Report of RILEM TC 281-CCC: outcomes of a round robin on the resistance to accelerated carbonation of Portland, Portland-fly ash and blast-furnace blended cements

Many (inter)national standards exist to evaluate the resistance of mortar and concrete to carbonation. When a carbonation coefficient is used for performance comparison of mixtures or service life prediction, the applied boundary conditions during curing, preconditioning and carbonation play a crucial role, specifically when using latent hydraulic or pozzolanic supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). An extensive interlaboratory test (ILT) with twenty two participating laboratories was set up in the framework of RILEM TC 281-CCC ‘Carbonation of Concrete with SCMs’. The carbonation depths and coefficients determined by following several (inter)national standards for three cement types (CEM I, CEM II/B-V, CEM III/B) both on mortar and concrete scale were statistically compared. The outcomes of this study showed that the carbonation rate based on the carbonation depths after 91 days exposure, compared to 56 days or less exposure duration, best approximates the slope of the linear regression and those 91 days carbonation depths can therefore be considered as a good estimate of the potential resistance to carbonation. All standards evaluated in this study ranked the three cement types in the same order of carbonation resistance. Unfortunately, large variations within and between laboratories complicate to draw clear conclusions regarding the effect of sample pre-conditioning and carbonation exposure conditions on the carbonation performance of the specimens tested. Nevertheless, it was identified that fresh and hardened state properties alone cannot be used to infer carbonation resistance of the mortars or concretes tested. It was also found that sealed curing results in larger carbonation depths compared to water curing. However, when water curing was reduced from 28 to 3 or 7 days, higher carbonation depths compared to sealed curing were observed. This increase is more pronounced for CEM I compared to CEM III mixes. The variation between laboratories is larger than the potential effect of raising the CO concentration from 1 to 4%. Finally, concrete, for which the aggregate-to-cement factor was increased by 1.79 in comparison with mortar, had a carbonation coefficient 1.18 times the one of mortar

Corrosion of steel in carbonated concrete: mechanisms, practical experience, and research priorities – a critical review by RILEM TC 281-CCC

Carbonation of concrete is generally assumed to lead to reinforcing steel corrosion. This mindset has long dictated the research priorities surrounding the developments towards new, low-emission binders. Here, by reviewing documented practical experience and scientific literature, we show that this widely held view is too simplistic. In fact, there are many cases from engineering practice where carbonation of the cementitious matrix surrounding the steel did not lead to noticeable corrosion or to corrosion-related damage at the level of a structure. The influencing factors that can, however, lead to considerable corrosion damage are identified as the moisture state, the microstructure of the carbonated concrete, various species that may be present – even in minor amounts – in the concrete pore solution, and the cover depth. The circumstance that a reduced pH alone is not sufficient to lead to significant steel corrosion in concrete seriously challenges the established approach of assessing the durability performance based on carbonation testing and modeling. At the same time, this circumstance offers great opportunities for reducing the environmental impact of concrete structures with low-emission binders. To realize these opportunities, the focus in research and engineering should shift from studying carbonation to studying corrosion of steel in carbonated concrete.ISSN:2518 -023

Application of electrochemical methods for studying steel corrosion in alkali‐activated materials

Alkali-activated materials (AAMs) are binders that can complement and partially substitute the current use of conventional cement. However, the present knowledge about how AAMs protect steel reinforcement in concrete elements is incomplete, and uncertainties exist regarding the application of electrochemical methods to investigate this issue. The present review by EFC WP11-Task Force ‘Corrosion of steel in alkali-activated materials’ demonstrates that important differences exist between AAMs and Portland cement, and between different classes of AAMs, which are mainly caused by differing pore solution compositions, and which affect the outcomes of electrochemical measurements. The high sulfide concentrations in blast furnace slag-based AAMs lead to distinct anodic polarisation curves, unusually low open circuit potentials, and low polarisation resistances, which might be incorrectly interpreted as indicating active corrosion of steel reinforcement. No systematic study of the influence of the steel–concrete interface on the susceptibility of steel to corrosion in AAMs is available. Less common electrochemical methods present an opportunity for future progress in the field

Application of electrochemical methods for studying steel corrosion in alkali‐activated materials

Alkali-activated materials (AAMs) are binders that can complement and partially substitute the current use of conventional cement. However, the present knowledge about how AAMs protect steel reinforcement in concrete elements is incomplete, and uncertainties exist regarding the application of electrochemical methods to investigate this issue. The present review by EFC WP11-Task Force ‘Corrosion of steel in alkali-activated materials’ demonstrates that important differences exist between AAMs and Portland cement, and between different classes of AAMs, which are mainly caused by differing pore solution compositions, and which affect the outcomes of electrochemical measurements. The high sulfide concentrations in blast furnace slag-based AAMs lead to distinct anodic polarisation curves, unusually low open circuit potentials, and low polarisation resistances, which might be incorrectly interpreted as indicating active corrosion of steel reinforcement. No systematic study of the influence of the steel–concrete interface on the susceptibility of steel to corrosion in AAMs is available. Less common electrochemical methods present an opportunity for future progress in the field.ISSN:0947-5117ISSN:0043-2822ISSN:1521-417

Understanding the carbonation of concrete with supplementary cementitious materials: a critical review by RILEM TC 281-CCC

Blended cements, where Portland cement clinker is partially replaced by supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), provide the most feasible route for reducing carbon dioxide emissions associated with concrete production. However, lowering the clinker content can lead to an increasing risk of neutralisation of the concrete pore solution and potential reinforcement corrosion due to carbonation. carbonation of concrete with SCMs differs from carbonation of concrete solely based on Portland cement (PC). This is a consequence of the differences in the hydrate phase assemblage and pore solution chemistry, as well as the pore structure and transport properties, when varying the binder composition, age and curing conditions of the concretes. The carbonation mechanism and kinetics also depend on the saturation degree of the concrete and CO2 partial pressure which in turn depends on exposure conditions (e.g. relative humidity, volume, and duration of water in contact with the concrete surface and temperature conditions). This in turn influence the microstructural changes identified upon carbonation. This literature review, prepared by members of RILEM technical committee 281-CCC carbonation of concrete with supplementary cementitious materials, working groups 1 and 2, elucidates the effect of numerous SCM characteristics, exposure environments and curing conditions on the carbonation mechanism, kinetics and structural alterations in cementitious systems containing SCMs.Accepted author manuscript, Corrigenda DOI: 10.1617/s11527-020-01599-1 and DOI:10.1617/s11527-021-01658-1Materials and Environmen