790 PIERS Proceedings, Marrakesh, MOROCCO, March 2023, 2011

Detection and Quantication of Corrosion Damage Using Ground

Penetrating Radar (GPR)
Shahid Kabir
1
and Ahmad Zaki
2
1
Sustainable Materials and Infrastructure (SMI) Cluster
Collaborative -electronic Design Excellence Centre (CEDEC), Engineering Campus
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Malaysia
2
School of Civil Engineering, Engineering Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Malaysia
Abstract This research aims to detect the damage due to corrosion of reinforcing steel in
concrete structures using ground penetrating radar (GPR) and conventional method, half-cell
potential (HCP). A method to accelerate corrosion of steel rebar in concrete samples to dierent
degrees is applied, the method consists of introducing a direct current (DC) power supply and
5% sodium chloride (NaCl) solution as an electrolyte to the rebar to induce signicant corrosion
within a short period of time. The 2 GHz GPR is used to detect the corrosion in the reinforced
concrete slabs after 28 days of standard moist preservation. The results are compared with those
obtained using the HCP method. Both of the GPR and the HCP show good performance in
determining the degree of corrosion.
1. INTRODUCTION
Corrosion is a worldwide problem facing the concrete structures [1]. Many reports have highlighted
that concrete structures are damaged by corrosion all over the world [25]. Major cause of dam-
ages are inadequate planning, wrong estimation, and bad workmanship. The damages need to be
repaired and maintained [6, 7]. The structures need to be repaired after a short service life [8].
The repair and maintenance of concrete structures are nearly as important as new constructions.
Consequently, visual inspection of whole structure is regular inspection to asses the condition of
corrosion in concrete structures. However, if there are no conclusions can be obtained by visual
inspection, a reliable inspection method is needed before the functionality of a structure is seriously
damaged [811].
Non-destructive testing (NDT) is objective corrosion inspection method. The NDT method
should be done without damaging the concrete. The NDT methods can be applied to both new
and old structures. For new structures, the principal applications are likely to be quality control
of materials or construction. In the old structures, the NDT methods are expected to provide the
needed feedback in monitoring for detection and identication of the deterioration [12]. Half-cell
potencial, one of NDT methods were used widely to test the rebar corrosion. This paper presents
applicability of GPR that allows the detection of rebar corrosion in concrete. The GPR results are
compared with half-cell potential results in order to provide a more in-depth evaluation of corrosion
of concrete structures and to increase the accuracy and reliability of deterioration assessment for
monitoring and safety analysis.
2. REVIEW
2.1. Half-cell Potential (HCP)
The HCP is the mostly useful method for assessing corrosion of the rebars. Basically, the HCP
measurements are simple, inexpensive and virtually NDT to provide a condition of the corrosion
activity and identify risk of corrosion zones. These measurements can be used to estimate the corro-
sion risk of steels even if there are no signs of corrosion on the concrete surface, which is a signicant
advantage for inspecting existing concrete structures. The HCP could localize the chloride-induced
corrosion of the rebars and improve the quality of condition assessment [13]. The HCP provides
information to calculate the probability of corrosion degree and in some cases information on the
possible presence of damage if this corrosion is in advanced stage [8, 10]. Interpretation of HCP
test results is carried out as per the ASTM C876 guidelines [15] The ASTM C876 states that the
probability of corrosion is less than 10% if the potential is greater than 200 mV, whereas potential
values lower than 350 mV indicate a high probability of corrosion (> 90%) However, this test does
not allow the detection of delamination in a direct manner.
Progress In Electromagnetics Research Symposium Proceedings, Marrakesh, Morocco, Mar. 2023, 2011 791
2.2. Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)
The GPR is an electromagnetic investigation method. It is also known as surface penetrating
radar or electromagnetic reection method. Mostly it is used in reection mode where a signal is
emitted via an antenna into the structure under investigation. Reected energy caused by changes
in material properties is recorded and analysed [7]. The GPR is a potential method for periodic
inspection and maintenance of concrete structures [9, 16, 17]. GPR has become a valuable tool for
the NDT of concrete structures for technological advancements over the past decade [9]. In detail,
GPR technology is employed for: localization and estimation of reinforcing bars, localization and
the dimensions of voids, localization of cracking, localization and dimensions of voids, localization
of honeycombey or cracking, corrosion detection, and estimation of bar size [1821]. GPR is capable
for direct and early detection of corrosion. However, most of corrosion detection are accomplished
in laboratory and need advances study related to corrosion and the GPR universally [22].
3. METHODS
In sample preparations, rebars are immersed in a solution of 5% sodium chloride (NaCl). The
rebars is exposed to the solution using DC power supply with some duration of rebar exposure (0,
1, 3, and 7 days). 0 day for no corrosion rebar, 1 day for corrosion, 3 days for middle corrosion
and 7 days for high corrosion. The corrosing rebars is dened as the anode while a rebar facing the
corrosing rebars is dened as the cathode. The current of 10 V (Volt) and 1 A (Ampere) are applied
in the corrosion process. Furthermore, the corroded rebars are induced to concrete mixture. The
concrete slab dimension are l = 1 m, w = 1 m, and h = 0.3 m. The concrete grade is C30. Portland
cement, uncrushed sand, crushed limestone with a maximum aggregate size of 20 mm are used to
prepare the concrete mixture. The y-type reinforced bars (rebars) with 20 mm diameter is selected.
The 2 GHz of GPR manufactured by IDS (Ingegneria Dei Sistemi S.p.A) Italy and the digital
half-cell manufactured by SCRIBE, were employed to detect the corrosion in reinforced concrete
slabs after 28-days of standars moist curing. The GPR results could be proposed in a-scan, b-
scan, c-scan, and 3D image. In this paper, authors used 3D image as the GPR data for corrosion
detection. In the other hand, the HCP is adjusted at 10 mV. Desired grid on the 1 m
2
surface of
concrete slab is marked out. The grid size is 10 10 cm. The four rebars are placed in b, d, f,
and h to represent no corrosion, low corrosion, middle corrosion, and high corrosion, respectively.
Eight points is taken for each rebar for HCP test. The point is taken from point 1 until the end
of rebar on concrete structure in point 8. The grid of b
1
b
8
for no corrosion rebar, d
1
d
8
for low
corrosion rebar, f
1
f
8
for middle corrosion rebar, and h
1
h
8
for high corrosion rebar.
4. RESULTS
B-scan is the raw data from scanning that already been ltered. Figure 1 shows the b-scans at
dierent location of scanning but in same direction of tranverse. Figures 1(a) and (c) are the
location of rebar at the end and beginning. There is no corroded rebar in that gure. Figure 1(b)
is the location of corroded rebar in three rebar with dierent degree of corrosion, but the wave
shows same characteristic for the all four rebar with Figures 1(a) and (c).
The view of corroded rebar also can be seen in Figure 2. C-scan at depth 0.10 m can view the
clearly rebar but the image is not clear to view the dierent degree of corrosion. The 3D image of
GPR data showed that the corrosion can be detected for high corrosion. However, the GPR could
not visualized for low and middle corrosion because the image is not clear, as shown in Figure 3.
The unclearness image of rebar in low and middle corrosion was caused by human error in sample
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 1: B-scans data, (a) at the end of rebar, (b) at corroded rebar, (c) at beginning of rebar.
792 PIERS Proceedings, Marrakesh, MOROCCO, March 2023, 2011
Figure 2: C-scan data. Figure 3: The 3D image of GPR.
Table 1: Digital half-cell grid.
1
2
3 155 162 178 201
4 152 152 185 205
5 150 153 182 201
6 151 158 184 202
7 150 157 185 205
8 157 166 187 203
9 155 173 187 205
10 155 173 184 206
A B C D E F G H I J K
preparation. The error is especially in use of the vibrator stick to compact the rebars. Therefore,
the end of rebar is not same high with the beginning of rebar.
Table 1 below shows the grid and the potential reading on pre-determined grid. Test area is
1 m
2
and the grid size is 10 cm, horizontally and vertically. As presented in Section 3, number of
points taken is 8 for each rebar. For rebar exposure times 0, 1, and 3 days the percentage chance of
corrosion activity is 5%. And for 7 days exposure time, the value for percentage chance of corrosion
activity is 50%.
5. CONCLUSION
This paper shows the detection corrosion of GPR and half-cell potential. The 3D image of GPR data
showed that the corrosion can be detected for high corrosion. There is dierent pattern on corroded
rebar and the diameter of corroded rebar less than uncorroded rebar. The GPR give results that are
compared with half-cell potential. The half-cell potential give results that 7 days of exposure time
of rebar (high corrosion) have 50% probability in value and 5% chance of corrosion activity for no
corrosion, low corrosion and middle corrosion. Therefore, the GPR have applicability to detection
corrosion of corroded rebar in advance stage base on the image. The authors of this paper believe
that image proceesing techniques should be used to get best classication and interpretation the
GPR images of corrosion.
REFERENCES
1. Badawi, M. and K. Soudki, Control of corrosion-induced damage in reinforced concrete beams
using carbon ber-reinforced polymer laminates, Journal of Composites for Construction,
Vol. 9, No. 2, 195201, 2005.
2. Ahmad, S., Reinforcement corrosion in concrete structures, its monitoring and service life
prediction-a review, Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 25, Nos. 45, 459471, 2003.
3. Yingshu, Y., J. Yongsheng, and P. S. Surendra, Comparison of two accelerated corrosion
techniques for concrete structures, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 104, No. 3, 344, 2007.
Progress In Electromagnetics Research Symposium Proceedings, Marrakesh, Morocco, Mar. 2023, 2011 793
4. Capozucca, R., Damage to reinforced concrete due to reinforcement corrosion, Construction
and Building Materials, Vol. 9, No. 5, 295303, 1995.
5. Cleland, D. J., K. M. Yeoh, and A. E. Long, Corrosion of reinforcement in concrete repair,
Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 11, No. 4, 233238, 1997.
6. Nagi, M., Corrosion evaluation of reinforced concrete bridges, ASCE, 1616, 2005.
7. Hugenschmidt, J. and R. Mastrangelo, GPR inspection of concrete bridges, Cement and
Concrete Composites, Vol. 28, No. 4, 384392, 2006.
8. Elsener, B., C. Andrade, J. Gulikers, R. Polder, and M. Raupach, Hall-cell potential mea-
surements Potential mapping on reinforced concrete structures, Materials and Structures,
Vol. 36, No. 7, 11, 2003.
9. Wiggenhauser, H. and H. W. Reinhardt, NDT in civil engineering: experience and results of
the for 384 research group, AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1211, 4754, 2010.
10. Rhazi, J., O. Dous, and S. Laurens, A new application of the GPR technique to reinforced
concrete bridge decks, Proceedings of 4th Middle East NDT Conference and Exhibition, King-
dom of Bahrain, December 2007.
11. Arndt, R. and F. Jalinoos, NDE for corrosion detection in reinforced concrete structures
A benchmark approach, Proceedings of Non-destructive Testing in Civil Engineering, Nantes,
France, June 30July 3, 2009.
12. Bu yu ko ztu rk, O, Imaging of concrete structures, NDT and E International, Vol. 31, No. 4,
233243, 1998.
13. Elsener, B., Half-cell potential mapping to assess repair work on RC structures, Construction
and Building Materials, Vol. 15, Nos. 23, 133139, 2001.
14. ASTM C876-09, Standard test method for half-cell potentials of uncoated reinforcing steel in
concrete, 1991.
15. Clemena, G. G., Short Pulse Radar Methods, CRC Press, 1991.
16. Laurens, S., J. P. Balayssac, J. Rhazi, G. Klysz, and G. Arliguie, Non-destructive evalua-
tion of concrete moisture by GPR: Experimental study and direct modeling, Materials and
Structures/Materiaux et Constructions, Vol. 38, No. 283, 827832, 2005.
17. Maierhofer, C. and S. Leipold, Radar investigation of masonry structures, NDT and E
International, Vol. 34, No. 2, 139147, 2001.
18. Barrile, V. and R. Pucinotti, Application of radar technology to reinforced concrete structures:
A case study, NDT and E International, Vol. 38, No. 7, 596604, 2005.
19. Maierhofer, C., Nondestructive evaluation of concrete infrastructure with ground penetrating
radar, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 3, 287297, 2003.
20. Bungey, J. H., Sub-surface radar testing of concrete: A review, Construction and Building
Materials, Vol. 18, No. 1, 18, 2004.
21. He, X. Q., Z. Q. Zhu, Q. Y. Liu, and G. Y. Lu, Review of GPR rebar detection, PIERS
Proceedings, 804813, Beijing, China, March, 2327, 2009.
22. Kim, W., Ground penetrating radar application for non-destructive testing: Bridge deck
inspection and dowel bar detection, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Missouri-Rolla, 2003.