Title:
Predicting the Microstructure Stabilization Time from Electrical Resistivity Measurements
Author(s):
Thomas Bernard and William Wilson
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
362
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
453-460
Keywords:
bulk electrical resistivity, durability, Fick’s second law, hyperbolic law, microstructure stabilization time
DOI:
10.14359/51741002
Date:
6/14/2024
Abstract:
There is no accepted test to determine the time needed for a cement paste microstructure to stabilize (and thus, for its diffusion coefficient to stabilize). This stabilization time is crucial when applying Crank's solution to Fick's law of diffusion of deleterious ions, as an important hypothesis is a constant diffusion coefficient. One potential approach involves utilizing the hyperbolic law to fit the evolution of bulk electrical resistivity, which is directly related to microstructural changes. This approach could provide a rapid means of determining the stabilization time and the final resistivity value. The objective of this work is to validate if this law is appliable for different types of cement and different types of curing and to determine the stabilization time for the different types of cement pastes: Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) and blends with Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCMs, i.e., slag, fly ash, silica fume, and limestone). Results show that the hyperbolic law for Portland cement allows predicting in 56 days the resistivity after 120 days with an error of less than 1%. Moreover, this law can be useful to estimate the time necessary for stabilization of the resistivity. However, it appears that this law is not applicable to every type of SCM especially silica fume and fly ash.
Related References:
1. L. Tang, L.-O. Nilsson, and P. A. M. Basheer, Resistance of Concrete to Chloride Ingress: Testing and modelling. CRC Press, 2011.
2. A. Boddy, E. Bentz, M. D. A. Thomas, and R. D. Hooton, ‘An overview and sensitivity study of a multimechanistic chloride transport model’, Cem. Concr. Res., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 827–837, Jun. 1999, doi: 10.1016/S0008-8846(99)00045-9
3. K. De Weerdt, W. Wilson, A. Machner, and F. Georget, ‘Chloride profiles – What do they tell us and how should they be used?’, Cem. Concr. Res., vol. 173, p. 107287, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2023.107287
4. G. Rong, T. He, G. Zhang, Y. Li, Y. Wang, and W. Xie, ‘A review on chloride transport model and research method in concrete’, Mater. Res. Express, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 042002, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1088/2053-1591/accb2a
5. M. Collepardi, A. Marcialis, and R. Turriziani, ‘Penetration of Chloride Ions into Cement Pastes and Concretes’, J. Am. Ceram. Soc., vol. 55, no. 10, pp. 534–535, 1972, doi: 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1972.tb13424.x
6. J. Marchand and E. Samson, ‘Predicting the service-life of concrete structures – Limitations of simplified models’, Cem. Concr. Compos., vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 515–521, Sep. 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2009.01.007
7. W. Wilson, F. Georget, and K. Scrivener, ‘XCr/√t as an Indicator of the Resistance Against Bulk Chloride Diffusion’, 2023, pp. 658–666. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-33211-1_59
8. G. E. Archie, ‘The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in Determining Some Reservoir Characteristics’, Trans. AIME, vol. 146, no. 01, pp. 54–62, Dec. 1942, doi: 10.2118/942054-G
9. N. Ukrainczyk and E. A. B. Koenders, ‘Representative elementary volumes for 3D modeling of mass transport in cementitious materials’, Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng., vol. 22, no. 3, p. 035001, Feb. 2014, doi: 10.1088/0965-0393/22/3/035001
10. Y. Sang, Y. Yang, and Q. Zhao, ‘Electrical resistivity of plain cement-based materials based on ionic conductivity: A review of applications and conductive models’, J. Build. Eng., vol. 46, p. 103642, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103642
11. X. Wei, L. Xiao, and Z. Li, ‘Hyperbolic method to analyze the electrical resistivity curve of Portland cements with superplasticizer’, J. Wuhan Univ. Technol.-Mater Sci Ed, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 245–248, Apr. 2008, doi: 10.1007/PL00022219
12. N. J. Carino and H. S. Lew, ‘The Maturity Method: From Theory to Application’, pp. 1–19, Apr. 2012, doi: 10.1061/40558(2001)17
13. Y. Liao and X. Wei, ‘Penetration resistance and electrical resistivity of cement paste with superplasticizer’, Mater. Struct., vol. 47, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1617/s11527-013-0079-4
14. L. Xiao and X. Wei, ‘Early age compressive strength of pastes by electrical resistivity method and maturity method’, J. Wuhan Univ. Technol.-Mater Sci Ed, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 983–989, Oct. 2011, doi: 10.1007/s11595-011-0349-3
15. ‘CAN/CSA-A3000-18 Cementitious materials compendium’, 2018, Online.. Available: https://www.csagroup.org/store/product/A3000-18/
16. W. Wilson, F. Georget, and K. Scrivener, ‘Unravelling chloride transport/microstructure relationships for blended-cement pastes with the mini-migration method’, Cem. Concr. Res., vol. 140, p. 106264, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2020.106264
17. Subcommittee C09.66, ‘ASTM C1876−19 Standard Test Method for Bulk Electrical Resistivity or Bulk Conductivity of Concrete’, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1520/C1876-19
18. T. Bernard and W. Wilson, ‘Comparison of ’sacrificial solution’ with classical curing solutions for curing paste cement samples by electrical conductivity’, Manuscript in preparation.