See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/226574327

Corrosion Detection in Reinforced Concrete using Induction Heating and

Infrared Thermography

Article  in  Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring · June 2011

DOI: 10.1007/s13349-010-0002-4

CITATIONS READS

20 1,297

2 authors:

Koichi Kobayashi Nemkumar Banthia

Gifu University University of British Columbia - Vancouver
38 PUBLICATIONS   185 CITATIONS    317 PUBLICATIONS   5,186 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Fiber Reinforced Concrete View project

Sensor Development for SHM View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nemkumar Banthia on 30 December 2013.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Corrosion detection in reinforced concrete
using induction heating and infrared
thermography

K. Kobayashi & N. Banthia

Journal of Civil Structural

Health Monitoring

ISSN 2190-5452
Volume 1
Combined 1-2

J Civil Struct Health Monit

(2011) 1:25-35
DOI 10.1007/
s13349-010-0002-4

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and
all rights are held exclusively by Springer-
Verlag. This e-offprint is for personal use only
and shall not be self-archived in electronic
repositories. If you wish to self-archive your
work, please use the accepted author’s
version for posting to your own website or
your institution’s repository. You may further
deposit the accepted author’s version on a
funder’s repository at a funder’s request,
provided it is not made publicly available until
12 months after publication.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35
DOI 10.1007/s13349-010-0002-4
ORIGINAL PAPER
Corrosion detection in reinforced concrete using induction heating
and infrared thermography
K. Kobayashi • N. Banthia
Received: 27 October 2010 / Revised: 10 December 2010 / Accepted: 11 December 2010 / Published online: 14 January 2011
Ó Springer-Verlag 2011
Abstract A novel non-destructive technique of corrosion
detection in reinforced concrete based on a combination of
induction heating (IH) and infrared thermography was
investigated. The technique is based on the principle that
corrosion products have poor heat conductivity, and they
inhibit the diffusion of heat that is generated in the rein-
forcing bar due to IH. Corrosion can thus be detected by
determining the temperature profiles on the surface of
concrete. Small idealized reinforced concrete specimens
were employed, and the impressed current method was
used to generate corrosion. The influences of rebar diam-
eter, cover depth, corrosion amount, and heating time on
the temperature distribution on the concrete surface were
investigated. It was found that the proposed techniques
worked well and greater the extent of corrosion, smaller
was the temperature rise on the concrete surface. A more
advanced state of corrosion also led to a higher temperature
rise in the rebar itself. The technique worked particularly
well when either the diameter of the rebar was large or
when the cover depth was small.
Keywords Induction heating  Infrared thermography 
Non-destructive technique  Reinforcement corrosion
1 Introduction
A functionally adequate and safe infrastructure is vitally
important to any country’s socio-economic progress.
K. Kobayashi (&)
Gifu University, Gifu, Japan
e-mail: ko2ba@gifu-u.ac.jp
N. Banthia
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
Unfortunately, severe corrosion of steel in reinforced
concrete elements, missed maintenance, changes in the
code provisions, increases in design loads, and last but not
least, lack of durable repair and strengthening technologies
have created an infrastructure crisis of unprecedented
proportions. Not surprisingly, nearly a third of all current
construction activity in developed countries is geared
toward repair and strengthening of our infrastructure. Of
the various factors cited above, chloride-induced corrosion
of reinforcing steel in concrete remains the most serious
durability concern of our time.
In reinforced concrete structures exposed to a chloride-
rich environment, chlorides accumulate on the surface of
steel reinforcement, and once a threshold concentration of
chlorides is attained, passivity of steel breaks down and
corrosion initiates. Further progress of corrosion reduces
cross-sectional area of reinforcing steel and decreases the
load-bearing capacity of the reinforced concrete (RC)
member which may not only impede serviceability but also
affect user safety. It is therefore very important to measure
the amount of steel corrosion in older RC structures and
precisely assess their residual performances and safety.
While many non-destructive test (NDT) methods have been
developed in order to determine the extent of corrosion in
RC elements, a dependable method does not yet exceed.
One method often used is that of direct measure of cor-
rosion activity. Since corrosion is an electrochemical
reaction involving the transfer of electrical charge, elec-
trochemical methods have been the most popular NDT
technique used for estimation of steel corrosion in RC
structures. These techniques also unfortunately have
numerous limitations. For example, the half-cell potential
method can only indicate the possibility of an on-going
corrosion, but fails to provide a quantitative measure of the
accumulated amount of corrosion or the residual rebar
123
 Author's personal copy
26
diameter. Polarization resistance methods can theoretically
measure the corrosion rate, but for obtaining the amount of
corrosion with this method, frequent measurements must be
made right after the construction. Moreover, precise values
of the coefficients used in the calculation of the corrosion
rate from the polarization resistance data do not exist, and
the effects of macro-cell corrosion circuit on the polariza-
tion resistance remain obscured. Other NDT methods
studied for their applicability in the determination of the
amount of steel corrosion include the radar method and the
impact echo method [1–3]. Significant challenges exist with
both these techniques, and their reliability remains low.
Around 1980, Hillemeier and his team [4, 5] developed
a novel NDT method by combining induction heating (IH)
with infrared thermography. Although the purpose of their
initial works was to detect reinforcement under cover
concrete, several studies have been carried out recently in
order to examine this method’s applicability to measure the
extent of corrosion in RC elements [6, 7]. In this method,
the reinforcing bars are first heated using induction heating
(Fig. 1). As the corrosion products have a very low thermal
conductivity, they inhibit heat diffusion from the heated
rebar to the cover concrete (Fig. 2). Rebar corrosion can
therefore be detected by determining the temperature dis-
tributions on the concrete surface using an infrared camera
(see Fig. 1). This method can thus be applied for quanti-
tative measurement of the extent of corrosion. This inter-
esting concept was further studied in this paper where
scope was expanded and additional variables were studied.
Fig. 1 Combining induction Induction coil
heating and infrared
thermography for detection of
corrosion in reinforcing steel in
concrete
Magnetic
field
Fig. 2 Effect of low heat
conductivity of steel corrosion
products
123
J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35
These variables included the influences of rebar diameter,
cover depth, corrosion state, and heating time. The tem-
perature distribution on the concrete surface was measured
to assess the effectiveness of the technique.
2 Experimental procedure
2.1 Specimens
For the sake of simplicity, and given that these are the early
stages of development for this techniques, smaller idealized
specimens were chosen such that the most basic of the
parameters can be studied. Cylindrical specimens with a
diameter of 100 mm as shown in Fig. 3 were chosen.
Reinforcing bar of various diameters were embedded in
concrete with different cover depths as detailed in Table 1.
A concrete with a water/cement ratio of 0.55 was used
throughout. An electric wire was connected to one end of
the round steel bar with a bolt and a screw nut. Both ends
of the round steel bar including the bolt and nut were
coated with rubber to prevent corrosion at the ends. The bar
had 70 mm of its middle length exposed to corrosion
(Fig. 3). The rebar was then placed in the 100 mm inner
diameter vinyl sleeve, and concrete was poured around it.
After casting, the sleeve (mold) was left in place, and it
acted both as a curing tank and an electrolytic corrosion
bath. Curing began a day after casting. At the age of
28 days, a 3% sodium chloride solution was poured into
Infrared
camera
Heat
generation
and
diffusion
Reinforcing bar
Corrosion products
Reinforcing bar
: Flow of heat
 Author's personal copy
J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35
direction of imaging
by infrared camera
electric cord
sleeve
concrete rubber paint
c
h apparatus
c
d)
sleel bar ((fd)
70mm
100mm h=2c+d 95mm
Fig. 3 Specimen details
Table 1 Experimental parameters investigated
Parameter Values investigated
Cover depth (c, mm) 10, 20
Corrosion loss (%) 0, 2, 5, 10, and 20
Bar diameter (/, mm) 6, 10, and 13
the sleeve, and a direct current was applied across the steel
bar and a wire mesh immersed in the sodium chloride
solution to accelerated corrosion. The applied current was
fixed at 10 A/m2 per surface area of steel bar in order to
avoid the generation of hydrogen gas. To calculate the
amount of corrosion, the following expression proposed by
Tamori et al. [8] was used.
DW ¼ 0:766  i  t;
where DW corrosion loss (g), i current (A), and t time (h).
2.2 Induction heater and infrared camera
A WARING PRO ICT100 cooker having a disk-shaped
induction coil with a diameter of 145 mm and a rated
output of 1.4 kW was used as an induction heater (IH). For
thermography, a FLIR-EX300 camera was used with a 25°
interchangeable field of view, a thermal sensitivity of less
than 0.80°C, and a spectrum range of 7.5–13 lm.
2.3 Reference heating of the bare steel bar
For reference purposes, the bare steel bar without any
rubber coating was first heated using the induction heater to
obtain the fundamental data on induction heating of steel.
The distance between the IH apparatus and the steel bar
(representing the cover depth) was adjusted using mortar
spacers ranging in height from 5 to 30 mm as shown in
Fig. 4. The heater was turned on for a predetermined length
of time, and the surface temperature of the steel bar before,
27
steel bar
c
surface of
IH apparatus
mortar spacer
95mm
(40 x 40 x c mm)
Fig. 4 Setup for heating bare steel bar by induction heating (IH)
during, and after heating was measured using a
thermocouple.
2.4 Corrosion detection in RC specimen
The RC specimens shown in Fig. 3 were heated by the IH
apparatus for the maximum heating time allowed by the
apparatus of 150 s (there is a safety function built in the
apparatus, and the apparatus turns itself off after 150 s).
During and after heating, the temperature change in the
steel bar inside the specimen was measured by a thermo-
couple. In addition, after heating, the temperature distri-
bution on the surface of the specimen was recorded by
taking a thermography image using an infrared camera
described in Sect. 2.2 (see Fig. 3).
Further, corrosion amount was quantified by taking the
rebars out of the specimen and immersing it in a 10% di-
ammonium hydrogen citrate solution at 60°C for 24 h to
remove the rust. The loss of mass of the rebar was then
determined to obtain the amount of corrosion. These were
then compared with theoretical (and targeted) values of
corrosion loss.
ð1Þ
3 Results and discussion
3.1 Reference heating of the bare steel bar
Figure 5 shows the temperature development in a 13-mm
diameter non-corroded bare steel bar with a 10-mm spacer
signifying a 10-mm cover (c) (see Fig. 4 for test details).
The test was repeated under matching conditions four
times, and almost identical temperature plot was obtained
every time. This heating method is therefore considered to
have sufficient reproducibility.
Figure 6 shows temperature development in bare steel
bar of various diameters with spacer distances (c) of 10, 20,
30, and 40 mm. It is clear from these figures that larger the
distance c between the bar and the IH apparatus, the
smaller is the temperature rise. This is expected and pre-
sumably related to the greater attenuation of the magnetic
flux intensity emanating from the IH coil at greater dis-
tances. It is also clear from Fig. 6 that larger the bar
diameter, the smaller is the temperature rise. This is also
123
 Author's personal copy
28 J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35

80 T ð CÞ ¼ K  DtðsÞ; for / ¼ 613 mm;

ð2Þ
70 pffiffiffi
=13 mm, c =10 mm where Dt time elapsed since the start of IH, K ¼ a 4 c þ b;
Bar temperature (°C)

60 a = -0.238/ ? 5.364, b = 0.0959/ - 0.102.

50
40
30
20
10
0
0 20 40 60
Heating time (s)
Fig. 5 Temperature rise in a bare steel bar (/ = 13 mm,
c = 10 mm) with setup shown in Fig. 4. Notice an excellent
repeatability of the test
attributable to the characteristics of induction heating itself.
With IH, the target object is heated mainly on its surface.
Since the temperature rise of the steel bar is lower when it
is farther away from the heater, a larger bar with its central
axis farther away from the source for a given value of
c would register a lower increase in temperature. There is
also an influence of bar volume here. For a given flux
energy, a bar with a greater diameter and hence a greater
volume would see a lower rise in temperature.
From these results, for the IH used, the following
expressions for temperature rise (T) were derived using
regression analysis:
The expression indicates that the temperature rise of
steel bar in air at 20°C is in inverse proportion to the fourth
test1 root of the distance between the IH apparatus and the bar
test2 and in direct proportion to the bar diameter.
test3
test4
3.2 Corrosion detection in RC specimens
80 100 120 3.2.1 Cracking and corrosion in specimens
Figure 7 shows examples of crack distribution on the sur-
face of the specimens that were deteriorated by the elec-
trolytic corrosion process. Cracks propagated in the vertical
direction, and more cracks were observed on the speci-
men’s upper surface where the wire mesh had been set as
an electrode during the electrolytic corrosion process.
Cracks were larger in specimens with a smaller cover depth
and with steel bar of a larger diameter. Some cracks were
as large as about 2 mm. Cover spalling was observed in
only one specimen with a cover depth of 10 mm and a bar
diameter of 10 mm with a corrosion loss of 10%.
Figure 8 shows photographs of corroded steel bars taken
from the specimens. Notice that the corrosion distribution
is highly uneven along the length of the bar. A larger cross-
sectional loss was noted on the upper side of the specimen
where the wire-mesh was set to accelerate corrosion.

Fig. 6 Temperature rise in bare 80 (a) c=10mm 80

steel bars of various diameters (b) c=20mm
Bar temperature (°C)

70 70
Bar temperature (°C)

when heated using IH setup

shown in Fig. 4: a for 60 60
c = 10 mm, b for c = 20 mm, 50 50
c for c = 30 mm, and d for 40 40
c = 40 mm =13mm
30 =10mm 30 =13mm
=6mm 20 =10mm
20
=6mm
10 10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200
Heating time (s) Heating time (s)

80 80
(c) c=30mm
=13mm (d) c=40mm
Bar temperature (°C)

70 70
Bar temperature (°C)

=10mm
60 =6mm 60 =13mm
=10mm
50 50 =6mm
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200
Heating time (s) Heating time (s)

123
 Author's personal copy
J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35 29

(a)
0.55mm

Top view Bottom view

0.55mm

Side view (wired side) Side view (the other side)

(b)
0.3mm
Fig. 8 Picture of corroded bars taken from RC specimens
(c = 10 mm, corrosion loss = 10%)

0.20
(a) c = 10 mm

Achtual corrosion loss

Top view Bottom view 0.15

0.10

=6mm
0.05 =10mm
=13mm
Side view (wired side) Side view (the other side)
0
0 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
(c)
Target corrosion loss
0.20
0.5mm (b) c = 20 mm
Actual corrosion loss

0.15
2.5mm

0.10
Top view Bottom view
=6mm
0.05 =10mm
1.7mm =13mm
2.0mm
0
0.5mm 0.8mm 0 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Target corrosion loss
Side view (wired side) Side view (the other side)
Fig. 9 Comparison between targeted corrosion loss and the achieved
Fig. 7 Examples of corrosion cracking and those widths (unit: mm): a / corrosion loss. Notice a reasonable correlation: a c = 10 mm and
= 6 mm, c = 10 mm, corrosion loss = 5%; b / = 13 mm, c = 10 mm, b c = 20 mm
corrosion loss = 2%; c / = 13 mm, c = 20 mm, corrosion loss = 10%

Figure 9 shows the relationship between the targeted
corrosion loss and the actual corrosion loss. Regardless of
cover depth and the bar diameter, a reasonable correlation
existed between the targeted corrosion loss and the actual
corrosion loss. Therefore, henceforth, the specimens will
be referred to by their respective targeted corrosion losses.
3.2.2 Temperature development in steel bar in RC
specimens
Based on the preliminary observations, it was expected that
if the distance between the rebar and the IH apparatus was
too large, it would be difficult to heat the steel bar using the

123
 Author's personal copy
30 J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35

available IH apparatus (see Fig. 6). Therefore, a maximum
cover depth of 20 mm was adopted.
Figure 10 compares the temperature development in the
bare steel bar with the temperature development in the
same bar when in the RC specimen for two cover depths of
10 and 20 mm. Note that the cover depth of RC specimens
are the same as the distance between the bare steel bar and
IH apparatus (obtained by using the spacers). All results
shown here are of non-corroded /10 bars. As expected, the
temperature rise in RC specimen is smaller than that of the
bare steel and not proportional to the heating time. This is
because the thermal conductivity of concrete is higher than
that of air. Due to the higher thermal conductivity of
concrete, the heat generated in the steel bar is immediately
diffused to the cover concrete, resulting in a smaller tem-
perature rise in the embedded bars.
In Fig. 11, temperature development in corroded RC
specimens is plotted for various targeted corrosion values.
The data shown here are the results obtained during and
after heating the specimens for 120 s by IH. The test was
carried out in a laboratory at about 20°C. The temperature
rise here is in the range of 20–40°C which is not harmful
for concrete. It can be noted that the temperature rise is
70
60
Bar temperature (oC)
generally higher in the corroded steel. According to Oshita
et al. [6], while concrete has a thermal conductivity of
2.70 W/m/°C, corrosion products have a low thermal
conductivity of 0.07 W/m/°C. Thus, apparently, the cor-
rosion products on the steel bar block the thermal diffusion
from steel to concrete, resulting in a greater temperature
rise in the bar. Since the temperature development in steel
itself depends on the rebar diameter as mentioned in the
previous section, it is also possible that a decrease in the
residual rebar diameter due to the corrosion had partly
caused a smaller amount of heat to be generated in the steel
bar.
3.2.3 Temperature distributions on concrete surface
In Figs. 12, 13, 14, and 15, surface thermographs taken
after induction heating at various levels of corrosion are
shown. It was observed that the areas just above the steel
bars were higher in temperature than other areas. This
meant that the heat generated in the steel bar diffused to the
cover concrete, thereby raising the temperature on the
specimen surface immediately above the rebar. The tem-
perature difference between the areas just above the bars
and other areas of the specimens was smaller in the spec-
imens with larger cover depths. This is probably because of
the larger distance for the heat to diffuse and also the lower
temperature rise in the steel bar in the first place (see

50 Fig. 6).
40
As seen in Figs. 12, 13, 14, and 15, temperature distri-
butions on the concrete surface was not uniform along the
30 length of the bar. The temperature rise tended to be higher
(a) f =10mm, c=10mm around the ends than around the center of the bars, prob-
20
bare steel bar ably because the IH coil was circular and the intensity of
10
steel bar in RC specimen the generated magnetic field was not uniform along the bar.
0 There was also a tendency for higher temperatures to be
0 40 80 120 160 developed at the end of the bar where the electrical cord for
Heating time (s) the electrochemical corrosion process was connected. The
70 cord was fixed using a bolt and a nut which must also have
been heated during IH. This suggests the necessity of using
60
non-magnetic materials for connections in future experi-
Bar temperature (oC)

50 ments. The temperature distribution may also have been

40
affected by uneven corrosion distribution (Fig. 8). The
corrosion layer was more pronounced on the upper side of
30 the bar, which was the side nearer to the wire-mesh elec-
20 (b) f =10mm, c=20mm trode used for the electrolytic corrosion.
bare steel bar
Notice also that larger the corrosion amount, the lower
10
steel bar in RC specimen the surface temperature of the concrete, regardless of the
0 depth of concrete cover (see Figs. 12, 13, 14, 15). As
0 40 80 120 160 mentioned above, temperature rise in the steel bar was also
Heating time (s) higher for a greater corrosion loss. Therefore, it can be
stated that the corrosion products at the interface between
Fig. 10 Comparison between temperature developments in bare steel
bar and steel bar in an RC specimen: a / = 10 mm, c = 10 mm; the bar and the concrete block the diffusion of heat from
b / = 10 mm, c = 10 mm the bar to the cover concrete.

123
 Author's personal copy
J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35 31

(a)
70 Corrosion loss 70 Corrosion loss 70 Corrosion loss
0% 0% 0%
60 60 60
Bar temperature (°C)

Bar temperature (°C)

Bar temperature (°C)

1% 1% 1%
50 5% 50 5% 50 5%
20% 20% 20%
40 40 40

30 30 30
20 20 20
10 f =13mm, c=10mm, heated for 120s 10 f =10mm, c=10mm, heated for 120s 10 f =6mm, c=10mm, heated for 120s

0 0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500
Heating time (s) Heating time (s) Heating time (s)

(b)
70 70 70
Corrosion loss Corrosion loss Corrosion loss
60 60 60
Bar temperature (°C)

Bar temperature (°C)

Bar temperature (°C)

0% 0% 0%
1% 1% 1%
50 50 50
5% 5% 5%
40 20% 40 20% 40 20%

30 30 30
20 20 20
10 f =13mm, c=10mm, heated for 70s 10 f =10mm, c=10mm, heated for 70s 10 f =6mm, c=10mm, heated for 70s
0 0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500
Heating time (s) Heating time (s) Heating time (s)

(c)
70
Corrosion loss
60
Bar temperature (°C)

0%
50 1%
5%
40 20%
30

20

10 f =13mm, c=10mm, heated for 50s

0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Heating time (s)

(d)
70 70 70
Corrosion loss Corrosion loss Corrosion loss
60 0% 60 0% 60 0%
Bar temperature (°C)

Bar temperature (°C)

Bar temperature (°C)

1% 1% 1%
50 50 50
5% 5% 5%
40 20% 40 20% 40 20%

30 30 30

20 20 20
10 10 10 f =6mm, c=20mm, heated for 150s
f =13mm, c=20mm, heated for 150s f =10mm, c=20mm, heated for 150s
0 0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500
Heating time (s) Heating time (s) Heating time (s)

Fig. 11 Examples of temperature development in steel bar in RC specimens: a c = 10 mm, heated for 120 s; b c = 10 mm, heated for 70 s;
c c = 10 mm, heated for 50 s; d c = 20 mm, heated for 150 s

Specimens with significant corrosion had large cracks in Meanwhile, Fig. 16 shows the surface temperature distri-
the cover concrete (see Fig. 7), but the surface temperatures bution of the specimen /6-c10-10% that suffered cover
did not indicate the presence of corrosion-induced cracks. spalling resulting from deep cracks due to corrosion. The test

123
 Author's personal copy
32 J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35

Fig. 12 Infrared thermography images of temperature distributions on concrete surface: a corrosion loss = 0%, b corrosion loss = 5%, and
c corrosion loss = 20% (/ = 13 mm, c = 10 mm, images taken 30 s after being heated for 120 s)

Fig. 13 Infrared thermography images of temperature distributions on concrete surface: a corrosion loss = 0%, b corrosion loss = 5%, and
c corrosion loss = 20% (/ = 10 mm, c = 10 mm, images taken 60 s after being heated for 120 s)

Fig. 14 Infrared thermography images of temperature distributions on concrete surface: a corrosion loss = 0%, b corrosion loss = 5%, and
c corrosion loss = 20% (/ = 6 mm, c = 10 mm, images taken 60 s after being heated for 120 s)

on this specimen was carried out with the pieces of spalled
cover concrete put back into their initial location. As shown,
the temperature inside the crack was higher than that of
surrounding concrete, and there were some areas near the
cracks where the temperature was excessively high. Con-
sidering the anomaly created by these cracks, test results
from this specimen were excluded from the discussion. It is
not clear why an internal crack and complete spalling have
different impacts on the heat diffusion, and the effects of
cracks should be further investigated in the context of ther-
mography. In this study, internal cracks that did not cause
spalling were not taken into consideration in the discussion.
To further investigate the effect of the extent of corro-
sion on the surface temperature, the changes with time in

123
 Author's personal copy
J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35 33

Fig. 15 Infrared thermography images of temperature distributions on concrete surface: a corrosion loss = 0%, b corrosion loss = 5%, and
c corrosion loss = 20% (/ = 13 mm, c = 20 mm, images taken 60 s after being heated for 150 s)

Fig. 16 Infrared thermography

images of temperature spalling
distributions on concrete surface
(corrosion loss = 10%,
/ = 6 mm, c = 10 mm,
images taken 120 s after
being heated for 70 s)

spalling
Topview
Top view

Side view (wired side)

the maximum temperature on the concrete surface were

analyzed. Since it was found that the surface temperature
distributions were affected by the shape of the IH coil and
the use of a bolt and nut as noted, only half of the specimen
on the side opposite to the wire was considered as shown in
Fig. 17. The changes in the maximum temperature on
the concrete surface in the specimen with a 10-mm cover
depth as a function of time are shown in Figs. 18 and 19.
Figure 18 corresponds to specimens heated for 70 s, and
Fig. 19 corresponds to specimens heated for 120 s. A
longer heating time, as expected, led to higher surface
temperatures. Interestingly, while the temperature of the
steel itself inside the specimen was not largely affected by
the bar diameter as shown in Fig. 11, the specimens with
larger bar diameters showed higher surface temperatures.
This suggests that a larger rebar generated more heat. Fig. 17 Highest temperature detected area (area surrounded by
At the beginning of the temperature measurement period dotted line)
immediately after heating, the surface temperature of the
specimens with non-corroded bars was higher than that of diffusion of heat from the bar to the cover concrete. This is
the specimens with corroded bars. In view of the lower further verified by the fact that the temperature of the non-
temperature of the non-corroded bar shown in Fig. 11, this corroded bars dropped most rapidly after the end of the
again suggests that the corrosion products block the heating. In the specimens with corroded bars, on the other

123
 Author's personal copy
34 J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35

(a) (b) (c)

Max. temp. on concrete surface ( oC)

Max. temp. on concrete surface ( oC)

Max. temp. on concrete surface ( oC)
32 32 32
f =13mm, c=10mm, heated for 70s f =10mm, c=10mm, heated for 70s f =6mm, c=10mm, heated for 70s
30 30 30

28 28 28

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22

20 20 20
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Time after being heated (s) Time after being heated (s) Time after being heated (s)

Corrosion loss 0% 1% 2% 5% 10% 20%

Fig. 18 Maximum temperature on concrete surface with specimen heated for 70 s (c = 10 mm): a / = 13 mm, b / = 10 mm, and
c / = 6 mm

(a) (b) (c)

Max. temp. on concrete surface ( oC)

Max. temp. on concrete surface ( oC)
Max. temp. on concrete surface ( oC)

32 32 32

30 30 30

28 28 28

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22
f =13mm, c=10mm, heated for 120s f =10mm, c=10mm, heated for 120s f =6mm, c=10mm, heated for 120s
20 20 20
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Time after being heated (s) Time after being heated (s) Time after being heated (s)

Corrosion loss 0% 1% 2% 5% 10% 20%

Fig. 19 Maximum temperature on concrete surface with specimen heated for 120 s (c = 10 mm): a / = 13 mm, b / = 10 mm, and
c / = 6 mm

hand, the surface temperature continued to increase for a bar diameters of 10 and 13 mm. Since there was only a
while even though the IH apparatus had been turned off. very small temperature rise (of about 1°C) on the concrete
This delayed response further implies that the corrosion surface of the specimens with 6 mm diameter bars, no
products have a low heat conductivity. quantitative or qualitative analysis was possible with
The above-discussed tendencies, however, do not apply respect to these specimens, and the results of these speci-
to all specimens. There were variations, especially in the mens are not shown here.
specimens with smaller cover depths where heterogeneity In the specimens with a cover depth of 10 mm, there
of concrete due to coarse aggregate had presumably caused was a difference in the maximum surface temperature of as
an uneven distribution of heat conductivity and affected the high as 6°C (/13) and 4°C (/10), as shown in Fig. 20. In
heat diffusion. Furthermore, while the analysis is made contrast, the difference was only of 3°C (/13) or 2°C (/10)
here only on the maximum temperature, the whole tem- in the specimens with the cover depth of 20 mm (see
perature distribution on the concrete surface should be Figs. 19, 20). The larger cover depth means a larger dis-
looked into, taking also into account the effect of the tance for the heat of the steel to diffuse, which made the
uneven corrosion distribution. Further, it should be con- effect of the corrosion layer relatively smaller. Meanwhile,
sidered that a part of the corrosion products diffuse into the as shown in Fig. 19, when the cover depth is 10 mm and
electrolyte and deposits therein. Thus, rust does not nec- the rebar diameter is 13 mm, there is a difference of 4°C in
essarily remain entirely at the interface between the steel the maximum temperature between the specimens with no
and cover concrete, and the actual corrosion loss is actually corrosion and specimens with 20% corrosion when heated
larger than estimated by IH. for 70 s, and 6°C when heated for 120 s. In other words,
Figure 20 shows the maximum temperature on the sur- the effect of corrosion on the surface temperature is more
face of the specimens with a cover depth of 20 mm for two evident when the heating time is longer and more heat is

123
 Author's personal copy
J Civil Struct Health Monit (2011) 1:25–35 35

Max. temp. on concrete surface ( oC)

Max. temp. on concrete surface ( oC)

Fig. 20 Maximum temperature 32 (a) 32 (b)
on concrete surface with
specimen heated for 150 s 30 30
(c = 20 mm): a / = 13 mm f =13mm, c=20mm, heated for 150s f =10mm, c=20mm, heated for 150s
and b / = 10 mm 28 28

26 26

24 24

22 22

20 20
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Time after being heated (s) Time after being heated (s)

Corrosion loss 0% 1% 2% 5% 10% 20%

generated in the steel bar. This implies, fortunately that, References

steel corrosion can also be detected in specimens with
larger cover depth by either using a more powerful IH 1. Susan S, Hubbard SS, Zhang J, Monteiro PJM, Peterson JE,
Rubin Y (2003) Experimental detection of reinforcing bar
apparatus or by heating the specimen for a longer time. corrosion using nondestructive geophysical techniques. ACI Mater
In the specimens with corroded steel, the maximum J 100(6):501–510
surface temperature kept increasing even after 6 min had 2. Liang MT, Su PJ (2001) Detection of the corrosion damage of
elapsed after the heater was turned off (see Fig. 20). Again, rebar in concrete using impact-echo method. Cem Concr Res
31(10):1427–1436
this was probably because the distance for the heat to 3. Munakata K, Kamada T, Uchida S, Mae H, Minezawa H (2009)
diffuse was large, as well as the heat diffusion from the Nondestructive evaluation of deterioration around rebar based on
steel to the concrete was inhibited by the corrosion elastic waves generated by electromagnetic force. In: NDTCE’09
products. non-destructive testing in civil engineering, Nantes, France
4. Hillemeier B (1982) Method of determining the location, orien-
tation and pattern of reinforcing members in reinforced concrete,
United States Patent 4309610
4 Conclusions 5. Hillemeier B (1984) Location of reinforcement by induction-
thermography. In: Proceedings of SPIE, Thermosense VII, vol
520, pp 197–206
A novel NDT method that employs induction heating (IH) 6. Oshita H, Horie H, Nagasaka S, Taniguchi O, Yoshikawa S (2009)
and infrared thermography for detection of corrosion in Nondestructive evaluation of corrosion in reinforced concrete by
reinforcing steel in concrete was investigated. The influ- thermal behavior on concrete surface due to electro-magnetic
ences of rebar diameter, cover depth, extent of corrosion, heating. JSCE 65(1):76–92 (in Japanese)
7. Arndt R, Jalinoos F (2009) NDE for corrosion detection in
and heating time were examined. The following conclu- reinforced concrete structures—benchmark approach. In:
sions were drawn: NDTCE’09 non-destructive testing in civil engineering, Nantes,
France
1. Under identical IH condition, the temperature rise in a 8. Tamori K, Maruyama K, Odagawa M, Hashimoto C (1988)
corroded rebar is higher than that in a non-corroded Cracking behavior of reinforced concrete members due to
rebar, and this difference is greater when the extent of corrosion of reinforcement. Proc JCI 10(2):505–510 (in Japanese)
corrosion is the greater.
2. Larger the extent of corrosion, smaller is the temper-
ature rise on the surface.
3. The technique is particularly effective in detecting
corrosion for larger bar diameters and smaller cover
depths.

123

View publication stats