Title:
Kelvin Probe Array for Rapid Survey of Reinforced Concrete Corrosion
Author(s):
Leonidas P. Emmenegger and Alberto A. Sagüés
Publication:
Materials Journal
Volume:
117
Issue:
2
Appears on pages(s):
135-143
Keywords:
contactless; corrosion; half-cell; Kelvin probe; potential mapping; reinforced concrete
DOI:
10.14359/51720306
Date:
3/1/2020
Abstract:
Half-cell potential mapping is frequently used for the detection of corrosion in reinforced concrete. The procedure can be time-consuming and disruptive, partly due to the need for physical contact with the concrete surface. An alternative is presented in the form of a fast-responding, non-contacting electrode array that requires no surface pretreatment, and is suitable for mobile operation. This approach uses the vibrating Kelvin probe principle, with the electrode hovering over but not touching the concrete surface. Operation is demonstrated on an actual Florida bridge deck with a robust synchronized array as a model for lane-wide roadway scanning. The electrode-to-concrete (operating) surface gap can clear normal deck surface irregularities. Results replicated corrosion-identifying features from conventional half-cell electrode mapping without significant surface preparation or waiting for potential stabilization. The technology is promising for rapid corrosion assessment of bridges at low cost without extended lane closures.
Related References:
1. Lee, S. K., “Current State of Bridge Deterioration in the US—Part 1,” Materials Performance (MP), V. 51, No. 1, 2012.
2. Lee, S. K., “Current State of Bridge Deterioration in the US—Part 2,” Materials Performance (MP), V. 51, No. 2, 2012.
3. Hema, J., and Guthrie, W. S., “Concrete Bridge Deck Condition Assessment Guidelines,” Final Report to the Utah Department of Transportation Research and Development Division, Report No. UT-05.01, Contract No. 03-9192, Nov. 2005.
4. ASTM C876-15, “Standard Test Method for Corrosion Potentials of Uncoated Reinforcing Steel in Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015, 8 pp.
5. Elsener, B.; Andrade, C.; Gulikers, J.; Polder, R.; Raupach, M., “Half-Cell Potential Measurements – Potential Mapping on Reinforced Concrete Structures,” Materials and Structures, V. 36, Aug.-Sept. 2003, pp. 461-471.
6. Schiegg, Y.; Büchler, M.; and Brem, M., “Potential Mapping Technique for the Detection of Corrosion in Reinforced Concrete Structures: Investigation of Parameters Influencing the Measurement and Determination of the Reliability of the Method,” Materials and Corrosion, V. 60, No. 2, 2009, pp. 79-86. doi: 10.1002/maco.200805042
7. Myrdal, R., “Phenomena that Disturb the Measurement of Potentials in Concrete,” Proceedings of Corrosion 96, Paper No. 339, NACE International, Houston, TX, 1996.
8. Myrdal, R., “Potential Gradients in Concrete Caused by Charge Separations in a Complex Electrolyte,” Proceedings of Corrosion 97, Paper No. 278, NACE International, Houston, TX, 1997.
9. Angst, U.; Vennesland, Ø.; and Myrdal, R., “Diffusion Potentials as Source of Error in Electrochemical Measurements in Concrete,” Materials and Structures, V. 42, No. 3, 2009, pp. 365-375. doi: 10.1617/s11527-008-9387-5
10. Broomfield, J. P.; Langford, P. E.; and Ewins, A. J., “The Use of a Potential Wheel to Survey Reinforced Concrete Structures,” Corrosion Rates of Steel in Concrete, ASTM STP-1065, N. S. Berke, V. Chaker, and D. Whiting, eds., ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1990, pp. 157-173.
11. Klein, U.; Vollmann, W.; and Abatti, P. J., “Contact Potential Differences Measurement: Short History and Experimental Setup for Classroom Demonstration,” IEEE Transactions on Education, V. 46, No. 3, 2003, pp. 338-344. doi: 10.1109/TE.2003.813896
12. Stratmann, M., and Streckel, H., “On the Atmospheric Corrosion of Metals which are Covered with Thin Electrolyte Layers—I. Verification of the Experimental Technique,” Corrosion Science, V. 30, No. 6-7, 1990, pp. 681-696. doi: 10.1016/0010-938X(90)90032-Z
13. Yang, C.; Hawthorne, J.; Steele, B.; Bryant, R.; Sowell, D.; Maloney, D.; and Ip, K., “Inspecting Wafers Using a Potential Difference Imaging Sensor Method,” MICRO, V. 23, No. 1, 2005, pp. 55-61.
14. Sagüés, A. A., and Walsh, M. T., “Kelvin Probe Electrode for Contactless Potential Measurement on Concrete – Properties and Corrosion Profiling Application,” Corrosion Science, V. 56, 2012, pp. 26-35. doi: 10.1016/j.corsci.2011.11.007
15. Sagüés, A. A., and Walsh, M. T., “Systems and Methods for Contactless Assessment of Reinforced Concrete,” U.S. Patent No.10,247,691, Apr. 2, 2019.
16. Ritty, B.; Wachtel, F.; Manquenouille, R.; Ott, F.; and Donnet, J. B., “Conditions Necessary to Get Meaningful Measurements from the Kelvin Method,” Journal of Physics. E, Scientific Instruments, V. 15, No. 3, 1982, pp. 310-317. doi: 10.1088/0022-3735/15/3/017
17. Hadjadj, A.; Equer, B.; Beorchia, A.; and Cabarrocas, P. R., “Contact Potential Measurements with a Local Kelvin Probe,” Philosophical Magazine Part B, V. 82, No. 11, 2002, pp. 1257-1266. doi: 10.1080/13642810208223162
18. Reichling, K., and Raupach, M., “Method to Determine Electrochemical Potential Gradients without Reinforcement Connection in Concrete Structures,” Cement and Concrete Composites, V. 47, 2014, pp. 3-8. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2013.12.007
19. Sagüés, A. A., and Emmenegger, L. P., “Contactless Electrode for Fast Survey of Concrete Reinforcement Corrosion,” Final Report for NCHRP IDEA Project 176, Transportation Research Board, Contract No. NCHRP-176, Washington, DC, Jan. 2017.
20. Emmenegger, L. P., “Kelvin Probe Electrode for Field Detection of Corrosion of Steel in Concrete,” master’s thesis, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, 2015.
21. Boyd, S. R., and Krauss, P. D., “Highway Concrete Pavement Technology Development and Testing: Volume 5-Field evaluation of Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) C-206 Test Sites (Bridge Deck Overlays),” Federal Highway Administration, Publication No. FHWA-RD-02-086, Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, McLean, VA, Aug. 2006.
22. Reverter, F.; Li, X.; and Meijer, G., “Stability and Accuracy of Active Shielding for Grounded Capacitive Sensors,” Measurement Science & Technology, V. 17, No. 11, 2006, pp. 2884-2890. doi: 10.1088/0957-0233/17/11/004
23. Millard, S. G., and DTI DME 5.1 Consortium, “Measuring the Corrosion Rate of Reinforced Concrete Using Linear Polarisation Resistance,” A Report from the Concrete Society/Institute of Corrosion Liaison Committee, 2003, pp. 1-13.
24. Ben-Ezra, M., and Nayar, S. K., “Motion-based Motion Deblurring,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, V. 26, No. 6, 2004, pp. 689-698. doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2004.1
25. Sagüés, A. A.; Kranc, S. C.; Presuel-Moreno, F.; Rey, D.; Torres-Acosta, A.; and Yao, L., “Corrosion Forecasting for 75-Year Durability Design of Reinforced Concrete,” Final Report to Florida Department of Transportation, State Job No. 99700-3515-020, WPI 0510805, Contract No. BA502, Dec. 2001.
26. Goldman, S., Transformation Calculus and Electrical Transients, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1949.
27. Voelz, D., “Computational Fourier Optics: A MATLAB Tutorial,” Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE), SPIE Tutorial Texts V. TT89, SPIE Press, 2001.
28. Kuo, B. C., and Golnaraghi, F., “Automatic Control Systems,” V. 9, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1995.