Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Performance assessment of cathodically protected reinforced concrete structure based on alternative performance criterion: a case study

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of Building Pathology and Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Performance of cathodic protection system in reinforced concrete structures is generally evaluated using 100 mV decay criterion. This approach is widely used, however has its own limitations. Recently, a new approach by determining the actual corrosion rate using the Butler Volmer equation has become an ‘alternative’ criterion for assessing the performance of cathodic protection system. This paper deals with critical examination and practical application of Butler-Volmer Equation to judge the effectiveness of cathodic protection system. Sensitivity analysis of various input parameters through numerical modelling by parametric studies showed significant dependence of corrosion rate on cathodic Tafel slope. One-year field data from a cathodic protection monitoring site in UK was collected and variability in the two approaches was assessed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Daniyal M, Akhtar S (2020) Corrosion assessment and control techniques for reinforced concrete structures: a review. J Build Pathol Rehabil 5:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-019-0067-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Goyal A, Pouya HS, Ganjian E (2019) Performance assessment of specialist conductive paint for cathodic protection of steel in reinforced concrete structures. Constr Build Mater 223:1083–1094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Goyal A, Sadeghi-Pouya H, Ganjian E, Claisse P (2018) A review of corrosion and protection of steel in concrete. Arab J Sci Eng 43:5035–5055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Asgharzadeh A, Raupach M (2020) Durability of impregnated carbon textiles in mortar as cathodic protection anodes. Mag Concr Res 72:422–431. https://doi.org/10.1680/jmacr.18.00402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Goyal A, Karade SR (2020) Efficiency of cathodic prevention to control corrosion in seawater mixed concrete. J Build Pathol Rehabil. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-020-00090-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bertolini L, Bolzoni F, Pedeferri P et al (1998) Cathodic protection and cathodic prevention in concrete: principles and applications*. J Appl Electrochem 28:1321–1331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Byrne A, Holmes N, Norton B (2016) State-of-the-art review of cathodic protection for reinforced concrete structures. Mag Concr Res 68:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1680/jmacr.15.00083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Helm C, Raupach M (2016) Development of a numerical simulation model considering the voltage drops within CP anode systems in RC structures. Mater Corros 67:621–630. https://doi.org/10.1002/maco.201608832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. BSI (2016) BS EN ISO 12696 Cathodic protection of steel in concrete. British Standard Institution, London

  10. Barlo TJ (2001) Origin and validation of the 100mV polarization criterion. In: Corrosion 2001. NACE International, OnePetro

  11. Gummow RA (2007) Technical considerations on the use of the 100mV cathodic polarization criterion. In: Corrosion 2007. NACE International, pp 1–11

  12. Khosravi J, Ghafourian SSM (2013) Using the 100-mV criterion for protection of new structures. Mater Performance 52(3):30–35

    Google Scholar 

  13. Khosravi J, Ghafourian SSM (2012) 100mv cathodic protection criterion-using of “Instant-on” potential in ICCP of new structures. In: Corrosion 2012. NACE International, Onepetro

  14. Goyal A, Sadeghi H, Ganjian E et al (2019) Predicting the corrosion rate of steel in cathodically protected concrete using potential shift. Constr Build Mater 194:344–349. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.168.13.1371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Andrade C, Alonso MC, Gonzalez JA (1990) An initial effort to use the corrosion rate measurements for estimating rebar durability. In: Berke NS, Chaker V, Whiting D (eds) Corrosion rates of steel in concrete. ASTM, Philadelphia, pp 29–37

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Andrade PC, Alonso C, Polder R et al (2005) Test methods for on-site corrosion rate measurement of steel reinforcement in concrete by means of the polarization resistance method. Mater Struct 37:623–643. https://doi.org/10.1617/13952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. The Concrete Society (2004) Electrochemical tests for reinforcement corrosion. The Concrete Society Technical Report 60, Wiltshire

  18. Goyal A, Olorunnipa EK, Pouya HS et al (2020) Potential and current distribution across different layers of reinforcement in reinforced concrete cathodic protection system—a numerical study. Constr Build Mater 262:120580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120580

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Structural Rehabilitation, Transportation UK and Europe, Atkins, Birmingham, UK

    Homayoon Sadeghi-Pouya

  2. Institute of Future Transport; Engineering, Environment, and Computing Building, Coventry University, Coventry, CV12JH, UK

    Arpit Goyal

  3. Director, Concrete Corrosion Tech Ltd., Birmingham, UK

    Eshmaiel Ganjian

Authors
  1. Homayoon Sadeghi-Pouya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arpit Goyal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eshmaiel Ganjian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arpit Goyal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sadeghi-Pouya, H., Goyal, A. & Ganjian, E. Performance assessment of cathodically protected reinforced concrete structure based on alternative performance criterion: a case study. J Build Rehabil 6, 14 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-021-00108-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-021-00108-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation