Evaluation of rain effect on concrete cover quality by non-destructive methods

Le Anh Van

Keywords: Concrete cover quality, Rain effect, Non-destructive methods, Hydration process

1. Introduction kT increased relatively with time, whilst, the outdoor values

The near surface concrete layers play a crucial role in protecting
the embedded steel from corrosion induced by the adverse
environment. Numerous reliable non-destructive methods have
been introduced and widely used to evaluate the concrete cover
quality such as: Torrent tester, WIST, Wenner because of their
simplicity for application and accuracy [1, 2, 3]. These three non-
destructive measurements’ results are affected greatly by the
moisture content as a major factor [4]. Nevertheless, the effect of
rain causing the variation of moisture content on these methods
dropped down significantly at the age of 56 days, then increased
slightly at the age of 91 days as shown in Figs 1 to 3. In relation to
the indoor measurement, the kT of three different curing results at
the age of 91 days revealed the influence of curing conditions on
kT explicitly. On the other hand, the outdoor case showed almost
the same values as demonstrated in Ffig. 4. Commented [MNH5]: Again, if you cannot show anything
5 6.1 else for other tests results. This research should be
4.5 5.6 changed to air permeability research as you presented
Moisture content (% )

Moisture content (% )

have not been studied thoroughly yet. Moreover, a rapid increment 4 28-d
5.1 herein.
56d

of moisture influenced by rainfall would positively contribute to 91d

Commented [MNH6]: I believe that only Fig.4 is good

3.5 28d
Indoor-28d
4.6
56d
the ongoing hydration process and affect the concrete durability. Indoor-56d 91d
enough for kT discussion. How about other prepared Figs?
3
Indoor-91d 4.1 Indoor-28d

Accordingly, this study aims to evaluate the rain effect on the

Indoor-56d
2.5 Indoor-91d
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 3.6
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
concrete cover quality and the variation of measurements’ results. Coefficient of air permeability, kT (10-16 m2)
Commented [MNH1]: What is objective of this study?
Coefficient of air permeability, kT (10-16 m2 )

Fig. 1. Coefficient of air permeability, kT Fig. 2. Coefficient of air permeability, kT

2. Materials and methods (1d-sealed) (7d-sealed) Commented [MNH2]: In this part, you have to show the
This current work was conducted on produced abutment and 6.1 10 used procedure in this study.
girder using two types of cements (BBC – blast furnace slag
Coefficient of air permeability, kT

5.6 1
Moisture content (% )

cement, HPC – High early strength cement) with water/binder

(10-16 m2)

5.1 0.1
ratios of 0.53 and 0.41, respectively. 56d
Commented [MNH3]: Where is type of specimens (shape,
91d

Specimens were cured under several sealed conditions (1, 7, 28 4.6 Indoor-56 0.01 Outdoor
dimension).
Indoor-91 Indoor

days sealed for BBC, and 1, 3, 28 days sealed for HPC). Right 4.1 0.001
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 01d-sealed 7d-sealed
10 20 28d-sealed
30

after demolding, a half of them were exposed to naturally outdoor Coefficient of air permeability, kT (10-16 m2 )

conditions. WIST was employed to conduct during early ages,
whilst, Torrent air permeability tester was applied at the later ages
of 1, 2, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The electrical resistivity and surface
moisture meter were used in line with the two methods mentioned
above.
3. Results and Discussion
The obtained results comparing the variation of the measured air
Fig. 3. Coefficient of air permeability, kT Fig. 4. Coefficient of air permeability, kT
(28d-sealed) at the age of 91 daysCommented [MNH7]: Insert the title of horizontal axis
4. Conclusion and future plan
The reduction of kT for the outdoor specimens can be explained Commented [MNH4]: How did you measure the above-
by the beneficial contribution of rain which enhances the ongoing mentioned tests (location, quantity, order of test locations)?
hydration process, and thereby improving the concrete durability.
Therefore, an accidental failure in workmanship would be

permeability indicated that the outdoor concrete cover quality
obtained aof outdoor specimens were better quality than that of
the indoor one without rain effectcomparing to indoor. The indoor
compensated by rainfall. For the sake of evaluating how much the
outdoor concrete cover durability improves, after 6-month
measurement, the outdoor specimens will be kept in room.
5. References
[1] R. J. Torrent, Paper Title, Mat. Struct, 1992, 25, 358-365.
[2] S. Nishio, Paper Title, Quarterly Report of RTRI, 2017.
[3] O. Sengul, OE. Gjorv, Paper Title, ACI MJ, 2008, 105-M61.
[4] P. Kummar, Conc. Struct. Prop. Mat, third ed.