Final Report
|
Economic considerations historically have precluded consideration and widespread utilization of high-performance (corrosion-resistant) reinforcements (such as stainless steels) in bridge construction. However, with the advent of life cycle cost analysis as a project planning tool and of a requirement that major bridge structures have a 75–100-year design life, the competitiveness of such steels has increased such that enhanced attention has been focused upon these materials in recent years.
This investigation was initiated to evaluate the corrosion resistance of various categories of high-performance reinforcement, including new products that are becoming available, in bridge structures that are exposed to chlorides. Both long-term (4-year) test yard exposures and accelerated laboratory experiments in simulated concrete pore waters were involved. The ultimate objective is to: (1) evaluate the corrosion properties and rank the different candidate materials; and (2) develop tools and short-term tests to help practitioners project long-term performance in actual structures. This interim report presents the results of a critical literature review of corrosion issues and behavior for high-performance reinforcements as applicable to bridges and as a precursor to the experimental program.
T. Paul Teng, P.E.
Director, Office of Infrastructure
Research and Development
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for its content or use thereof. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade and manufacturers' names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of this document.
1. Report No. FHWA-HRT-04-093 |
2. Government Accession No. |
3. Recipient's Catalog No. |
|
4. Title and Subtitle A Critical Literature Review of High-Performance Corrosion Reinforcements in Concrete Bridge Applications |
5. Report Date July 2004 |
||
6. Performing Organization Code FAU-OE-CMM-04 |
|||
7. Author(s) William H. Hartt,* Rodney G. Powers,** Virginie Leroux,* and Diane K. Lysogorski* (See box 15) |
8.Performing Organization Report No.
|
||
9. Performing Organization Name and Address Center for Marine Materials |
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) | ||
11. Contract or Grant No. | |||
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Office of Infrastructure Research and Development |
13. Type of Report and Period Covered Interim Report | ||
14. Sponsoring Agency Code | |||
15. Supplementary Notes Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR): Y.P. Virmani, HRDI-10 |
|||
16. Abstract A critical literature review regarding high-performance reinforcement for concrete bridge applications was conducted. This included (1) an overview of the corrosion-induced concrete deterioration process, (2) corrosion control alternatives, (3) the utility of corrosion (pitting) resistant alloys for applications in chloride containing environments, (4) a review of the pitting mechanism, and (5) performance of various metallic reinforcement types in aqueous solutions, cementitious embedments, test yard exposures, and actual structures. Specific alloys upon which attention was directed include black steel; MMFX-II; and various grades of ferritic, austenitic, and duplex stainless steels, as both solid and clad bars and in the as-received and pickled conditions. It was determined that the high-performance alloys outperformed black steel from a corrosion resistance standpoint. Unlike the various grades of black steel, however, a relatively wide range of corrosion performance was apparent for the high-performance counterparts depending upon the alloy and surface condition. At the same time, the present approach to materials selection for bridge construction is to identify the reinforcement candidate that will achieve the design life at the least life cycle cost. This, in turn requires that long-term corrosion performance of candidate reinforcement types be known for the anticipated design life of the bridge in question, which can be 75–100 years. However, because service history for these materials in this application is limited, the necessary information can only be obtained from accelerated, short-term tests, but there is no reliable correlation between the results from these tests and long-term performance. |
|||
17. Key Words Reinforced concrete, bridges, corrosion resistance, high-performance reinforcement, stainless steels, MMFX-II |
18. Distribution Statement No restrictions. This document is available to the public through NTIS, Springfield, VA 22161 |
||
19. Security Classif. (of this report) Unclassified |
20. Security Classif. (of this page) Unclassified |
21.No of Pages 54 |
22. Price |
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized
FHWA-RD-04-093 |
TFHRC Home | FHWA Home | Feedback United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration |