Construction and Building Materials 14 2000.

189]197

How to make todays repairs durable for tomorrow }

corrosion protection in concrete repair

A.M. VaysburdU , P.H. Emmons

Structural Preser ation Systems, Inc., 3761 Commerce Dri e, Suite 414, Baltimore, MD 21227, USA

Received 12 February 1999; received in revised form 10 February 2000; accepted 21 February 2000

Abstract

The future of the concrete repair industry appears to be promising and bright, judging from the projections based on current
trends in repair, rehabilitation, restoration and strengthening of existing infrastructure. However, this optimism must be
tempered in light of the need to change the image of the industry as one that is often self-serving } the industry that is repairing
the repairs. Due to the increasing public concern with durability of concrete structures in general, and repaired concrete
structures in particular, the subject of steel corrosion and corrosion protection in repaired concrete structures is discussed with
reference to the deficiencies in our knowledge of corrosion and corrosion protection in concrete repair, methods of testing, and in
the science of repair durability. Q 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Concrete repair; Corrosion protection; Durability

found to be suffering from corrosion-related problems

I sometimes think that the construction industry is like the
person who seeks the wonder cure: the elixir that will provide
eternal life with no effort at all on their part. Wouldnt it be
wonderful if by the simple expedient of adding ingredient X all
would be solved? There would be no need to worry about cover,
compaction, curing, or even the concrete itself. Life is not that
simple . . .
C.D. Pomeroy
1. Introduction
In most industrialized countries of the world, the
heavy expenditure for repair and rehabilitation of the
infrastructure has become a matter of serious concern,
as too many repaired and rehabilitated structures are
U A basic understanding of the processes leading to
Corresponding author. Tel.: q1-410-850-7000; fax: q1-410-850-
4111.
E-mail address: avaysburd@structural.net A.M. Vaysburd.
much earlier than their expected service life. The per-
formance of repaired concrete structures remains a
matter of utmost concern to all those involved with
their design, construction, maintenance and use. Few
problems can more aggravate the public and lead to
dissatisfaction with our ability to provide for the struc-
tures user, than the presence of cracks, spalls, leakage,
rust stains, and disruption of the use of the structures a
few years after repairs. Contrary to the expectations,
the problem of corrosion in concrete repairs has be-
come widespread, not only with respect to severe envi-
ronmental conditions but also with respect to moderate
environmental conditions. Consequently, it is important
that we critically examine the issue of corrosion and
corrosion protection in concrete repair of today, and
explore how it can be improved in the near future }
how to make todays repairs durable for tomorrow.
premature corrosion in repaired structures still eludes
the concrete repair community. This applies not only to

0950-0618r00r$ - see front matter Q 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 5 0 - 0 6 1 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 2 2 - 2
190 A.M. Vaysburd, P.H. Emmons r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 189]197
the processes leading to the problems themselves cor-
rosion of reinforcement in repaired structures and de-
teriorationrdistress of concrete., but also to a variety
of the proposed solutions; corrosion protection tech-
niques, materials and systems have a highly empirical
history of use, and their performance in many cases is
questionable.
The intent of this paper is to try to determine and
summarize what is lacking in the current state of our
knowledge in corrosion and corrosion protection in
concrete repair and what is already known. We must
pause periodically from our busy schedules to review
where we are and where we might be going.
The primary issues of the concrete repair project
deal with the evaluation of the condition of existing
structures to be repaired, repair solutions, and additio-
nal protection of embedded reinforcement. This paper
encompasses the elucidation of the basic processes of
corrosion of steel in repair, electrochemical incompati-
bility, and how these processes may lead to eventual
failure of the composite repair system. The paper is
also about how we currently can, or cannot, success-
fully address these problems with the aim of prolonging
lifetime of existing concrete structures.
The 20th century will be remembered for significant
progress in science and technology, for advancements
in developing new materials, for improved knowledge
of existing materials. But how has concrete technology
as a whole progressed from the scientific and practical
points of view, in, say, the last 50 years? With the
exception of certain modifications, good and bad, con-
crete and other cementitious materials produced and
used today are essentially the same products that have
been produced and used for the last 50 years, except
for the fact that they became stronger, more brittle,
and, therefore, more susceptible to cracking.
It is not possible here to provide a critical review of
all the numerous aspects of corrosion and corrosion
protection; the problems are too extensive and various
mechanisms too complicated for a critical discussion in
a single paper. The general aspects of steel corrosion in
concrete and its protection have been treated by a
number of authors and will not be addressed here,
except for a few comments. Instead, specific aspects
concerned with corrosion and corrosion protection in
concrete repair are emphasized.
We should not, of course, forget one of the critical
durability issues not discussed in this paper } work-
manship. The premature corrosion of repaired con-
crete structures is dependent not only on materials,
techniques, and systems used, but also on the quality of
workmanship. Poor design and on-site practices, and
indifference to quality control during the repair instal-
lation, often produce a final product of dubious dura-
bility. To paraphrase Adam Nevilles words: it is only
concrete repair } any fool can do it; the trouble is }
he often does.
Of course, there are some thoughts in this paper that
may lead others to agree or disagree. But it is only
when ideas receive a forum that progress can be made,
and that is our goal in this paper.
2. Corrosion in concrete repair
It is generally known that the major cause of prema-
ture deterioration and failure of concrete repairs is the
corrosion of the reinforcing steel, especially for struc-
tures in severe environments. Based on field experience
and from a review of case histories of repair degrada-
tion, the issues encompassing the major problems lead-
ing to reinforcement corrosion in concrete repair are
presented.
It seems that the concrete construction industry does
not pay adequate attention to the specifics of concrete
repair and its significant differences with new construc-
tion. It does not pay adequate attention to the three
primary issues related to premature corrosion in re-
paired concrete structures, namely: cracking, as a result
of drying shrinkage, electrochemical incompatibility,
and changes in interior environment caused by repair.
Therefore, a brief review of the fundamental principles
governing the failure of repair from these three causes
will be helpful here.
Steel reinforcement in concrete and in concrete-like
materials, according to textbooks, in general is well
protected from corrosion by the alkaline nature of the
cementitious matrix surrounding it. True, in general, it
is protected, and it is not supposed to corrode. But
concrete in general exists only as bookcrete and may
exist as labcrete, in a small specimen, In the real
world, concrete always exists in particular.
Reinforcing and prestressing steels are subject to
corrosion due to carbonation and chloride ion attack.
Concrete is a permeable material, where aggressive
agents by diffusion theoretically . are reaching rein-
forcing steel, causing its depassivation and corrosion,
when water and oxygen are available. But this is a
relatively lengthy process. Concrete is a brittle material
and always contains microcracks. When these micro-
cracks combine in a network with macrocracks, the
prevailing transport mechanism is not diffusion; it is
the permeation of water and aggressive agents via
water through the cracks to the reinforcement. Why
enter through the closed door, when an open door is
nearby?
Cracking of cement-based materials is responsible
for high permeability and lack of durability. For corro-
sion to occur, it is necessary that both the passivating
film on the steel is destroyed and that there exists an
 A.M. Vaysburd, P.H. Emmons r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 189]197
electrochemical potential differential within the
steel]concrete system. The natural protection of steel
by the high alkalinity of cement matrix is disturbed due
to the following reasons:
v Neutralization, a reduction of pH below 10 due to
the chemical action between the products of hydra-
tion of cement and carbon dioxide which diffuses
from the atmosphere carbonation.. In non-dis-
tressed concrete, carbonation by diffusion is a very
lengthy process: approximately 1 mm of concrete
cover carbonates in a year. Cracks in the concrete
allow carbon dioxide easy permeation through the
concrete cover, and carbonation occurs very fast.
v The presence of chloride ions at the reinforcement
level. Chlorides may penetrate into the concrete
due to one of three processes: diffusion due to a
concentration gradient, absorption in water solution
form, andror by solution flow through the cracks.
The electrochemical potential differential may de-
velop due to the dissimilarities in the chemical environ-
ment of steel, such as non-uniformed carbonation, the
variation of penetration of chlorides, moisture, oxygen,
etc. Reinforcing steel in the crack starts to corrode
from a localized depassivation of steel because of the
weakened steel]cement-matrix contact and disturbed
steel passivating film. Steel depassivates from reduced
alkalinity at the surface of the reinforcement, or from
accumulation of aggressive ions, chlorides in particular.
Acid gasses and aggressive ions penetrate cracked
materials much easier than crack-free materials. The
active coefficient of carbon dioxide diffusion penetra-
tion. in a concrete crack is 0.20 mm 0.008 inches. wide
is approximately three orders higher than in average
quality crack-free concrete w1x. The same holds true for
the transport of aggressive ions, and the rate of subs-
tance transfer by capillary suction is even greater.
According to data w1x, reinforcement in a crack wider
than 0.1 mm 0.004 inches. initially corrodes more
rapidly than the unprotected steel, both in the air and
with cyclic wetting and drying. A high initial rate of
steel corrosion in the cracked concrete versus the un-
protected steel, apart from the effect of microcells, can
be accounted for by a much larger preservation of
moisture on the steel surface in the crack than on the
open steel surface. Chlorides also penetrate faster
through cracks towards the reinforcement. Cracks of-
ten have a high chloride concentration at the root of
the crack near the reinforcing steel.
As soon as corrosion starts, the rate of corrosion is
controlled by the conductivity of the concrete, the
difference in potential or voltage between the anodic
and cathodic areas, and the rate at which oxygen
reaches the cathode. The width and the direction of
191
cracks are not of critical importance. The amount of
cracks per unit of area is critical.
Repairs are more prone to cracking and, therefore,
to corrosion than newly constructed concrete struc-
tures. When freshly placed and hardened cement-based
repair material is exposed to ambient temperature and
humidity, it experiences drying shrinkage strain. The
type and magnitude of this strain will depend on the
characteristics of the repair material, temperature and
the humidity of the environment, the geometry of the
repair, the degree of the restraint, and the tempera-
tures of the repair material and substrate. The repair
would crack when the induced tensile stress exceeds its
tensile strength. However, due to the creep behavior,
some of the stress is relaxed and it is, therefore, the
residual stress that determines whether or not cracking
would occur. Unfortunately, this cracking often occurs
and destroys the repairs watertightness, increases its
permeability to aggressive agents from the exterior
environment, and intensifies the transport of subs-
tances inside the system.
Cracking due to the restrained shrinkage of the
repair material can be reduced by one, or a combina-
tion, of the following factors: low shrinkage of the
repair material, high creep of the repair material, low
modulus of elasticity of the repair material, and high
tensile strength of the repair material. Todays irony is
that contemporary cement-based repair materials tend
to be high-strength and contain a high amount of
regular and high-early strength cementitious materials.
It is obvious that crack resistance or extensibility of
such materials is low because of increased drying
shrinkage and modulus of elasticity on the one hand,
and a reduction of the creep and, therefore, relaxation
on the other hand. This is the reason that more expen-
sive, so-called high performance repair materials are
more vulnerable to cracking than their old-fashioned
counterparts } 3000 psi cementitious materials. It is
obvious that the use of high-strength, and especially
high-early strength repair materials, is not usually a
good solution for corrosion protection and repair dura-
bility problems.
Permeability of repair materials is one of the primary
properties of importance, and more work is needed on
defining what degree of permeability of repair materi-
als shall be recommended for different repair situa-
tions. Most likely, there is no single recommendation
whether very low permeability or compatible with exist-
ing concrete permeability materials are more effective.
It depends, in the authors view, on particular transport
mechanisms in the repair system. Transport of sub-
stances through and in the repair system is a very
complex process, consisting of a combination of liquid
flow through macro- and microcrack systems, capillary
transport, diffusion, and osmotic effects. The exact
192 A.M. Vaysburd, P.H. Emmons r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 189]197
contribution of each process needs to be quantified in
each particular situation. The effects of such variables
as location of the repair in the structure, chemical
environment in the composite repair system, amount
and distribution of cracks in both phases, temperature,
moisture, and stresses need to be considered.
3. Electrochemical incompatibility
When an existing concrete structure suffering from
corrosion of embedded reinforcement and concrete
deterioration is being repaired, some of the chloride
contaminated concrete may be left in place. In this
case, there is always a risk that corrosion activity may
continue or even accelerate, because the repair phase
has a different moisture, oxygen and chloride content
than the surrounding concrete, and strong corrosion
cells may be established resulting in spalling of the
repair itself or, more frequently, of the concrete around
the repair Fig. 1..
It is difficult to predict the effect of a repair on
electrochemical activity in a repaired structure because
it is a function of the change in potentials, the nature
of the repair materials, and the exterior and interior
environments. If the steel in the repair area is only
partially exposed with a bar that is embedded halfway
in existing, chloride-contaminated concrete and halfway
in new repair material, strong corrosion cells may de-
velop. The half of the bar in the existing concrete will
become anodic and will corrode at a rapid rate, driven
by the other half acting as a cathode. Repair phase
deterioration and failure may develop this way in less
than 1 year. If concrete is removed completely from
Fig. 1. Possible corrosion locations in concrete repair systems.
around the reinforcement and replaced by a repair
material, similar to above reactions can accelerate the
corrosion of the steel at the perimeter of the repair in
the surrounding existing concrete. The risk of corrosion
in concrete repair due to electrochemical incompatibil-
ity between old and new portions of the structure is
always present.
4. Interior environment
The durability criteria for concrete repairs differs
from that of newly constructed concrete structures.
Challenging this longevity are not only normal physical
and chemical attacks from the exterior environment,
but the attack from the interior environment and the
changes in the interior environment created by the
application of the repair. A holistic model of repair
failure is presented in Fig. 2.
It is never advisable to design any structure without
first having a very clear idea of what environment it is
going to be exposed to, and how it is going to behave in
this environment. Unfortunately, often repair projects
are not designed in this way. Very little, if anything, is
being considered about the interior environment in the
repair system and, therefore, little is known about how
the repair will behave in this environment. In repair
systems, the interior environment is a moving target }
it is constantly changing due to the existence of the
interior transport mechanism in addition to the exte-
rior transport described earlier. Water with dissolved
salts may be transported by temperature and pressure
gradients. Dissolved substances can also move by dif-
fusion in water saturated concrete with a stagnant
 A.M. Vaysburd, P.H. Emmons r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 189]197
Fig. 2. A holistic model of repair failure.
water phase if there is a concentration gradient.
Finally, ions will migrate in an electric field, and this is
what provides electrical conductivity in a repair system.
With a complex composite system such as concrete
repair, aggressive exterior and interior environments,
and their interaction, become a major factor in initiat-
ing a progressively cumulative damage attack. Develop-
ment of reinforcement corrosion and concrete deteri-
oration becomes an overall synergistic process, a com-
plex combination of a variety of individual mechanisms,
the exact role, effect and contribution of each is not
clearly understood. Variability in almost everything is
typical for repair systems. Occasionally these variables
cancel each other, but usually, as a rule, they are likely
to be cumulative.
The effects of interior and exterior environments
and their combination on the corrosion process is fore-
most among the most important and less known area.
193
A better understanding in this area may lead to better
solutions to corrosion problems. The interactions of
repair with existing structure, with existing environ-
ment, with loading conditions, also need considerable
study as this represents the real world conditions to
which repaired structures are exposed.
5. Corrosion protection
When a new concrete structure is to serve in a severe
environment it is always debatable whether one can
rely on the quality of the concrete alone to protect the
embedded steel in it from corrosion, or, if the steel
would need additional protection of one kind or an-
other. In severe environments, a wide range of aggres-
sive agents can penetrate concrete and initiate a da-
mage process in a very short time of exposure. A
194 A.M. Vaysburd, P.H. Emmons r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 189]197
sensible solution for long-term durability, where the
risk of chloride-induced corrosion exists, is to adopt a
global design strategy belts and suspenders. in which
the concrete is designed and protected to develop its
high quality through low permeability structure, whilst
the steel is additionally protected to counteract the
possible poor field practices.
The material manufacturers offer a tiered choice of
corrosion protective systems for concrete repair with
varying degrees of cost. The systems include the use of
various protective coatings, cathodic protection, corro-
sion-inhibiting admixtures, etc. In some cases, combi-
nations of protection systems have been recommended.
Several theoretical justifications have been proposed
for different protective systems, but all contain ele-
ments of speculation and not one of them has been
demonstrated effectiveness beyond a doubt. Current
protection theories usually resolve themselves into one
of three mechanisms or their combinations:
1. Electrochemical barrier between reinforcement and
cementitious material to minimize reactive sites
barrier coatings..
2. Cathodic protection in the form of sacrificial anode.
3. Chemical stabilization of the steel surface.
Examples of the existing protective systems is pre-
sented in Table 1.
Since their introduction in the repair field, the per-
formance of barrier coatings for reinforcing steel in a
corrosive environment has been questioned. One of the
major concerns is the effect of partial coating of an
electrically continuous rebar. Another concern is the
effect of discontinuities such as pinholes, damages, or
holidays. Proponents of the method make blanket
statements that barrier coatings must be defect-free.
Whether or not these statements could be practically
applied to reinforcement in concrete repair is debat-
able. Because of the problems with barrier coatings,
and more recently the appearance of evidence support-
ing these concerns, serious consideration has been given
to other options. One of the options used is rebar
protective coating combining two components: barrier
coating with inhibitor and barrier coating with zinc as a
sacrificial anode.
Polymer-modified, cement-based anti-corrosion coat-
ings for reinforcing steel consist of a mixture of acry-
late and cement, or epoxy emulsions and cement. Com-
pared to epoxy coating they should not decrease the
concrete bond to the reinforcing steel and should also
maintain a high alkalinity environment surrounding the
bar. However, these coatings are susceptible to deteri-
oration due to continued chloride ingress, and further
research on their effectiveness is needed.
Other bar coatings incorporate some barrier proper-
ties that are sacrificial to the mild steel. The advantage
of these materials is that the corrosion products of the
sacrificial material are not as expansive and detrimen-
tal to the concrete as mild steel corrosion products.
Sacrificial metal primers require intimate contact with
the steel, so the steel must be cleaned to a near-white
condition. Laboratory tests indicate that these coating
materials improve the corrosion resistance of the coated
steel but their effectiveness in preventing corrosion of
the unexposed steel in concrete adjacent to the repair
is not yet known. Many of these materials are new and
little information is available on their long-term effec-
tiveness.
The most serious concern regarding protective sys-
tems in concrete repairs is that only a portion of the
electrically continuous rebar is being treated. By doing
this, are we not contributing to the already existing
uniform non-uniformity in repair system and, there-
fore, increasing the risk of corrosion activity in the
repaired structure?
A number of proprietary anti-corrosion admixtures,
corrosion inhibitors, are currently marketed not only
for new construction, but also for repairs of which
these based on calcium nitrates are most promising.
Incorporated in the mixture, they passivate the steel
surface against the action of the chloride ion. Other
inhibitors reportedly reduce the sorbitivity of chlorides,
even in the presence of cracks. While these admixtures
appear to offer added protection to buy time. against
corrosion in newly constructed concrete structures and
lately in concrete repair, there are some concerns and
uncertainties related to their use in concrete repairs.
One of the serious drawbacks in the use of anodic
inhibitors is that the admixtures are effective in main-
taining passivity only if present in sufficiently high
concentrations. It is generally agreed that calcium
nitrate corrosion-inhibiting effect is degenerative in
nature. The unbound nitrate ions diminish in concen-
tration as they stabilize the passivation layer of the
steel reinforcement. Due to the relatively small amounts
in concrete, the admixture tends to be dispersed in the
mass rather than at the concretersteel interface.
The concern is how to maintain the necessary con-
centration of the inhibitor in the repair phase. It is
likely that the inhibitor is not staying in the limited
repair area, that it migrates with the water and other
ions causing the necessary concentration to be reduced.
The porous structure and microcracks in repair phase
and existing concrete determine their ability to pass
moisture and other agents under various gradients.
Both moisture and temperature gradients determine
the transport of water and other agents, via water,
including corrosion inhibitor in the repair system. This
flow can be significant when the structure is subjected
to wetting and drying. It is also more than likely that
chloride ions from chloride contaminated existing con-
crete, by the transport mechanism described above, will
A.M. Vaysburd, P.H. Emmons r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 189]197 195
196 A.M. Vaysburd, P.H. Emmons r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 189]197
Fig. 3. Penetration of chloride ions from existing concrete into repair
material with corrosion inhibitor.
move into the repair phase Fig. 3. w3x. Chloride ions
will react with the inhibitor and reduce its critical
concentration.
The inhibitor content and its fluctuations within the
repair system determines its effectiveness. In the real
world, the inhibitor content varies in a very complex
and unforeseeable manner. Therefore, it is not possible
to make an exact calculation of the effect of inhibiting
admixture on the service life of a repaired structure.
But considering its relatively low cost and simplicity of
use, this may be an effective alternative to other pro-
tective treatments.
There are a large number of corrosion protection
treatments on the market that claim a variety of
properties. Their behavior in protection against steel
corrosion in concrete repair is not well established and
there are no reliable guidelines at the present time on
which to base the choice of protective strategy, if any.
In view of the recently discussed problems, many con-
fused designers are specifying secondary and even ter-
tiary protection systems } costly and often defeating
each other treatments.
There are opportunities of the use of known and
novel corrosion protection materials, methods and sys-
tems. At present, to use or not to use these additional
protection systems is a question of practical concern.
Some of these systems are being used in new construc-
tion practices, and often good results have been
achieved. Questions remain as to their applicability to
concrete repair, where such concerns as electrical in-
compatibility, simultaneous existence of diverse envi-
ronmental conditions along the electrically continuous
reinforcement, and water, oxygen, aggressive agents
and corrosion inhibitors transport mechanism in the
composite repair system are paramount.
Existing research and testing methods used for eval-
uating the effectiveness of protective systems in con-
crete repair are clearly unsatisfactory. One of the rea-
sons for this is that the tests are related to newly
constructed structures and cannot be synthesized into a
complete understanding of actual behavior and effects
in repair systems. Although reinforcing bars within a
repaired structure constitute an electrically continuous
system exposed to quite diverse environments, for un-
known reasons most of the research studies carried out
so far have been done by exposing the entire reinforce-
ment in more or less uniform exposure conditions.
Thus, the effect of the simultaneous existence of di-
verse exposure conditions with respect to various seg-
ments of the reinforcement has not been evaluated.
Also, not all parts of the repaired structure are equally
vulnerable to corrosion, and corrosion characteristics
under actual conditions cannot be clarified by evaluat-
ing them individually andror independently. Labora-
tory and experimental testing should be designed to
study repair related issues paying more attention to
repair location in the existing structure, its geometry,
restraint, and nonuniformity. Various loading condi-
tions need to be included in such testing programs.
Non-destructive, reliable test methods to evaluate
hidden corrosion activity in new as well as in repaired
concrete structures are nonexistent. For example, one
of the tests least understood by its users is the mea-
surement and interpretation of the half-cell potential
on areas of reinforcing steel embedded in concrete
suggests that half-cell potentials more negative than
y0.35 V indicates corrosion, but some workers have
found no corrosion at more negative potentials and
severe corrosion at much more positive potentials. Un-
fortunately, many of the practitioners of this test believe
that the half-cell is always due to corrosion occurring at
the time of measurement. The half-cell potential, how-
ever, often represents the chemistry of the solution in
contact with the steel, which may not relate to corro-
sion at all. Work is needed to relate half-cell potential
to the chemistry of the system. Only then can the
corrosion cause be fully understood w2x.
This example is another indication that the limited
research being done in this field, unfortunately, is not
addressing the issues of real repairs the industry is
interested in. It appears that sometimes it is not re-
search at all, but self-serving exercises in status quo.
6. Concluding remarks
In the coming century, the concrete repair industry
will be called upon to serve the pressing need of the
 A.M. Vaysburd, P.H. Emmons r Construction and Building Materials 14 (2000) 189]197
human society, namely meeting the infrastructural re-
quirement for increasing industrialization of the world.
Durable, corrosion resistant repairs can be engi-
neered if we can better understand and control the
corrosion and corrosion protection problems. It is ap-
parent from the experience and case histories that the
processes of reinforcement corrosion in concrete repair
which cause loss of durability are very complex. Each is
not only non-linear in itself, but interacts physically
and chemically with the processes in exterior and inte-
rior environments. The kinetics of the corrosion reac-
tions need much more study. In many cases repaired
structures will exhibit corrosion during the first year of
use, others may take much longer to exhibit problems.
Better judgments as to repair and protection measures
could be possible if more information on corrosion
kinetics were available.
When protecting from corrosion, simple solutions
addressing simple processes are not adequate. Redun-
dant measures of protection, especially for structures in
severe environments, in our opinion, may be adopted in
order to adequately delay the onset of corrosion and
arrest its development. However, the installation of
several protective systems belts and suspenders ap-
proach. may not be the most economical nor even the
most effective means of insuring durability, since we do
not have reliable information on each protective sys-
tem, and definitely on the effects of their interaction.
There are a large number of corrosion protection tech-
niques, materials and systems on the market that claim
197
a variety of properties. Whether this protection is reli-
able, unfortunately, it is hard to say. The realistic status
of our knowledge in this field is that we know about
half of the answers to questions we should know to
really do it properly. One does not have the luxury to
wait until he gets the other half of the answers. We
have to do the best we can today and, of course, do
everything necessary to get all the answers in the near
future. There is research necessary which all of us
would like to see accomplished.
The research programs shall be devoted to achieving
practical, implementable results. Meanwhile, and this is
to be strongly emphasized, since cracking in repair
systems is unquestionably one of the truly critical
phenomena of repair pathology, responsible for corro-
sion, deterioration and failure, the use of good quality,
crack resistant repair materials with addition of corro-
sion inhibitors remains the least expensive and essen-
tial in corrosion protection in concrete repair along
with good quality design and construction practices.
References
w1x Alekseyev SN, Rosenthal NK. Resistance of reinforced concrete
in industrial environment win Russianx, Moscow, 1976.
w2x Hime WG. The corrosion of steel } random thoughts and
wishful thinking. Concrete International, No. 10, October
1993:54]7.
w3x Bijen JM, editor. Maintenance and repair of concrete structures,
vol. 34, No. 2. Netherlands: Heron, 1984:36.