High alumina cement (HAC)

HAC concrete undergoes a conversion process which results in a significant reduction in the
strength of the hydrated cement paste. The alkalinity is also affected by the conversion
process and decreases. Also, the increased porosity means the concrete is more susceptible
to other forms of attack such as alkali, sulphate attack or carbonation which may result in
reinforcement corrosion.

The effects of conversion on the strength of beams depend on the original strength and
quality of concrete used. In some cases, the increase in porosity has been reported to allow
moisture to react with unhydrated cement particles and produce an increase in strength. In
other cases, significant strength reduction can take place.

In 1988 BRE Information Paper 8/88 concluded that wet HACC (flat roofs) is likely to reach a
minimum strength of up to 30% lower than that of dry HACC (protected internal floors) and
at a later age, even in the absence of chemical attack.

Most HAC concrete in the UK went into precast beams, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s.
Structures were built with HAC concrete until the mid-1970s in the UK and it was banned as
a building material in 1976. Structures which still contain HAC concrete elements are very
unlikely to undergo catastrophic failure due to conversion. All conversion processes should
have occurred during the previous 35 years since the ban was introduced. Deterioration may
now be more related to corrosion or alkaline hydrolysis.
High alumina cement has already caused several structural failures, but it is thought that the
detrimental conversion process should now be completed in most structures. There is still
the likelihood that HAC structures need to be strengthened, however many elements
currently in service are performing adequately and will continue to do so subject to periodic
inspections. A remedial option is to strengthen HAC precast concrete beams by introducing a
secondary support system. HAC elements are prone to further deterioration processes such
as corrosion and improper repair may cause more problems.

Cast-in chloride (Calcium Chloride Admixture)

Some of the chloride in the mix is bound to the cement products and some are not and are
freely available. Corrosion of reinforcement depends on the free chloride content which
increases over time when the concrete carbonates. Carbonation causes a decrease of the
normal concrete alkalinity and during this process bound chlorides are released back into
solution. If the carbonation front progresses to the depth of the reinforcement the protective
layer on the steel destabilizes which may initiate corrosion in the presence of oxygen and
moisture. The release of chlorides into the pore solution may exceed the critical chloride
threshold and cause corrosion before the carbonation front reaches the reinforcement. The
critical chloride threshold is approximately 0.4-0.5% chloride by mass of cement, at which
point some corrosion is likely to occur.

Corrosion does not occur until a particular concentration (known as the threshold
concentration) is exceeded at the reinforcement surface. This threshold can range from
about 0.1 to 1.0% chloride by mass of cement, but the most used thresholds are 0.3% (used
by the Highways Agency) or 0.4%, found in much of the European literature. Once the
chloride concentration at the reinforcement exceeds this threshold there is a significant risk
of corrosion, especially in the presence of moisture. If cast-in chlorides exceed 0.4%, then
the corrosion risk rises (see BRE Digest 444). This paragraph taken from Concrete Society
Technical Report No. 69 “Repair of concrete structures with reference to BS EN 1504”.
Concrete.org.uk websites states: “The subject of a safe level of chloride is somewhat
controversial. A traditional view is that below 0.4% chloride by mass of cement represents a
low corrosion risk, 0.4 to 1% a medium risk and above 1% a high risk. BRE Digest 444 gives
a more comprehensive interpretation of all the factors involved in chloride-induced
corrosion.”

The use of calcium chloride as an accelerator in the past may cause significant deterioration
of reinforced concrete structures in the future. If no chlorides from external sources have
already initiated corrosion, then the relatively slow process of carbonation can be the trigger.
The time until the carbonation front reaches the reinforcement depends on several
parameters. These are mainly the depth of concrete cover and the permeability of the
concrete, and it could take 100 years or more for the problem to develop.

Calcium chloride as an accelerator in reinforced concrete was effectively banned in the UK

in 1977 when corrosion first started to be considered seriously.

Chloride-contaminated concrete due to calcium chloride can be identified by an even

distribution of the chloride content which can be expected to be between 1 and 2% by mass
of cement. Concrete that has been contaminated due to external sources can be identified
on the chloride profile that decreases from the face of exposure.

Concrete defect procedure

The most critical defect in reinforced concrete is corrosion of reinforcement steel which leads
to cracking and spalling of concrete cover, leaving the steel exposed to the elements. If
discovered, then the following procedure should be followed.

1. Undertake preliminary testing to establish the cause of the defect. For example, is
the cause due to carbonation or the presence of cast-in chlorides (during concrete
mix) or ingressed chlorides (due to sea water or de-icing salts). These are the two
most common causes of reinforcement corrosion in concrete elements.
a. Examine reinforcement - Immediately after removing the concrete cover in
areas exhibiting cracking or spalling, the type of rust present should be
recorded. Widespread corrosion of the steel caused by carbonation usually
produces flaking layers of rust over long lengths of the bar. Whereas short
lengths of corrosion with uncorroded bar on either side is often associated
with high chloride content, particularly where pitting of the steel has occurred.
These observations can be readily confirmed by depth of carbonation and
chloride content tests.
b. Cast-in chlorides are indicated by a constant chloride content through the
depth of the concrete. Ingressed chloride content varies along depth of cover.
Half-cell potential measurements are an invaluable aid in the diagnosis of
deterioration caused by the presence of chloride as these can indicate if the
underlying bars are corroding making it possible to identify areas with high
risk of reinforcement corrosion.
2. Undertake detailed testing/assessment to establish if defect is localised or
widespread. Is a specialist sub-consultant (corrosion specialist) required?
3. Assess the corrosion risk based on test results (chloride content, carbonation depth,
concrete moisture content, corrosion potential of reinforcement from half-cell survey).
From CS 462: The following are examples where risk of reinforcement corrosion is
unacceptably high and shall be used as a guide to promoting a maintenance
intervention:
a. 1.0% total chloride concentration by mass of cement supported by evidence
of reinforcement corrosion and concrete delamination.
 b. total chloride concentration by mass of cement exceeds 0.4%, half-cell
potential measurements are more negative than -350mV relative to CSE, and
other factors indicate a high risk of corrosion.
Where total chloride concentration by mass of cement is generally between 0.4% and
1.0%, but half-cell potential readings are generally more positive than -350mV, the
risk may be classified as 'medium'.
Maintenance intervention may be deferred if risk and consequence of corrosion is
assessed as medium to low and is justified by evaluation of test results. Where
maintenance intervention is deferred, the deteriorated structure should be monitored
at appropriate intervals.
Repair intervention shall not be undertaken when the risk of reinforcement corrosion
is 'acceptably low'.
In all cases, if the concrete element is kept dry, then the corrosion risk should be
minimal.
4. Establish clients’ expectations in terms of their end goals and in relation to the
required service life of building and acceptance of the future maintenance
requirements.
5. Determine appropriate repair options and their life-cycle costs. See CS 462 7.18 for
Repair Options. Undertake a whole-life cost analysis of the repair system and
maintenance. For a particular structure the installation and maintenance cost of such
systems need to be weighed against the cost of replacement, strengthening or the
acceptance of a reduced service life. Consider the following:
a. Unlike carbonation, it is difficult to achieve lasting repair to chloride
contaminated concrete that is beginning to deteriorate. This is particularly true
with cast-in calcium chloride.
b. Providing it is detected early, penetration of chloride ion from the environment
need not present the same problems as that of cast-in chloride. Variations in
concrete quality, cover and exposure often lead to spalling in a few isolated
areas, giving warning of a problem requiring investigation.

References
“UNEXPECTED EFFECTS OF HISTORIC CONCRETE INNOVATIONS” by Rene Brueckner
& Paul Lambert (2017).
Graphs taken from “The climate of the UK and recent trends” 2009
From “CS TR 54 Diagnosis of deterioration in concrete structures”:

Carbonation-induced corrosion tends to be general, though severe localised corrosion can

occur on isolated bars with low cover. Chloride-induced corrosion is characterised by local,
rapidly corroding area of bars. Carbonation occurs most rapidly in moderate humidity
environments (60-70%) but at this humidity the corrosion rate will be very slow. If chlorides
are present, the conditions that lead to the most rapid chloride penetration (wetting and
drying or high humidity) are also the conditions leading to the most rapid rate of corrosion.

See Case Histories in “CS TR 54 Diagnosis of deterioration in concrete structures”: