Bridge Stay Cable Corrosion Protection. II: Accelerated Corrosion Tests
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 3, Issue 2
Abstract
This paper is the second of two companion papers that cover the results of corrosion and structural testing of eight large-scale stay cable specimens. Four of the specimens had the traditional system of portland cement (PC) grout and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) sheathing, while the other four specimens used improved protection systems such as epoxy-coated, galvanized, greased, and sheathed strands, or a grout improved with silica fume. A unique accelerated corrosion testing technique developed for bridge stay cables is also described. The traditional system of corrosion protection broke down almost immediately after the initiation of the accelerated corrosion test, while the improved corrosion protection systems provided far better corrosion protection than the traditional system. However, some problems were encountered with the improved corrosion protection systems that are of interest.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
American Society for Testing and Materials. (1987). “Standard test method for half-cell potentials of uncoated reinforcing steel in concrete.”ASTM A876-87, Philadelphia, Pa., 1987.
2.
Berke, N. S. (1989). “Resistance of microsilica concrete to steel corrosion, erosion, and chemical attack.”Proc., 3rd Int. Conf.: Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag, and Natural Pozzolans in Concrete (ACI SP-114), V. M. Malhotra, ed., Am. Concrete Inst., 861–886.
3.
CEB-RILEM. (1984). “Durability of concrete structures.”Bull. No. 152. CEB-RILEM Int. Workshop, Copenhagen, Denmark.
4.
Committee on Cable-Stayed Bridges. (1993). Recommendations for stay cable design, testing, and installation. Post-tensioning Inst.
5.
Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc. (1992). Combined axial-flexural fatigue tests of 37-strand stay cable specimen for the Clark Bridge, Alton, Illinois.
6.
Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc. (1992). Fatigue and static tests of 17-strand stay cable specimen for the Clark Bridge, Alton, Illinois.
7.
Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc. (1992). Fatigue and static tests of 31-strand stay cable specimen for the Burlington Bridge, Burlington, Iowa.
8.
Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc. (1992). Fatigue and static tests of 46-strand stay cable specimen for the Clark Bridge, Alton, Illinois.
9.
Fidjestol, P. (1987). “Reinforcement corrosion and the use of CSF-based additives.”Proc., Concrete Durability: Katherine and Bryant Mather Int. Conf. (ACI SP-100), J. M. Scanlon, ed., Am. Concrete Inst., 1445–1458.
10.
González, J. A., Benito, M., Feliu, S., Rodriguez, P., and Andrade, C.(1995). “Suitability of assessment methods for identifying active and passive zones in reinforced concrete.”Corrosion, 51(2), 145–152.
11.
Hamilton, H. R., III, and Breen, J. E. (1995). “International survey of current opinion on bridge stay cable systems.”Proc., Int. Assn. of Bridge and Struct. Engrs. Symp., San Francisco, Calif.
12.
Hamilton, H. R., III. (1995). “Investigation of corrosion protection systems for bridge stay cables,” PhD dissertation, Univ. of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
13.
Hime, W. G. (1993). “The corrosion of steel: Random thoughts and wishful thinking.”Concrete Int., October, 54–57.
14.
Kahhaleh, K. Z. (1994). “Corrosion performance of epoxy-coated reinforcement,” PhD dissertation, Univ. of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tx.
15.
Perenchio, W. F., Fraczek, J., and Pfeifer, D. W. (1989). “Corrosion protection of prestressing systems in concrete bridges.”NCHRP Rep. 313, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C.
16.
Stafford, D. G., and Watson, S. C. (1987). “A discussion of some critical corrosion problems in the cable elements of stayed girder structures.”Proc., U.S.-European Workshop on Bridge Evaluation, Repair, and Rehabilitation, St. Rémy-lès-Chevreuse.
17.
Stafford, D. G., and Watson, S. C. (1988). “Cables in trouble.”Civ. Engrg., ASCE, 58(4).
18.
Technical University of Munich. (1985). Report on the dynamic test with subsequent tensile test on a cable with end anchorages 37 strand 0.6″ diameter, nominal ultimate load 9.64 MN.
19.
Technical University of Munich. (1985). Report on the dynamic test with subsequent tensile test on a cable with end anchorages 44 strand 0.6″ diameter, nominal ultimate load 11.47 MN.
20.
Uhlig, H. H., and Revie, R. W. (1985). Corrosion and corrosion control. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y.
21.
Yeomans, S. R. (1993). “Corrosion testing of black, galvanized and epoxy coated reinforcing steel in concrete (Paper no. 329).”NACE Annual Conf.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 3 • Issue 2 • May 1998
Pages: 72 - 81
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: May 1, 1998
Published in print: May 1998
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.