Contents

Back ground:............................................................................................................ 2
Problem:.................................................................................................................. 2
Scope:..................................................................................................................... 2
1.

List of information you would like provided by the owner........................................2

2.

Sites and laboratory techniques to evaluation the structure....................................2

3.

Providing patch repair...................................................................................... 5

4.

Thoughts on patch repair to improve the life expectancy of wharf structure..............7

Conclusion............................................................................................................... 7
References.............................................................................................................. 8

Back ground:
Being a consultant working in consulting company of New Plymouth and the Port of Taranaki
has approach us to provide the remedial solution to wharf structure which is approximately
30 years old. The precast piles driven on sediment foundation and Beam and deck are
constructed from precast, pre-stressed elements and stitched together. Further the
reinforcement cover is stirrups are typically around 40-50mm.
Problem:
Longitudinal cracking of beams
Map cracking of deck
Cracking. Staining and spalling of the piles
Scope:
To provide the remedial and repair solution on this following details,
1. List of information you would like provided by the owner.

Details of civil drawing of structure

Type of material used for precast like cement, water, aggregates, reinforcement &
addictives
Design detail of such as loading types, analysis etc of precast of precast beam, deck
and piles
Workmanship details
Reinforcement layout and details
Details on construction practice such as fixing of reinforcement, placing, compacting
and curing of concrete while casting above elements
Environmental condition
2. Sites and laboratory techniques to evaluation the structure.
a. Site techniques
Visual inspection and condition record
A thorough visual examination of the wharf structure and its damages should be
properly inspected and recorded for analysis along with site photographs and free
hand drawings if required. The record should contain following:
The site and its conditions, including nearby structures or services, drains, depth of
water and soil condition
The type, extent and position of any visible deterioration such as cracks, corrosion,
spalling of concretes etc
General condition of structure

Delimitation survey will be carried to detect the internal cracks and voids in case of
precast deck using the various method such as chain drag, Acoustic method and
hammer.

Cover meter survey to locate and verify the size of reinforcement and its direction and
depth below surface. In area of congested reinforcement, it may be difficult to read
and result maybe unreliable. Thus based on nature of deterioration, cover meter
equipment can be used which is readily available in the market.
2

Crack width monitoring should be carried at various location of crack in beam, deck
and piles. It can be done by fixing a thin piece of glass across the crack: the glass will
crack open when the crack widens and splinter when it closes. Using this result crack
width can be monitored for further analysis

By breaking off small pieces of concrete, testing freshly exposed concrete surfaces
with indicator solution (Phenolphthalein) to determine the depth of carbonation

Measuring the chloride content of concrete broken from the structure, or dust samples
obtained by drilling holes.
Core sampling to determine concrete strength and depth of cracks using rebound
hammer
A rebound hammer has a spring-loaded hardened plunger that strikes the surface of
the concrete at a predetermined velocity: the harder the concrete, the greater the
rebound. A measure of the rebound can be compared to empirical values, which can
then be used to interpret the probable strength of the concrete. It is especially useful
to determine the differences in concrete within the same structure.

b. Laboratory based techniques

Testing for carbonation depth
A measurement of carbonation depth using phenolphthalein solution should be carried
out by spraying the indicator on the split surface ofthe concrete cylinder. The solution
became a pink colouring the carbonated concrete and can be differentiated from the
uncarbonated concrete, giving a distinct boundary marking the carbonation front.
Acarbonation depth upto an accuracyof 5mm can be identified with the naked eye.
Carbonation induced corrosion occurs at low cover exposed to differential moisture
level

Chloride testing
Chloride ion is primary cause of reinforcement corrosion. Chloride contaminated
constituent (aggregate or water) used during construction, de-icing salt applied to
surface and air borne chloride and direct exposure to sea water cause corrosion
Chloride diffusion rate provides chloride ion concentration in at steel or concrete
surface which when exceed threshold value initiates corrosion. The threshold values
are approximately 0.025-0.033% by the weight of concrete.
The chloride content can be determined through analysis of powdered concrete
sample collected at site from different depth up to and beyond depth of reinforcing
steel using hammer drill. Alternatively core sample can be collected at different depth
and taken to laboratory. The chloride ion content is measured using wet chemical
analysis.

Half cell potential mapping to ascertain the probability and extent of corrosion
Potential mapping provides information on the likelihood and extent of corrosion, but
not on the rate of corrosion. The technique uses a half cell reference electrode
connected via a voltmeter to the steel reinforcement, which becomes the other half
cell. It therefore requires access to the reinforcing bars. The circuit is completed with a
sponge saturated in water.

Measurement of electrical resistivity to indicate the likely rate of corrosion. testing

Resistivity measures the ease with which an electrical charge is transported in
concrete, indicating the capacity of the concrete to either promote or retard corrosion.
If the resistivity is high, the corrosion current will be small and corrosion will be
unlikely. Resistivity relates to the type of concrete cover and does not measure
environmental influences such as carbonation, chlorides, or temperature and
humidity.

Measurement of rate of corrosion.

Corrosion rate measured using galvano static LPR. It sends short pulse into steel
and response is measured over 20-60 seconds. If the corrosion rate is greater
10A/cm2, corrosion rate is very high. The test is likely to be time consuming and
corrosion rate fluctuates widely.

Therefore, based on above site inspection and test conducted, following are the cause of
wharf structure damages.
SL
no

Component
s

Problems

Likely hood causes

Reasons for deteriorations

beam

Longitudina
l cracking

Corrosion,
Insufficient concrete cover
Insufficient allowance in the
design of the structure for
expansion and contraction due
to changes in moisture and
temperature
Caused by shrinkage, plastic
settlement

Crack following the line of

reinforcement
-progressive
crack
movement based on crack
monitoring test
Insufficient concrete cover
based on cover meter
survey

Deck

Map
cracking

Volumetric
expansion
of
concrete
ASR and DEF, Carbonation,
differential thermal movement
and moisture movement

Due to stain seen on

surface
Micro cracking pattern
Abnormal expansion
Carbonated
concrete
based on carbonation test
result

Piles

Cracking,
staining
and spalling

Chloride induced corrosion

Insufficient concrete cover
Due to ASR, DEF, Salt attack
from environment

Presence of water and salt

Macro crack
ASR gel around aggregate
Rust staining on the
surface
Corroded exposed steel

3. Providing patch repair

As per the owner recommendation, we would like to provide patch repair as remedial
solution to above problem of wharf structure. Prior to providing patch repair, the following
measure has to be taken:

Conduct structural review before removal of significant amounts of concrete.

Exposed corroded rebar should be undercut to ensure adequate coverage and bond
withnew concrete(minimum clearance of 20 mm or 6 mm more than max aggregate size
inpatching concrete)
The full circumference of the exposed bar should be cleaned
Loose rebar should be tied to other secure bars
If more than 25% of the cross section of a bar has been lost (or more than 20% of
thecross section of two bars in closes proximity) a structural review should be conducted
todetermine if repair or replacement of the bars is necessary.
Unless shotcrete repairs are anticipated, the edges of the patch should be cut
straightand square with the surface to ensure maximum integrity of the patch (i.e.
avoidfeathered edges)
Surface prepared for patch repair should be clean free from dust, loose materials or any
other deleterious material
All spalling and poor quality of concrete must be removed from piles.
Reinforcement lying in chosen repair has to be coated with cement slurry or zinc rich
primer to avoid corrosion

After carrying necessary prerequisite, patch repair can be provided as per the requirement.
Concrete patch repair can be provided at the beam, deck and piles of wharf structure using
various methodologies.
i.
ii.
iii.

Trowellable mortars is most common types of repair material but need to apply in several
layers where substantial depth of repair is required
Free flowing micro-concretes are placed into performed boxing and allow large volume of
repair to be completed in one process. It can be used in beam of deck
Sprayed applied mortar can be used at the underside of deck portion and piles which are
high height
Aside the patch repair, the other possible repair option includes like chloride extraction or
desalination and cathodic protection (CP). The two are the treatment reinforcing iron and
steel to avoid corrosion of steel and minimise the possible crack arising from it.

i.

Chloride extraction is appropriate for chloride-contaminated concrete. The natural

alkalinity of concrete surrounding reinforcement may be reduced by the presence of
chlorides and, in the presence of moisture, pitting corrosion of the reinforcement may
occur. Chloride extraction is carried out once. Excess chloride ions may be extracted
from the concrete by this electrochemical process, during which the chlorides are
repelled from the reinforcement towards an external anode. A titanium mesh anode is
placed with calcium hydroxide (as a slurry) in a cassette shutter on the face of the
concrete. A low-voltage DC current is passed through the concrete to achieve a preselected current density. When this is achieved, desalination is complete, although
measurement of the chloride levels in the concrete should also be undertaken. If there is
a danger of further chloride ingress, the structure must be protected with a chloride-proof
coating.
5

Sometime, due to depth of chloride ingress to pile and beam, extraction of chloride may
not be possible and for this situation, Cathodic Protection would be most economical and
non destructive technique to protect the corrosion of rebar.
ii.

Cathodic Protection is a method of forcing the corrosion reaction away from the
reinforcing steel to an external anode by the use of an impressed current. The reinforcing
steel becomes the cathode, hence the term cathodic protection. A small DC power
supply is connected (+ve) to anode and (-ve) to reinforcing steel. The circuit is completed
with the concrete acting as an electrolyte. The result is that the electrical potential of the
steel is lowered to the point where corrosion does not occur. A long-term benefit of CP is
that the negatively charged chloride ions are drawn away from the rebar towards the
anode. CP is a live system that can be regularly monitored and adjusted to ensure that
the steel is adequately protected. The life expectancy of a CP system can be in the order
of 30 years or more, with minimal maintenance costs, far longer than the life expectancy
of traditional repair methods.

iii.
4. Thoughts on patch repair to improve the life expectancy of wharf structure.
Prerequisite remedial are important to be carried prior to patch repair
Use of latest modern techniques such as use of non-cementitious materials acting as
bonding mediums, chemical binders, strengtheners, consolidants, and admixtures
such as plasticisers
Proper testing all techniques and mixes before carrying out a repair.
Treating the surfaces to reduce moisture content and chloride ingress to deck and
beam,
Treating of steel bars with epoxy coating to electrically isolates the steel in the patch
and prevent it from becoming cathode and reduces the risk of incipient anode
formation
Coating of exposed steel with zinc paint
Installing of discrete sacrificial node to protect the rebar in patch portion
Conclusion
Based on the damages evaluated upon the site visual inspection and laboratory testing, the
problem is likely to cause serious impact to structure. For the same, although patch repair is
provided to arrest the cracks and corrosion along the deck, beam and pile areas, further
method such as chloride extraction and cathodic protection must be suitable for ensuring a
long and durable life expectancy of wharf.Timely monitoring and assessing of the damages
and providing necessary repair are very important measures for future serious failure of
structures.
References

1. 2001: Transit New Zealand Bridge inspection and Maintenance manual.

2. Peter Reed, Kate Schoonees and Jeremy Salmond. (2008) Historic concrete
structures in New Zealand Overview, maintenance and management.
3. S.A. Freitag, S.M. Bruce (2011) Concrete pile durability in South Island bridges
4. 2011: Report for Victoria Wharf Condition Assessment and Repair Options, Auckland

5. Michael Lawson, Dean Latham, Barry Kooistra and Willie Mandeno (2003) Seaview
Wharf: A Concrete Cp Case Study
6. Peter Pullar-Strecker, Corrosion Damaged Concrete assessment and repair, 1987