Award Date

December 2023

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science in Engineering (MSE)

Department

Civil and Environmental Engineering and Construction

First Committee Member

Nader Ghafoori

Second Committee Member

David James

Third Committee Member

Ying Tian

Fourth Committee Member

Pradip Bhowmik

Number of Pages

246

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the corrosion resistance of six distinct reinforcing bar types; namely, the bare, epoxy coated steel, quenched and tempered steel, ChromX 9100, Duplex 2304 stainless steel, and galvanized steel in “as-rolled” condition using the ASTM A955 Cracked Beam and Rapid Macrocell tests, and ASTM G109 test. The results were used to compare the corrosion rate and corrosion loss of various reinforcing bar types against those obtained for the bare reinforcing bars. This study also sought to identify an alternative reinforcing bar type to the epoxy coated reinforcing bars which are overwhelmingly specified by the US Departments of Transportation.

The Rapid Macrocell test was conducted for fifteen weeks as prescribed by ASTM A955. Accordingly, the overall average corrosion rate of the Duplex 2304 stainless steel, epoxy coated, galvanized, ChromX, and quenched and tempered reinforcing bars was 0.25%, 25%, 33%, 50%, and 150%, respectively, of that of the bare reinforcing bars. The corresponding overall average corrosion loss of the above-mentioned reinforcing bars was 0.22%, 25%, 33%, 40%, and 125% of that of the bare reinforcing bars.

While the ASTM A955 Cracked Beam test required a maximum of ninety-six weeks of testing, only forty-eight weeks of data was presented since the weekly average corrosion rate for each reinforcing bar type stabilized after thirty-two weeks of testing. By week forty-eight, the overall average corrosion rate of the Duplex 2304 stainless steel, epoxy coated, galvanized, ChromX, and quenched and tempered reinforcing bars was 0.5%, 1%, 20%, 80%, and 150%, respectively, of that of the bare reinforcing bars. The overall average corrosion loss of the Duplex 2304 stainless steel, epoxy coated, galvanized, ChromX, and quenched and tempered reinforcing bars was 44%, 0.67%, 25%, 70%, and 150%, respectively, of that of the bare reinforcing bars.

Overall, the Duplex 2304 stainless steel reinforcing bars performed the best against chloride-induced corrosion followed by the epoxy coated, galvanized, ChromX, bare, and quenched and tempered reinforcing bars in both the Rapid Macrocell and Cracked Beam tests. The results of the ASTM G109 test were not presented since there were insufficient data to date, and the test is still ongoing.

Based on the comparison of the combined cost and performance of the studied reinforcing bar types under the controlled laboratory conditions, the galvanized reinforcing bars were recommended as an alternative to the epoxy coated reinforcing bars.

Keywords

Chlorides; Corrosion; Macrocell; Reinforcing Bars

Disciplines

Civil Engineering | Engineering Science and Materials | Materials Science and Engineering

File Format

pdf

File Size

26400 KB

Degree Grantor

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Language

English

Rights

IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/

Download

Available for download on Tuesday, December 15, 2026


Share

COinS