| Literature DB >> 31906365 |
Qing-Feng Liu1,2, Zhi Hu3, Xian-Yang Lu1, Jian Yang1,4, Iftikhar Azim1, Wenzhuo Sun1.
Abstract
Chloride-induced corrosion is the main threat to the service life of concrete structures. In order to better investigate chloride distribution in offshore concrete, this study proposed a new prediction model based on statistical analysis as well as a large body of experimental results collected from various sources. A detailed discussion found that the key influential parameters, such as diffusion coefficient ( D ), surface chloride concentration ( C S ) and penetration depth ( x ) are all highly time-dependent. The exposure zone, water-cement ratio and service time were also considered as relevant factors. The proposed model is then validated by two alternative tests and the results suggest that it is feasible in predicting the chloride content and penetration depth of concrete structures in a marine environment under chloride attack.Entities:
Keywords: chloride; durability; long-term behaviour; offshore concrete; statistical analysis
Year: 2020 PMID: 31906365 PMCID: PMC6982216 DOI: 10.3390/ma13010174
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Different exposure conditions.
Figure 2Influence of ratio on chloride diffusion coefficient versus time for different zones: (a) Atmospheric zone; (b) Splash zone; (c) Tidal zone; (d) Submerged zone.
Figure 3Influence of ratio on surface chloride content versus time for different zones: (a) Atmospheric zone; (b) Splash zone; (c) Tidal zone; (d) Submerged zone.
Figure 4Influence of ratio on penetration depth versus time in different zones: (a) Atmospheric zone; (b) Splash zone; (c) Tidal zone; (d) Submerged zone.
Empirical coefficient for different exposure zones.
| Exposure Zone | Empirical Coefficients | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Atmospheric | 0.16 | 0.04 | 0.58 | 0.20 × 10−7 | 0.02 × 10−7 | 0.61 | 0 | 18.94 | −0.43 | 0.48 |
| Splash | 0.21 | 0.13 | 0.48 | 0.76 × 10−7 | −0.01 × 10−7 | 0.53 | 139.50 | −72.71 | 20.38 | 0.36 |
| Tidal | 0.26 | 0.25 | 0.38 | 1.05 × 10−7 | 0.01 × 10−7 | 0.42 | 0 | 64.92 | −3.84 | 0.28 |
| Submerged | 0.19 | 0.14 | 0.45 | 0.88 × 10−7 | −0.13 × 10−7 | 0.57 | 238.78 | −146.21 | 31.18 | 0.41 |
Cover requirements from NAVFAC [30] marine concrete specification.
| Zone | Cover Thickness (mm) |
|---|---|
| Atmospheric zone not subject to salt spray | 65 |
| Tidal, splash and atmospheric zone subject to salt spray | 75 |
| Submerged zone | 75 |
Critical depth calculated using Equation (24).
| Exposure Zone | Critical Depth(mm) |
|---|---|
| Atmospheric | 50 |
| Splash | 64 |
| Tidal | 68 |
| Submerged | 67 |
Penetration depth calculated using Equation (23).
| Exposure Zone | Critical Depth(mm) |
|---|---|
| Atmospheric | 56 |
| Splash | 66 |
| Tidal | 75 |
| Submerged | 64 |
Figure 5Comparison between experimental results and the results by presented formula (Equation (22)).
Figure 6Comparison between experimental results and quantified models.
Figure 7Comparison between empirical formula (Equation (22)) and quantified model (Equation (25)).