Experimental study on correlation between the results of different methods of measuring the electrical resistivity of concrete

Authors
H. Parsian
D. MostofiNejad
M. Tadayon
Isfahan University of Technology (IUT)
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to develop relationships to predict the results of measuring the electrical resistivity of the standard test method ASTM C1760 with assistance of other methods’ results. Comparative Methods in this paper are Impedance spectroscopy method , one electrode method and four electrode method. Impedance spectroscopy method is the most common in laboratory studies , ASTM C1760 method (Standard Test Method for Bulk Electrical Conductivity of Hardened Concrete) only has a standard rule and use in laboratory , one electrode method is a new technique in field and it’s application is in the reinforcement structures , and four electrode measurements are more common in field. In laboratory methods, bulk electrical resisitivity measured but in field , usually surface electrical resisitivty evaluated , that is why several source of errors affecting on the results of this test methods. To reach the aim of this research , 49 mix designs with a vast domination of electrical resistivity from about 40 (Ω-m) to 290 (Ω-m) was intended and for each of mix designs , 4 cylindrical and one reinforced slab specimen were made. reinforced slab specimen for one electrode measurement and cylindrical specimens for the other test method measurments were considered. Moreover , the electrical resistance of the aforementioned methods was measured at 28 days age. The results showed that there is a negligible difference between the results of impedance spectroscopy and ASTM C1760 methods; however , the electrical resistivity measured by ASTM C1760 method was slightly higher than the results of impedance spectroscopy method in the concrete. As a result , we can use the results of the impedance spectroscopy method instead of standard test method results in the lack of facilities with accepting about 5% of error. In the four electrode method , a number of factors including the imbalance among the distances between electrodes and structure dimensions can result systematic errors. That is why the measurements’ results with the method is approximately 140% larger than the standard test method results. Due to the lack of a comprehensive relationship for calculating the cell constant in the one electrode method , the value of this constant was obtained by comparing the results of the standard test method. After that , the electrical resistivity values were calculated. Electrical resistivity measurement results which was obtained by this method had also little difference with the standard test method results. Finally 3 relationships separately developed for predicting the result of standard test method from results of the each other test methods. Since the features and conditions of measuring by the standard test method are not available in the entire projects , the current results are capable to predict the standard method’s results with assistance of other methods’ results.

Keywords

[1]                 Whiting, D.A., Nagi, M.A. (2003). “Electrical Resistivity of Concrete_Literature Review.” Portland Cement Association, Serial No. 2457.
[2]                 Esbach, O.E. and Souders, M. (1975). “Handbook of Engineering Fundamentals.” Joun Wiley & Sons, New York.
[3]                 Harper, C.A. (1978). “Fudamentals of Electrical Insulating Materials.” Industrial Research/Development, 20(12), pp. 81-84.
[4]                 ASTM C876-91. (1999). “Standard Test Method for Half-Cell Potentials of Uncoated Reinforcing Steel in Concrete.” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 6p.
[5]                 Polder, R., Andrade. C., Elsener, B., Vennesland, Æ., Gulikers, J., Weidert, R., Raupach, M. (2000). “Test Methods for On Site Measurment of Resistivity of Concrete.” Materials and Structures, 33(10), pp. 603-611.
[6]                 شکرچی زاده، محمد (1380). "استفاده از روش‌های الکتریکی برای تعیین مقدار آب در بتن سخت شده"، مجموعه مقالات اولین کنفرانس بین المللی بتن و توسعه، ایران، تهران.
[7]                 Andrade, C., d’Andrea, R., Rebolledo, N. (2014). “Chloride Ion Penetration in Concrete: the Reaction Factor in the Electrical Resistivity Model.” Cement & Concrete Composite,47, pp. 41-46.
[8]                 Li, Z., Xiao, L., Wei, X., Zhang, J. (2008). “Interpretation of MicroStructure Development of Cementitus Materials In Early Ages With Electrical Resistivity Measurment.” 1st International Conference on Microstructure Related Durability of Cementitous Composites, Nanjing, China.
[9]                 Mei, ZH., Chung, D.D.L. (2000). “Effects of Temperature and Stress on the Interface Between Concrete and its Carbon Fiber Epoxy-Matrix Composite Retrofit, Studied by Electrical Resistance Measurement.” Cement and Concrete Research, 30 , pp. 799-802.
[10]              Gjorv, O. E., Vennesland, O., El-Busaidy, A. H. S. (1977). “Electrical Resistivity of Concrete in the Oceans.” 9th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, paper 2803, Houston.
[11]              Tuutti, K. (1982). “Corrosion of Steel in Concrete.” CBI Stockholm.
[12]              ASTM C1760-12.(2012). “Standard Test Method for Bulk Electrical Conductivity of Hardened Concrete.”, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 5p.
[13]              Li, Z., Li, W. (2003).“Contacless Transformer-Based Measurment of the Resistivity of Materials.”, United States Patent, patent No. Us 6, 639, 401 B2.
[14]              Elkey, W. and Sellevold, E.J. (1995). “Electrical Resistivity of Concrete.” Norwegian Road Research Laboratory, Publication No. 80.
[15]              Hammond, E. and Robson, T.D. (1955). “Comparison of Electrical Properties of Various Cements and Concretes.” The Engineer, 199(5156), pp. 78-80, 199(5166), pp. 114-115.
[16]              Broomfield, J.B. (1997). “Corrosion of Steel in Concrete.” FN Spon, an Imprint of Chapman & Hall, London, 238p.
[17]              Feliu, S., Andrade, C., González, J.A., Alonso, C. (1996). “A New Method for In-Situ Measurement of Electrical Resistivity of Reinforced Concrete.” Materials and Structures, 29, pp. 362-365.
[18]              Elsener, B., Fluckiger, D., Wojtas, H., Bohni, H. (1996). “Methods for the Evaluation of Corrosion of Steel in Concrete.” Swiss FederalDepartment of Traffic and Energy, ASB Research forthe Maintenance of Bridges, VSS Report 521, 140p.
[19]              Wenner, F. (1916). “A Method of Measuring Earth Resistivity.” Bulletin of the Bureau ofStandards, 12(4), pp. 469-478.
[20]              Stratfull, R. F. (1968). “Materials Protection.” 29.
[21]              Naish, C.C., Harker, A. , Carney, R.F.A. (1990). “Concrete Inspection: Interpretation of Potential and Resistivity Measurements.” Corrosion of Reinforcement in Concrete, pp. 314-332.
[22]              Gowers, K.R. and Millard, S.G. (1999). “Measurement of Concrete Resistivity for Assessment of Corrosion Severity of Steel Using Wenner Technique.” ACI Materials Journal, 96(5), pp. 536-542.
[23]              Gowers, K.R. and Millard, S.G. (1991). “The Effect of Steel Reinforcement Bars on the Measurement of Concrete Resistivity.” British Journal of Non-Destructive Testing, 33(11), pp. 551-554.
[24]              McCarter, W.J., Barclay, S. (1993). “A Comparison of Two Methods For Resistivity Measurments On Repair Mortar For Cathodic Protection Systems.” Cement and Concrete Research, 23 (5), pp. 1178-1184.
[25]              ASTM C192-02.(2002). “Standard Test Method for Making and Curing Concrete Test Specimens in the Laboratory.” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 8p.
 
Modares Civil Engineering journal
Volume 16, Issue 3
September and October 2016
Pages 13-25