TN 001 ABSORPTION & SORPTIVITY.

DOC
BCRC
Building & Construction
Research & Consultancy
Sydney Perth
PO Box 10, Brookton BC PO Box 2357, Clarkson,
NSW 2100, Australia WA 6030, Australia
Tel: 02 9939 7533 Tel: 08 9407 5363
Fax: 02 9939 7544 Fax: 08 9407 4031
1. INTRODUCTION
Tests that measure concretes propensity to suck in
water are generally termed absorption or sorptivity
tests. The difference between the two terms is
generally considered to be that absorption is the
capacity of a sample to hold water while sorptivity is
the rate at which the sample fills the sample.
2. PRINCIPLE
There are two ways of measuring
absorption/sorptivity. In one the concrete is immersed
under a small head of water (20-30mm) while in the
other less common method the sample is held in
contact but above the water. The difference is that
gravity adds to the driving force in the immersion
method and detracts from the driving force in the
suspension method. The gravitational component has
been found to be insignificant compared to the
suction force and in essence the two methods
measure the same thing i.e. water drawn in under
capillary suction.
Research has shown:
a) the penetration is dependent on initial water
content
b) drying to a constant rate of moisture loss provides
more accurate results than drying for a set time
as it provides a more consistent moisture content
c) the depth of penetration can be calculated
from:
d= (r
2
P
u
T/4)

where
r = nominal pore radius
Pu = atmospheric pressure
= viscosity
T = time
From this the nominal pore radius can be calculated
for any depth of penetration if time and temperature
are known
The many tests fall into three categories:
I) Sample is immersed for a set time that does not
lead to saturation. If immersion time and
temperature(absorption) are constant the
weight gain is a function of average pore
diameter. The depth of penetration will vary and
no estimate of voids van be made without this.
II) Sample is immersed such that it becomes
saturated. The result measure the volume of
permeable voids (VPV). As the sample is
saturated only voids can be measured.
III) Sample is immersed and measurements of height
rise and/or weight gain are measured. In some
tests measurements are made at various time
increments (normally root time based) while in
others the depth is measured at a standard time.
If depth in a given time is measured the result
relates only to nominal pore radius. If depth and
weight gain are measured then voids and
nominal pore radius can be estimated assuming
that capillaries are all full. Measurements at
various times improve the accuracy of the
method.
While there are many tests around the world for
measuring absorption/sorptivity only those commonly
recognised in Australia are discussed here.
3. TESTS METHODS
3.1 AS4058
The principle concrete quality test for pipes in AS 4058
is the absorption test undertaken in accordance with
AS4058 Appendix F. This requires that cores of
approximately 120mm diameter be taken through the
pipe thickness for pipes 14-28days after casting.
Cores are kept damp until tested. They are then oven
dried, weighed, immersed, boiled, cooled and
reweighed. Absorption is calculated as the weight of
water absorbed during immersion, boiling and
cooling divided by the weight of dry sample. It can
be assumed that the procedure will saturate all voids.
Although not mentioned in the standard the
absorption can be converted to voids percentage by
multiplying the absorption by the specific gravity of
the concrete, i.e. approximately 2.3. AS4058
requirements are shown in Table 1
Table 1 - AS 4058 Requirements for Absorption

A
b
s
o
r
p
t
i
o
n

m
u
s
t

n
o
t

e
x
c
e
e
d

E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

v
o
i
d
s

V
i
c

R
o
a
d
s

V
P
V

C
l
a
s
s

pressure, sewage or
marine or other
aggressive
environments
6.5% 15% 2.
Good
for drainage pipes
8.0% 18.4% 4.
Marginal



Specialist Concrete Consultants For Engineers & Contractors
Page 2 of 5
TN 001 Absorption & Sorptivity.Doc


Specialist Concrete Consultants For Engineers & Contractors
BCRC
Building & Construction
Research & Consultancy
In considering revision to AS4058 one must consider
whether the absorption test prescribed continues to
be valid in light of developments since the last
standard was published in regards test methods,
acceptance criteria and durability criteria.
3.2 RTA T362
The NSW RTA T362 sorptivity test dries sample slowly to
avoid thermal shock. After drying at a RH of 50% for
the prescribed drying time the samples are immersed
at 23C for different times. The sorptivity is then
measured as the depth of penetration except that the
depth is doubled for class A and B1 concretes. The
method is specified in RTA B80 specification as a test
for curing. Criteria and testing intervals specified are
shown in Table 2 together with the mix requirements
for each exposure category.
The test method has been specifically developed by
RTA to provide a check on the adequacy of curing for
different grades of concrete. In developing the
criteria a number of variables are introduced
between different grades eg drying time, immersion
time and result calculation method. This means that
there may be no relationship between RTA sorptivity
and different grades of concrete.
The test requires that samples are stored at constant
50% humidity and are broken in a beam test rig.
These requirements for special facilities limits seriously
limits where the test can be undertaken. The breaking
of the sample to obtain a result means a result can
only be obtained at one time interval for each
sample.
Table 2 - RTA B80 Sorptivity Requirements
RTA T362 Sorptivity Test
E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

M
i
n
i
m
u
m

C
e
m
e
n
t

C
o
n
t
e
n
t

(
k
g
/
m
3
)

M
a
x
i
m
u
m

w
/
b

r
a
t
i
o

D
r
y
i
n
g

T
i
m
e

a
t

2
3
C

(
d
a
y
s
)

I
m
m
e
r
s
i
o
n

T
i
m
e

A
t

2
3
C

(
h
r
s
)

M
a
x

S
o
r
p
.

G
P

C
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)

M
a
x

S
o
r
p
.


b
l
e
n
d
e
d

C
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)

A 320 0.56 21 6 35 35
B1 320 0.5 21 6 25 25
B2 370 0.46 28 24 17 20
C 420 0.4 35 24 N/A 8
U Project Specific
This method is similar in many respect to the CSIRO
test developed by Ho and Lewis but which has
seldom been used commercially because of the
large number of samples required due to their being
broken open for each test.
3.3 AS4056, ASTM C642 &AS1012.21
AS 4056, ASTM C642 & AS1012.21 tests require that
samples are immersed and boiled such the
permeable voids are saturated. Procedures are
shown in Table 3.
Table 3 - Comparison of Absorption Test Methods
AS4056 AS1012.21 ASTM C642
Weigh sample Weigh sample Weigh sample
Dry at 105
o
C to
constant wt
Dry at 105
o
C for
24hrs
Dry at 105
o
C to
constant wt
Cool sample Cool sample Cool sample
Weigh sample
in air, M1
Weigh sample in
air, M1
Weigh sample,
M1
Immerse sample
for 48hrs
Immerse
sample to
constant wt
Weigh sample in
air, M2
Weigh sample
in air, M2
Immerse
sample and
boil for 5hrs
Immerse sample
and boil for 5-
6hrs
Immerse
sample and
boil for 5hrs
Cool sample in
2 hrs
Cool naturally Cool naturally
Weigh sample
in air, M2
Weigh sample in
air, M3
Weigh sample
in air, M3
Weigh sample in
water M4
Weigh sample
in water M4
AS4056 gives the absorption as (M2-M1)/M1. Result is
weight of water absorbed as a percentage of sample
weight but can easily be calculated as VPV
ASTM C642 & AS1012.21 gives the VPV as (M3-M1)/
(M3-M4). Result (VPV) is volume of continuous voids
as a percentage of the sample volume.
Concern is sometimes expressed about thermal
shock causing cracking and the test methods
discounted on that basis.
Phaedonos
(1)
of Vic Roads reviews the ASTM C642
absorption test. This is similar to the absorption test in
AS 4058 and AS1012.21 in that the samples are dried
in the oven at 105C. The paper states results indicate
that the oven drying temperature of 100-110C has a
negligible effect on the pore system or microstructure
of concrete. The excellent correlation between oven
drying at 50C and 105C indicates there is very little
mass loss when the temperature increases from 50-
105C, thereby confirming that no combined water is
lost. He goes on to discuss other results ie that oven
drying temperature and the overall treatment of the
sample during the test procedure have no
detrimental effects on the microstructure. He
provides reference to various authors that conclude
the same. In view of this there is no concerned about
microcracking when curing at 105C.
Page 3 of 5
TN 001 Absorption & Sorptivity.Doc


Specialist Concrete Consultants For Engineers & Contractors
BCRC
Building & Construction
Research & Consultancy
Phaedonas also states Whereas the ASTM C642
method requires oven dried samples to cool naturally
followed by a two day water immersion where 99% of
the water absorption is achieved, the AS 4058 method
requires oven dried samples to be cooled and rapidly
heated to 100C for the 5 hour boiling period, The
ASTM C642 method is therefore considered as
subjecting test specimens to more sever testing due
to an induced thermal shock and the possibility of
macro cracking. The AS 4058 test produces 0.5% to
2% higher volume of permeable voids.
The ASTM C642 test (with refinements) has been made
an Australian Standard (AS1012.21-1999) and in a
phone conversation with Phaedonos he
recommended that the AS1012.21 test should be
adopted in place of AS 4058 testing.
Vic roads criteria for VPV using the ASTMC642 method
are given (Table 4). These criteria could also apply to
AS1012.21.
Table 4 - Criteria For VPV
D
u
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

V
o
l
u
m
e

o
f

P
e
r
m
e
a
b
l
e

V
o
i
d
s

(
V
P
V
)

(
%

b
y

v
o
l
u
m
e

I
m
m
e
r
s
e
d

a
n
d

B
o
i
l
e
d

A
b
s
o
r
p
t
i
o
n

(
%

b
y

w
t
)

S
o
r
p
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
m
m
/
s
e
c
0
.
5
)

1. Excellent <14 <6 <0.08
2. Good 14-16 6-7 0.08-0.10
3. Normal 16-17 7-7.5 0.10-0.15
4. Marginal 17-19 7.5-8.5 0.15-0.20
5. Bad >19 >8 >0.20
A major shortcoming of these tests is that they waste
the opportunity to plot weight gain with time. This is
particularly true of the AS1012.21 test where the
sample is immersed for 48hrs without boiling in any
event. Given a large enough sample the flow will
approximate to uniaxial
3.4 ASTM C1585 SORPTIVITY TEST
In this test an oven dried sample is suspended above
water and the height rise and weight gain measured
at time intervals. The sorptivity is calculated as the
weight gain per unit cross section against the square
root of time. It provides a relative measure that
combines pore size diameter and number of pores.
The test was originally developed for use on bricks
and introduced to Taywood Engineering in the early
1980s by Ken Baker of Halpern Glick as a potential
method of measuring concrete pore characteristics.
Taywood used the test extensively and were one of
the first companies to use Sorptivity as a performance
requirement. Only recently has the test become and
ASTM method.
Oven drying is not seen as an issue for the reasons
discussed in section 3.3.
The test method plots weight gain (absorption) at
several time increments for the same sample thereby
increasing accuracy by enabling initial surface effect
to be discarded and results to be based on the
statistical fit of a number of measurements. Hence, it
gives more reliable absorptions than simple weight
gain at a set interval. The test can also be set up to
measure absorption by placing the surface of interest
in touch with the water. The performance of the
exposed (surface can be assessed and the effect of
distance form the surface can also be determined.
The height rise measurement is comparable to the
RTA test method but unlike the RTA test the ASTM test
is simple to undertake.
Converting the height rise and weight gain to a pore
volume does not provide a reliable VPV in the same
fashion as the boiled absorption type tests. However
the test method lends itself to establishing this at the
end of the sorptivity test as an additional procedure.
The test method is not unique and was originally
developed by Fagerlund
(6)
. Similar tests are
commonly used for absorption tests on bricks eg
Reda
(5)
and it is the brick test, with an extended
measurement time, that has become the ASTM C
Sorptivity test method.
4. PREVIOUS RESEARCH
4.1 VPV VS OTHER TESTMETHODS &W/B RATIO
Whiting compared VPV results with results from water
permeability and air permeability on mixes with
different w/c ratio and a mix with silica fume (Table
5). The results show that VPV differentiated better than
air permeability between the concretes at w/c ratios
less than O.4 but neither method differentiated
between concretes at w/c ratios over 0.4. By
comparison water permeability differentiates the high
w/c ratio concretes but measurements at low w/c
ratios could not be made.
Phaedonos
(3)
reports on the relationship between VPV
and various concrete properties as follows:
Relationship to strength is poor reflecting that
strength is a poor indicator of durability
VPV detect the improved performance of slag, fly
ash and silica fume in a similar fashion to other
durability tests
Hydrophobic admixtures reduce VPV very
significantly while water-proofers did not reduce
VPV significantly
4.2 SORPTIVITY
V.Sirivivatnanon
(4)
tested fly ash, slag and silica fume
concrete using the RTA sorptivity test and ASTM VPV
Page 4 of 5
TN 001 Absorption & Sorptivity.Doc


Specialist Concrete Consultants For Engineers & Contractors
BCRC
Building & Construction
Research & Consultancy
test. The results for GP, FA and slag cement systems
indicated that the two tests gave similar results in the
w/c range 0.34-0.6 except for one anomaly with the
slag cement at a w/c ratio of 0.43. For silica fume one
high w/c mix (0.87) indicate VPV was less sensitive
than RTA sorptivity in this high w/c range.
Table 5 - Results of VPV and Other Penetrability Tests
w/b SCF
(wt %
binder)
VPV
(%)
Air
Permeability
(Darcy)
Water
Permeability
(Darcy)
0.26 12% 6.2 29 *
0.29 - 8.0 33 *
0.40 - 12.2 120 0.03
0.50 - 12.7 170 0.20
0.60 - 12.5 150 0.23
0.75 - 13.3 150 0.86
0
20
40
60
80
100
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
w/c r at io
R
T
A
S

(
s
o
l
i
d

l
i
n
e
)
12
13
14
15
16
17
V
P
V

%

(
d
o
t
t
e
d

l
i
n
e
)
GP - RTAS
FA - RTAS
SF - RTAS
HS - RTAS
GP - VPV
FA - VPV
SF - VPV
HS - VPV
Figure 1 - Sirivivatnanon Test Results for VPV and RTA

4.3 SORPTIVITY TESTING VS VPV
As noted above VPV is a measure of voids and
sorptivity (whether my mass gain or depth of
penetration) is a measure of nominal pore radius and
number of pores. While there may be some
relationship between these two parameters its not
likely that the relationship would be constant across
all concrete types.
Reda
(5)
measured total absorption and sorptivity on a
range of samples. The results for each tests method
gave a low standard deviation however a plot of total
voids vs sorptivity gave a very poor correlation
suggesting that the two properties are not related.
5. MECHANISMS OF DETERIORATION
Pipes deep below the ground water table will be
attacked by substances (acids, sulphate, chl;oride)
dissolved in water penetrating by permeability. In
pipes just below the water table and above it the
attacking substances will be taken in by water
penetrating by sorptivity. Classical formulae for
permeability and sorptivity suggest that the rate of
penetration to a given depth is controlled by the pore
radius while the volume of water delivered is related
to the pore volume. For diffusion pore volume may be
more significant.
Figure 2 - Six Notional Concretes
1. 5% voids, no capillaries
4. 2% voids, few large capillaries
3. 3% voids, few fine capillaries
5. 1% voids, few fine capillaries 6. 2% voids, many fine capillaries
2. 10% voids, few fine capillaries 1. 5% voids, no capillaries
4. 2% voids, few large capillaries
3. 3% voids, few fine capillaries
5. 1% voids, few fine capillaries 6. 2% voids, many fine capillaries
2. 10% voids, few fine capillaries
Figure 2 depicts six concretes. The variable are
discrete void percentage, capillary void number and
capillary void size. The discrete voids have little effect
on performance. For example the performance of
concrete 1 would be little different to a concrete with
0% voids. Similarly the effect of discrete void
percentage in concrete 2 and 3 makes little
difference to performance. The difference in
concretes 4,5 and 6 however would be marked. The
early depth of penetration will be highest in concrete
4 although ultimately the depth of penetration in
concrete 5 and 6 is likely to catch up, particularly at
the low depths of significance in most deterioration
mechanisms.
The objective of a sorptivity/absorption test is to be
able to differentiate these concrete in respect to
durability. In making concrete pipe voids, as denoted
in Figure 2, would most likely be caused by poor
compaction while the capillaries are most likely to be
a function of the concrete mix and curing. It would
seem that discrete voids are not so significant and
one issue with just measuring VPV is that such discrete
voids could make a durable concrete appear of poor
quality. Conversely a test that only measures pore
radius (eg RTA sorptivity) gives no idea of the volume
of flow, a key durability factor.
Table 6 shows the likely grade testing the concretes
by the various absorption./sorptivity methods would
provide. This is a broad assessment where grade 1 is
excellent and grade 5 is very poor.


Page 5 of 5
TN 001 Absorption & Sorptivity.Doc


Specialist Concrete Consultants For Engineers & Contractors
BCRC
Building & Construction
Research & Consultancy

Table 6 - Test Methods Result (Grade) for Six Notional
Concretes
Type 1 as Figure 2 1 2 3 4 5 6
Test
method
Measuremen
t function of
Grade Expected Using
Test Method Shown
AS 1012.21
VPV
Voids 1 5 3 2 1 2
AS 4056
Absorption
Voids 1 5 3 2 1 2
TE Sorptivity
No of pores
and radius
1 1 1 5 1 3
RTA
Sorptivity
Pore radius 1 2 2 5 2 2

6. RECOMMENDATIONS
Measurement of the rate of absorption with root time
up to the point of saturation is gaining acceptance as
a test method and ASTM and Canadian standards are
being developed. The accuracy, measurement of
nominal pore radius and number of pores, ability to
measure VPV simplicity of tests all make it a clear
leader in terms of durability assessment.
The Taywood Sorptivity Tests is not well accepted and
is unlikely to find favour at this stage as and Australian
Standard tests are too far removed. The RTA sorptivity
test carries some authority but it is considered far too
limited, has too many variables and requires too
much specialist equipment to be considered as it is
for general use in quality.
Of the boiled absorption tests the AS1012.12 is the
most suitable for adoption. It currently allows for a
48hr immersion time without boiling. During this period
the weight gain with time can be measured to
establish a sorptivity.
The Papworth Modified AS1012.21 includes an
allowance for measurements of the sorptivity rate and
is able to be undertaken as a standard test at BRC.