This paper focuses on the effect of the electric field on the thermodynamic model of ion flows in the concrete pore solution. The equation for ion migrations was derived from the mass balance in the multi-component system and material constants. Then, using only one component – chloride ion, a reliable diffusion coefficient was determined from the formulated converse task of the migration equation. Taking into account experimentally obtained distribution of chloride concentrations under the electric field, the diffusion coefficient was determined. The distribution of the chloride concentrations was calculated on the basis of that coefficient. And then, it was compared with the measurement results for concentrations of chlorides penetrating into concrete via diffusion. The lowest mean square error between the experimental and calculated distributions of mass densities indicated the reliable value of the chloride diffusion coefficient

This research paper is the result of observations made during tests according to various standards carried out on behalf of industry. The article presents diffusion coefficient values calculated according to the thermodynamic migration model for twenty different concrete mixes and some selected mixes of the codified approaches known as ASTM 1202, NT BUILD 443, NT BUILD 492, ASTM 1556. The method used here, according to the thermodynamic model of migration, allows determination of the value of the diffusion coefficient after short studies of the migration of chloride ions into concrete and was described in earlier works by one of the authors. Unfortunately, when using standard methods, the values of diffusion coefficients differ significantly from each other. In each concrete, diffusion tests were carried out in the conditions of long-term natural diffusion to verify the values determined by standard methods and according to the thermodynamic model of migration. The analysis conducted for this research paper reveals that the chloride permeability test method according to the standard ASTM C1202-97 has an almost 2.8-fold greater dispersion of the obtained results compared to the thermodynamic model of migration. It was observed that the standard NT BUILD 492 has a 3.8-fold dispersion of results compared to the method with the thermodynamic model of migration. The most time-consuming method is the standard method NT BUILD 443. The largest 3.5-fold dispersion of values concerning the reference value are observed in that method. Moreover, a method based on a thermodynamic migration model seems to be the best option of all analyzed methods. It is a quite quick, but laborious, method that should be tested for a larger number of concrete mixes. A great advantage of this method is that it is promising for a wide range of concrete mixtures, both plain concrete and concrete with various additives and admixtures, as well as high-performance concrete.

This paper presents a simple comparative method for evaluating the impact of concrete design on the effectiveness of repair with the electrochemical chloride extraction (ECE) process of reinforced concrete structures. This comparison covered two concretes with different types of used cement. Penetration of chloride ions to induce corrosion processes was accelerated with the electric field. However, the corrosion process itself occurred naturally. When the corrosion process was found to pose a risk to the reinforcement, the profile of chloride ion concentration was determined at the depth of concrete cover. Corrosion current intensity during migration and extraction processes of chloride ions was measured with the LPR method. Then, this serious condition for the structure was repaired with electrochemical chloride extraction. Rates of chloride extraction were determined from the derived concentration profiles. It should be noted that the critical concentration C_crit = 0.4% at the rebar surface was reached after 21 days of the migration process. Moreover, after the same time of extraction, the concentration was reduced by 95% at the rebar surface, which could suggest that extraction rate was slower than chloride ion migration to concrete within the electric field. Using the migration coefficient for predicting the extraction time, as well as ignoring the variability of the extraction coefficient and the initial concentration over time, may result in too short or unnecessarily long extraction times.

In this work, two methods were used to accelerate the corrosion of concrete. In the first method, chloride ions were injected into the concrete using the migration method. The moment of the initiation of the corrosion process was monitored using an electrochemical method of measuring polarization resistance. In the next step, the corrosion process was accelerated by the electrolysis process. Changes on the sample surface were also monitored using a camera. In the second method, the corrosion process of the reinforcing bar was initiated by the use of the electrolysis process only. Here, changes occurring on the surfaces of the tested sample were recorded using two web cameras placed on planes perpendicular to each other. Continuous measurement of the current flowing through the system was carried out in both cases. It was assumed that in conditions of natural corrosion, a crack would occur when the sum of the mass loss of the reinforcing bar due to corrosion reached the same value in $t_{cr\left(real\right)}$ (real time) as it reached in the $t_{cr}$ (time of cracking) during the accelerated corrosion test. The real time value was estimated for C1 concrete with cement CEM I. The estimated value was $t_{cr\left(real\right)}$ = 1.1 years and for C2 concrete with cement CEM III, $t_{cr\left(real\right)}$ = 11.2 years. However, the main difference that was observed during the tests was the nature of the concrete cracks. In the case of the C1 concrete sample, these occurred along the reinforcing bar, while in the C2 concrete, the failures occurred on a perpendicular plane transverse to the direction of the reinforcing bar.

This study presents a comparison of the protective properties of three concretes of similar composition on the effect of chloride ions. To determine these properties, the values of the diffusion and migration coefficients of chloride ions in concrete were determined using both standard methods and the thermodynamic ion migration model. We tested a comprehensive method for checking the protective properties of concrete against chlorides. This method can not only be used in various concretes, even those with only small differences in composition, but also in concretes with various types of admixtures and additives, such as PVA fibers. The research was carried out to address the needs of a manufacturer of prefabricated concrete foundations. The aim was to find a cheap and effective method of sealing the concrete produced by the manufacturer in order to carry out projects in coastal areas. Earlier diffusion studies showed good performance when replacing ordinary CEM I cement with metallurgical cement. The corrosion rates of the reinforcing steel in these concretes were also compared using the following electrochemical methods: linear polarization and impedance spectroscopy. The porosities of these concretes, determined using X-ray computed tomography for pore-related characterization, were also compared. Changes in the phase composition of corrosion products occurring in the steel–concrete contact zone were compared using scanning electron microscopy with a micro-area chemical analysis capability, in addition to X-ray microdiffraction, to study the microstructure changes. Concrete with CEM III cement was the most resistant to chloride ingress and therefore provided the longest period of protection against chloride-initiated corrosion. The least resistant was concrete with CEM I, for which, after two 7-day cycles of chloride migration in the electric field, steel corrosion started. The additional use of a sealing admixture can cause a local increase in the volume of pores in the concrete, and at the same time, a local weakening of the concrete structure. Concrete with CEM I was characterized as having the highest porosity at 140.537 pores, whereas concrete with CEM III (characterized by lower porosity) had 123.015 pores. Concrete with sealing admixture, with the same open porosity, had the highest number of pores, at 174.880. According to the findings of this study, and using a computed tomography method, concrete with CEM III showed the most uniform distribution of pores of different volumes, and had the lowest total number of pores.