Additive for reinforced concrete

Abstract

The additive for reinforced concrete is a concrete additive for preventing corrosion of steel rebars in steel-reinforced concrete, improving the workability of the cast concrete, and reducing water absorption/permeability in the cast concrete. The reinforced concrete may be a conventional reinforced concrete, such as that formed from a mixture of water, an aggregate and cement, having at least one steel rebar embedded in the mixture. The additive is added to the mixture prior to curing and casting. The additive may for example, have a concentration with respect to the cement of between 0.25 wt % and 1.0 wt %. The additive includes a triazole and a non-ionic surfactant including a poly oxy ethoxylated reaction product of sorbitan and a fatty acid. The triazole and the non-ionic surfactant are dissolved in the solvent.

Claims

1. An additive for reinforced concrete, consisting of a mixture of: a triazole compound; a non-ionic surfactant, the surfactant being a poly oxy ethoxylated reaction product of sorbitan and a fatty acid; and a solvent, the triazole compound and the non-ionic surfactant being mixed in the solvent.

2. The additive for reinforced concrete as recited in claim 1, wherein the solvent comprises at least one solvent selected from the group consisting of methanol, ethanol, propanol, isopropanol, butanol, isobutanol, and water.

3. The additive for reinforced concrete as recited in claim 1, wherein the triazole compound is selected from the group consisting of 1,2,3-benzotriazole and tolyltriazole.

4. The additive for reinforced concrete as recited in claim 1, wherein the fatty acid is selected from the group consisting of oleic acid and stearic acid.

5. The additive for reinforced concrete as recited in claim 1, wherein the non-ionic surfactant is selected from the group consisting of polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate and polyoxyethylene sorbitan monostearate.

6. The additive for reinforced concrete as recited in claim 1, wherein a solution of the non-ionic surfactant in the solvent has a concentration of between 50% and 90% weight of the non-ionic surfactant/volume of the solvent.

7. The additive for reinforced concrete as recited in claim 6, wherein the additive has a concentration of the triazole compound with the solution of claim 6 of between 0.25% and 25.0% weight of the triazole compound/volume of the solution of claim 6.

8. Reinforced concrete, comprising a cured and hardened mixture of water, an aggregate, cement, and the additive according to claim 1 having at least one steel rebar embedded in the mixture.

9. The reinforced concrete as recited in claim 8, wherein the mixture has a ratio of the additive according to claim 1 to the cement in the mixture of between 0.25 wt % and 1.0 wt %.

10. The reinforced concrete as recited in claim 8, wherein the mixture has a ratio of water to cement (w/c ratio) between 0.4 and 0.6.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

(1) FIG. 1A is a composite comparing electrochemical impedance spectroscopic (EIS) plots (Bode plots of the magnitude of the impedance as a function of frequency) for a control sample of steel rebar embedded in concrete and samples of steel rebar embedded in concrete and treated with the additive for reinforced concrete at varying concentrations.

(2) FIG. 1B is a composite comparing EIS plots (Bode plots of the phase angle of the impedance as a function of frequency) for a control sample of steel rebar embedded in concrete and samples of steel rebar embedded in concrete and treated with the additive for reinforced concrete at varying concentrations.

(3) FIG. 2 is a comparison of photographic images of steel rebar samples removed from a control concrete sample and a concrete sample treated with the additive for reinforced concrete at 0.25% of the weight of cement in the mix.

(4) Similar reference characters denote corresponding features consistently throughout the attached drawings.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

(5) The additive for reinforced concrete is a concrete additive for preventing corrosion of steel rebars in steel-reinforced concrete, improving the workability of the cast concrete, and reducing water absorption/permeability in the cast concrete. The reinforced concrete may be a conventional reinforced concrete, such as that formed from a mixture of water, an aggregate, and cement, with at least one steel rebar embedded in the mixture. The additive is added to the mixture prior to curing and casting. The additive may, for example, have a concentration with respect to the cement of between 0.25 wt % and 1.0 wt %. The additive includes a triazole and a non-ionic surfactant including a polyoxyethoxylated reaction product of sorbitan and a fatty acid. The triazole and the non-ionic surfactant are dissolved in the solvent.

(6) The solvent may be, for example, methanol, ethanol, propanol, isopropanol, butanol, isobutanol, water, or combinations thereof. The triazole may be, for example, 1,2,3-benzotriazole or tolyltriazole. The fatty acid may be, for example, oleic acid or stearic acid. The non-ionic surfactant may be, for example, polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate or polyoxyethylene sorbitan monostearate.

(7) The weight-to-volume ratio of the non-ionic surfactant in the solvent may be between 50% and 90%. The concentration of the triazole with respect to the non-ionic surfactant and the solvent may be, for example, between 0.25 wt % and 25.0 wt %, and preferably between 2.5 wt % and 20.0 wt %, and more preferably between 5.0 wt % and 15.0 wt %.

(8) For purposes of testing the additive for controlling uniform corrosion and pitting corrosion in the steel rebars, carbon-manganese steel rebars were used, each having a length of 150 mm and a diameter of 12 mm. The steel rebars were de-scaled by abrasion with a motorized wheel fitted with sandpaper. The rebars, following cleaning with acetone, were embedded in a concrete mixture with a binder (cement):water:aggregate (sand) ratio of 1.0:0.5:2.0. After curing the concrete for 28 days following the standard recommended procedures, the concrete samples were subjected to wet/dry treatments. The concrete samples were kept wet in 0.6M chloride solution for 7 days, followed by drying in a laboratory environment for 8 days. These wet/dry treatments were taken as one cycle. Such wet/dry treatments augment the migration of moisture, gases and chloride ions through the samples, thus accelerating the onset and propagation of corrosion reactions at the surface of the embedded rebars.

(9) The polarization resistance of the rebars was measured by electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS). In this technique, a sinusoidal voltage of 10 mV was introduced at the corroding interface at their corrosion potentials. The frequency of the sinusoidal voltage was varied between 100 KHz and 0.001 Hz. The resulting impedance and shift in phase with change in frequency was monitored using a potentiostat. For determination of polarization resistance and other impedance parameters of the corroding surfaces in the presence (and in the absence) of admixtures, a constant phase element (CPE) model was used to extract data from the respective plots. Polarization resistance measured by this technique is inversely related to the corrosion current density (I.sub.corr) and follows the Stern-Geary equation:
I.sub.corr=B/R.sub.p,
where B is a constant and R.sub.p is the polarization resistance (measured in Ω.Math.cm.sup.2). The Stern-Geary equation shows that the corrosion current density, and thus the corrosion rate of a corroding metal-electrolyte interface, has an inverse relationship with R.sub.p.

(10) For purposes of testing the additive for controlling water permeability through the cured concrete, 20 mm×20 mm×20 mm cubes of concrete were cast. Cubes containing the present additive and control cubes with no additive were cast. The cubes were cast with a concrete mixture with a binder (cement):water:aggregate (sand) ratio of 1.0:0.5:2.0. After curing the concrete for 28 days following the standard recommended procedures, the concrete samples were kept in a laboratory environment for 90 days. The weights of the cubes following casting (W.sub.C) were then recorded with a precision of up to the third decimal point of a gram. The cubes were then fully immersed in tap water for seven days. Following removal from the water, they were kept in an open laboratory atmosphere for 24 hours to allow the water on the upper surfaces of the cubes to vaporize. The weights of the cubes following immersion and vaporization (W.sub.I) were then recorded. The difference in weights (ΔW=W.sub.I−W.sub.C) provided the quantity of water absorbed by the cubes after their immersion in water. The averages of water absorbed for three identical cubes in the absence of the additives (AWA) and in the presence of the additives (ΔW.sub.P) were determined. The percentage retardation efficiency of the additives (% RE) in reducing the permeability of water through the cast cubes was determined as:

(11) $\%\mathrm{RE}=\frac{\Delta W_A-\Delta W_P}{\Delta W_A}\times 100.$

(12) In order to assess the workability/plasticity of the concrete according to ASTM C1437, the concrete was placed in two layers in a specified mold on a flow table. The two layers were tamped 20 times with a specified tamper. The tamping pressure was kept just sufficient to ensure uniform filling of the mold. Next, the concrete was cut off to smooth the surface, and then the mold was lifted away from the concrete one minute after completing the mixing operation. The table was immediately dropped 25 times in 15 seconds. Then, the diameter of the concrete along the four lines scribed in the tabletop were measured to calculate the flow index.

Example 1

General Method of Preparing Additive

(13) A pre-weighed amount of the non-ionic surfactant was dissolved in a solvent after mixing in an appropriate container, such as a glass or metal vessel, using a mechanical or magnetic stirrer in the temperature range of 25° C.-50° C. The non-ionic surfactant may be, for example, polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate or polyoxyethylene sorbitan monostearate, or any other similar reaction product of sorbitan and a fatty acid followed by ethoxylation of the reaction product. The solvent may be, for example, methanol, ethanol, propanol, isopropyl alcohol, or tap water. The mixing ratio of the non-ionic surfactant to solvent may be, for example, 50-90 parts of the non-ionic surfactant in 100 parts of the solvent. The mixing time may vary from 300 seconds to 1500 seconds or more. This mixture is hereinafter referred to as “component A”. A pre-weighed amount of a triazole compound was added to component A under vigorous mixing until the triazole was completely dissolved in component A, forming “component B”. The triazole compound may be, for example, 1,2,3-benzotriazole, tolyltriazole, or any other suitable similar triazole. The preferred content of the triazole is 0.5 wt % to 25 wt % of the weight of component A, more preferably 2.5 wt % to 20 wt %, and still more preferably 5 wt % to 15 wt %.

Example 2

Specific Example of Preparing Additive

(14) The additive was prepared as described in Example 1 by mixing polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate and 1,2,3-benzotriazole in chloride-free and sulfate-free tap water or industrial grade ethyl alcohol and stirring by a mechanical stirrer at room temperature, resulting in a homogenous emulsion-type mixture or a transparent solution. Specifically, 30 grams of polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate was dissolved in 25 mL of industrial grade ethanol, followed by the addition of 25 mL of distilled water under constant stirring at room temperature. Thereafter, 5 grams of 1,2,3-benzotriazole was added to the mixture. The total volume was increased to 100 mL through the addition of distilled water. The mixture was kept under constant stirring at room temperature for about 30 minutes. The prepared additive prepared in this manner was stored in a glass or HDPE (high-density polyethylene) plastic container with a shelf life of about 12 months.

Example 3

Corrosion Control Efficiency of Additive

(15) FIGS. 1A and 1B illustrate impedance plots produced using an electrochemical impedance spectroscopic (EIS) technique after 48 cycles of wet/dry treatments (24 months of treatments) in 0.6M chloride solution. The reinforced concrete was prepared as described in Example 2. Samples made with the addition of the additive at varying concentrations of 0.25 wt %, 0.5 wt % and 1.0 wt % with respect to the cement in the concrete mixture were tested. The water-to-cement ratio was 0.5. In FIGS. 1A and 1B, the plot labeled “Control” represents the results taken from control samples that were prepared with no additive.

(16) The impedance plots of FIG. 1A incorporate various electrical components of the corroding interface, such as the polarization resistance (R.sub.p), which is inversely proportional to corrosion rate, the solution and film resistance (R.sub.u), and capacitance components (Y0). The impedance values at the lowest studied frequency of the plots are normally taken as the polarization resistance, and the impedance values at the highest studied frequency are taken as the uncompensated resistance (R.sub.u). It can be seen in FIG. 1A that the polarization resistance component of the impedance (at a frequency of 10 mHz) in the presence of 0.25% and 0.5% of the additive are considerably higher than that of the control rebar. This shows that the additive strongly controls the corrosion rate of the steel reinforcement bars embedded in the concrete.

Example 4

Values Extracted From EIS Plots

(17) The results shown in FIGS. 1A and 1B (and discussed above in Example 3) are qualitative. To obtain the corresponding quantitative data, the plots of FIGS. 1A and 1B were fitted with a simulated equivalent electrical circuit of a constant phase element model (CPE), and the data from the best fit results were extracted. The extracted values of R.sub.p and Y0 are shown below in Table 1.

(18) As shown in Table 1, the polarization resistance, which is directly proportional to the corrosion resistance of the reinforcement bars embedded in the concrete, is considerably higher for the samples containing the additive than for the control rebars. The Y0 component, which incorporates capacitance values of the corroding interface, are significantly lower for the rebars treated with the additive than for the control sample. The higher values of the Y0 component indicates that the corroding interfaces had a leaky layer and are more prone to the onset and propagation of corrosion reactions.

(19) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Quantitative Data Extracted From FIGS. 1A and 1B Concentration of Electrochemical Parameters Additive (%) R.sub.p (Ω .Math. cm.sup.2) Y0 (Ω.sup.−1 cm.sup.−2s.sup.n) 0 (control) 2.24 × 10.sup.4  11.6 × 10.sup.−7 0.25 3.83 × 10.sup.6  1.75 × 10.sup.−7 0.5 5.04 × 10.sup.6  1.04 × 10.sup.−7 1.0 3.35 × 10.sup.4 10.84 × 10.sup.−7

Example 5

Water/Moisture Permeability in Treated Concrete Cubes

(20) With regard to the effect of the additive on the retardation of the permeability of water/moisture through the cured concrete cubes, the percentage retardation efficiencies (calculated as described above) are shown in Table 2 below. The results of Table 2 show that the concrete cubes cast with the additive effectively control the permeability of water.

(21) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 % Retardation Efficiencies (RE) of Additive on Permeability of Water Concentration of ΔW.sub.A Average ΔW.sub.P Average % Additive (%) (g) ΔW.sub.A (g) (g) ΔW.sub.P (g) RE 0 (control) 11.051 — — — 0 (control) 11.055 11.049 — — — 0 (control) 11.043 — — — 0.25% — 7.275 0.25% — — 7.129 7.202 34.81 0.25% — 7.202 0.5% — 4.832 0.5% — — 4.801 4.818 56.39 0.5% — 4.822 1.0% 4.583 1.0% — 4.585 4.582 58.52 1.0% 4.580

Example 6

Efficacy of Additive as Super Plasticizer

(22) With regard to the efficacy of the additive as a super plasticizer for increasing the workability of concrete, testing was performed as described in ASTM 1437, and as discussed above. The water-to-cement ratio (w/c) for the slump was maintained at 0.40. Table 3, below, provides the results of the testing, which show that the inclusion of the additive in the concrete mix considerably increases the slump area compared against the control samples.

(23) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Plasticity Results at Differing Concentrations of Additive with w/c = 0.4 Concentration of Plasticity Additive (%) (% Flow) 0 (control) 63 0.0625 93 0.125 89 0.250 88 0.500 85 1.00 93

Example 7

Effect of Additive Against Chloride-Induced Pitting of Rebars

(24) In the present experiment, after 37 cycles of wet/dry treatment, one set of rebars was removed by breaking the concrete. The digital photographs of FIG. 2 show that the surface of the rebars embedded in the control sample of reinforced concrete experienced severe pitting attack. Under identical test conditions, the rebars embedded in the concrete with the additive included in the mix (at concentrations of 0.25%450% with respect to the weight of cement) did not show any trace of rust or pits on their surfaces.

(25) It is to be understood that the additive for reinforced concrete is not limited to the specific embodiments described above, but encompasses any and all embodiments within the scope of the generic language of the following claims enabled by the embodiments described herein, or otherwise shown in the drawings or described above in terms sufficient to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the claimed subject matter.