007. NACE International
231
'"""-
~~
"""'-
Gulf of Mexico
~
DDDD
DO O
000
Marsh
an inhibitor-type
~
EXPERIMENTAL
PROCEDURES
Saturated calcium hydroxide (Ca[OHb) solutions
were prepared and two exposure conditions were
tested: continuous partial immersion (3.5% NaCI) and
wet (partial immersion in 0.4. 2. and 5% NaCI) and
dry cyc1es (in an oyen at 50C).
Specimens Construction
The specimens consisted of 6-mm-diameter corrugated reinforcing steel bars (rebars). ASTM grade
75.(1)single (continuous immersion tests) and double
111
AS1M Internatlonal.
PA 19428.
232
2007
Working electrodes
ffi
F\
ion
Cement = 1
Sand = 3
Water = 0.5
ortar propo
8cm
Electrical
contact
8cm
-----..
Part
covered
with the
primer
1cm
1 cm
1 cm
3cm
2cm
2cm
2cm
I 5.5 cm I
Double rebar
specimen
Single rebar
specimen
Exposed
area
potentiostatj
galvanostat
was used
AGURE
once set.
TABLE 1
Characteristics of the Primers Tested
Characteristic
Formulation
Type of coating
General use
Thickness obtained
Solvent
Color
Finish
Surface preparation
CORROSION-Vol.
Type 01primer
(According to its Theoretical Protection Mechanism)
CathodicProtection
Barrier
Zinc chromate
Primer
Metallic surfaces, interior and exterior
200 11m
Thinner
Green yellow
Matte
Dry and oxide-free
63, No. 3
Goal-lar epoxy
Primer
Tanks, ships, and submerged equipment
200~
Thinner
Black
Matte
Dryand oxide-free
Inhibitor
Lead base
Primer
MetaJlicsurfaces
200 11m
Thinner
Orange
Matte
Dryand oxide-free
233
TABLE2
Oistributionof Single Specimens (One Embedded Rebar),
According to the Type of Primerand NaCI Solution, for Immersion Tests
""-"
Type 01 Primer
(According to its Theoretical
Protection Mechanism)
Cathodic
Protection
0.4
2
2.0
2
6
Barrier
5.0
2
0.4
2
2.0
2
6
Inhibitor
5.0
2
0.4 2.0
2
2
6
5.0
2
Repassivant
0.4 2.0 5.0
2
2
2
6
Blank
0.4
2
2.0
2
6
5.0
2
TABLE 3
Oistribution of Oauble Specimens (Twa Embedded Rebars),
According fo the Type af Primer far Tests with Wet and Ory Cyc1es
Type 01 Primer
(According to its Theoretical
Protection Mechanism)
Cathodic
Protection
Barrier
Inhibitor
1
2
1
2
1
2
5
Partial immersion
Blank
1
2
Side view
Barrier01plastic
Exposed
area =3 cm
'-'"
Repassivant
1
2
level 01the
solution
} 1.5 cm
Place 01plastic
= 26
= 52
for
fue steel in fue passive state in fue Equation (1). regardless of fue primer used: 14
iCOlT
= B/Rp
(1)
Evaluation Griteria
The primer effectiveness was obtained comparing
fue electrochemical data together with fue time for
depassivation data. The IDean was a decisive parameter used for fue comparisons among fue different
parameters. Active corrosion (depassivation) was
considered after having a corrosion rate higher than
234
tests.
2007
CORROSION,SCIENCE SECTION
Side view
"-"
Barrier of plastic
}1.scm
Piece of plastic
FIGURE 5. Photo and scheme of specimens for wet and dry cycles~
Working electrode,
WE
Reference electrode, RE
(SCE)
"-"
TABLE 4
Corrosion Risk in Reinforced Concrete
from Corrosion Potentials, According to ASTM C876
Eco" (mVsce)
Corrosion Risk
Ecorr> -124
-124>
Eco" > -274
Eco" < -274
10%
50%
90%
TABLE 5
Corrosion Risk in Reinforced Concrete
from Corrosion Rates, According to Durar Manual
icorr(IJA/cm2)
ico" < 0.1
0.1 < co"< 0.2
0.2 < ico"< 0.5
0.5 < co"< 1.0
icorr> 1.0
\....-
Corrosion Risk
Negligible
Uncertainty
Significant
High
Very high
TABLE 6
Corrosion Risk in Reinforced Concrete
from Concrete Resistivity, According to Durar Manual
Corrosion Risk
Resistivity (kQ.cm)
p > 20
20>p>10
10>p>5
p<5
, Low
Lowto moderate
High
Very high
TABLE 7
Mean Corrosion Current Density Va/uesAccording to Primer Trpe 'rom Dar 40 to the End o, the Experiment
--
Mean icorr(IJA/em~
Exposure Type
Cathodie
Proteeton
Barrier
Inhibtor
Repassivant
Blank
0.25
0.44
0.54
3.30
0.14
0.18
0.24
0.21
0.77
1.06
0.94
5.37
0.34
1.30
1.13
37.68
0.63
1.52
3.46
29.85
TABLE 8
Mean Corrosion Potentia/ Va/uesAccording to Primer Trpe 'rom Dar 40 to the End o, the Experiment
Mean Eco., (mVscd
Type of Primer
Cathodie
Exposure Type
0.4% NaCI solution
2.0% NaCI solution
5.0% NaCI solution
Wet and dry cycles
Proteetion
-486
-562
-566
-551
Barrier
;'
-570
-747
-605
-399
Inhibitor
Repassivant
Blank
-417
-494
-466
-494
-195
-436
-403
-602
-317
-569
-686
-598
T ABLE 9
Mean E/ectrica/ So/ution Resistance Va/uesAccording fa Primer Trpe 'rom Dar 40 to the End o, the Experiment
Mean R. (kQ.em)
Type of Primer
Cathodie
Exposure Type
............
Proteetion
2.02
1.03
0.64
1.88
Barrier
Inhibitor
Repassivant
Blank
44.03
9.38
8.60
89.45
0.56
0.63
0.42
1.25
0.76
0.55
0.39
0.12
1.00
0.63
0.39
0.15
2007
TABLE10
Effectiveness Primer Scale According to the Average Depassivation Time
for Each of the Tested Exposure Conditions as Well as Their Corrosion Risk
CorrosionRisk
Mean
Mean
Depassivation
Performance
Time
Primer Type
icon'
Econ'
Partial immersion in a 0.4% NaCIsolution
More
Bafrier
N.A.
Passive
90%
effective
Cathodic
90%
77 days
Significant
t
protection
Blank
90%
51 days
High
Less
Repassivant
50%
2 days
High
effective
Inhibitor
90%
2 days
High
Partial immersion in a 2.0% NaCIsolutionMore
Barrier
effective
Cathodic
t
protection
Blank
Less
Inhibitor
effective
Repassivant
Partial immersion
More
effective
t
Less
effective
'--/
t
Less
effective
Barrier
Cathodic
protection
Inhibitor
Blank
Repassivant
N.A.
36 days
63, No. 3
90%
90%
Very high
Very high
90%
90%
1 day
Very high
90%
107 days
16 days
Significant
High
90%
90%
Low
Very high risk'
1 day
3 days
2 days
High
Very high
Very high
90%
90%
90%
125 days
23 days
Significant
Very high
.90%
90%
Low
High risk
17 days
4 days
1 day
Very high
90%
90%
90%
17 days
1 day
fue coating, fue zinc parti~le grain size. and fue zinc
partic1e distribution, because fue three of them can
influence fue results.19 Under fue trials undertaken,
coal-tar epoxy primers had fue best performance during fue corrosion initiation periad in both types of
exposure conditions. However. it is important to take
roto account fut. although not equal to fuese tested
here, fusion-bonded, epoxy-coated rebars embedded
in chloride-contaminated
concrete environments deteriorate at faster rates once fuey started to fail. 20 It
is also well known that epoxy-coated rebar does not
provide total protection to fue steel reinforcement.
although they significantly extend fue corrosion initiation period as compared to uncoated bars for structures subjected to chloride environments.21 There
CORROSION-Vol.
Low
High risk
Passive
Significant
\...,
Mean
R",
Very high
Very high
Low
Very high risk
Very high risk
Veryhigh risk
Very high risk
--
Partia/ immersion
in a 5% NaCI solution
Partia/ immersion
in a 5% NaCI solution
Blank proba
Partia/ immersion
in a 5% NaCI solution
.
FIGURE 9. Aspect o( the rebars lJxposed
to partal immersion (5% NaCI) and wet
and dry cycles. Inhibitor-type primer.
Partia/ immersion
in a 5% NaCI solution
CONCLUSIONS
.:. The conclusions presented apply to fue conditions
and materials investigated in this work. Recornmendations discussed here should be taken into account
238
Partia/ immersion
in a 5% NaCI solution
CORROSION-MARCH2007
....
"-'"'
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
1,000
C>
..
CI)
ID
ff
O
100
J
ea
(.)
'E
~(.)
10
O
....
ID
[jJ
REFERENCES
'---"
10
Gravimetric
100
Losses (mg)
1,000
\....
CORROSION-Vol.
63, No. 3
239