Repair of Submerged Concrete Piles With FRP Composites

Repair of submerged concrete piles with
FRP composites
Master’s Thesis in the Master’s Programme Structural Engineering
JOHAN RÖÖS
AUGUST UDDMYR
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Division of Structural Engineering
CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Master’s Thesis BOMX02-17-68
Gothenburg, Sweden 2017
MASTER’S THESIS 2017:68
Repair of submerged concrete piles with FRP composites

Master’s Thesis in the Master’s Programme Structural Engineering and Building Technology
JOHAN RÖÖS
AUGUST UDDMYR

CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Göteborg, Sweden 2017
Master’s Thesis in the Master’s Programme Structural Engineering and Building
Technology
JOHAN RÖÖS
AUGUST UDDMYR
© JOHAN RÖÖS, AUGUST UDDMYR, 2017
Examensarbete 2017:68/ Institutionen för bygg- och miljöteknik,

Chalmers tekniska högskola 2017

Chalmers University of Technology
SE-412 96 Göteborg
Sweden
Telephone: + 46 (0)31-772 1000
Cover:
The first and third picture from the left are on specimens before subjected to accelerated
long-term durability tests. The second and fourth pictures are the same specimens after
the testing.
Chalmers Reproservice Göteborg, Sweden, 2017
I
Master’s thesis in the Master’s Programme Structural Engineering and Building
Technology
JOHAN RÖÖS
AUGUST UDDMYR
Chalmers University of Technology
ABSTRACT
Deterioration of concrete piles in marine structures due to harsh environmental
conditions has highlighted the need of continuous maintenance and renewal of such
structures. To repair these structures a relatively new and emerging repair method is to
wrap the piles with fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) materials. The lightweight, high
strength and flexibility of the FRP material provide for a quick and effective repair. The
idea is that the FRP material with low permeability and good resistance to harsh
environments will provide the pile with a protective layer and thus increase the
durability of the pile.
The aim of this thesis is to investigate the feasibility of the FRP repair method for
submerged concrete piles. The methodology used in the thesis is to perform: a literature
review, interviews with experts in the field, accelerated long-term durability tests
focusing on corrosion and a case study to compare costs between an FRP repair and a
conventional pile jacket repair method.
From the interviews, conclusion could be made that there is a need and interest for new
sound, quick and durable repair methods. The literature review showed that FRP
reparations mostly have been made in the splash zone to increase the durability and thus
enhance the service life of the pile. It also showed that wrapping concrete with glass
fibre reinforced polymer (GFRP) or carbon fibre reinforce polymer (CFRP) reduces the
corrosion rate equally.
The results from the experiment showed that FRP wrapping of reinforced concrete
specimens reduces the corrosion rate, crack propagation and crack bandwidths. In the
case study, the FRP repair method showed to be cost effective in comparison to a
traditional concrete pile jacket reparation.
Key words: fibre reinforced polymer, FRP, repair, submerged, concrete, piles,
wrapping, marine, corrosion, underwater, freeze and thaw
I
Reparation av undervattenspelare i betong med FRP komposit
Examensarbete inom masterprogrammet Konstruktionsteknik och Byggnadsteknik
JOHAN RÖÖS
AUGUST UDDMYR
Institutionen för Bygg- och Miljöteknik
Avdelningen för konstruktionsteknik
Chalmers tekniska högskola
SAMMANFATTNING
Nedbrytning av betongpålar i marina konstruktioner som ett resultat av den hårda
miljön har understrukit vikten av kontinuerligt underhåll av dessa konstruktioner. En
ny metod för att reparera dessa konstruktioner är att linda pålar med fiberförstärkt plast
(FRP). FRP materialets låga vikt, höga styrka och flexibilitet möjliggör för en snabb
och effektiv reparation. Idén är att det täta FRP materialet tillsammans med dess goda
egenskaper att motstå tuffa miljöer ska förse pålen med ett skyddande lager och därmed
öka pålens beständighet.
Målet med detta examensarbete är att undersöka genomförbarheten av att reparera

undervattenspålar med FRP. De använda metoderna för att undersöka detta är:
litteraturstudie, intervjuer med experter inom området, accelererad långtidsprovning
med fokus på korrosion och en fallstudie för att jämföra kostnader mellan en FRP- och
en pågjutningsreparation.
Från intervjuerna kan slutsatsen dras att det finns ett behov och intresse för nya säkra,
snabba och hållbara reparationsmetoder. Litteraturstudien visade att FRP reparationer
mestadels har genomförts i skvalpzonen för att öka hållbarheten och därigenom
förlänga pelarnas livslängd. Den visade också att lindning av betong med
glasfiberförstärkt plast eller kolfiberförstärkt plast minskar korrosionshastigheten lika
mycket.
Resultatet från experimentet har påvisat att FRP lindning av armerad betong minskar
korrosionshastigheten, sprickspridningen och sprickbredden. I fallstudien så påvisades
det att FRP lindningen är en kostnadseffektiv reparationsmetod i jämförelse med en
traditionell betong pågjutning.
Nyckelord: fiberförstärkt plast, FRP, reparation, , betong, pålar, linda, marin,

korrosion, undervatten
II
Contents
ABSTRACT I
SAMMANFATTNING II
CONTENTS III
PREFACE VI
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Aim and objectives 2
1.3 Research approach 2
1.4 Limitations 2
2 DEGRADATION CAUSES OF SUBMERGED CONCRETE PILES 3

2.1 Chemical causes 3
2.1.1 Chloride ingress 3
2.1.2 Sulphate attack 3
2.2 Mechanical causes 4
2.2.1 Freeze/thaw 4
2.2.2 Abrasion 5
2.2.3 Accidental loads 5
2.2.4 Damage during production and installation 6
2.2.5 Salt scaling 7
2.2.6 Scour 7
2.3 Concluding remarks 7
3 TRADITIONAL REPAIRING OF SUBMERGED PILES 9

3.1 Introduction 9
3.2 Traditional repair methods 10
3.2.1 Pile replacement 10
3.2.2 Pile jacket 10
3.3 Common procedures in underwater repair 12
3.3.1 Surface preparation 12
3.3.2 Reinforcing 13
3.3.3 Casting concrete 13
4 FRP REPAIR OF SUBMERGED PILES 15

4.1 Introduction of the material 15
4.1.1 Fibres 15
4.1.2 Resin Matrices 16
4.2 Reasons to use FRP 16
CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 III

4.3 Limitations of FRP composites 17
4.4 FRP repair method 17
4.4.1 State of practice 18
4.5 Limitations for repair with FRP 27
4.6 Literature review of experimental studies 28
4.6.1 Corrosion potentials of lightweight concrete wrapped with fibre
reinforced polymers (FRP) 28
4.6.2 Repair of corrosion-damaged columns using FRP wraps 30
4.6.3 Corrosion of steel reinforcement in carbon fibre-reinforced polymer
wrapped concrete cylinders 31
4.6.4 Corrosion of steel reinforcements embedded in FRP wrapped concrete
31
4.6.5 Effectiveness of fibre-reinforced polymer in reducing corrosion in
marine environment 34
4.6.6 Bond enhancement for FRP pile repair in tidal waters 35
4.6.7 Effective repair for corrosion control using FRP wraps 37
5 DURABILITY TEST OF REPAIRING CONCRETE WITH FRP 41

5.1 Introduction 41
5.2 Specimens 41
5.2.1 Concrete 41
5.2.2 Reinforcement bars 42
5.2.3 Casting 43
5.2.4 Curing 44
5.2.5 FRP configuration 44
5.3 Test scheme 46
5.4 Accelerate corrosion test 47
5.4.1 Set up 47
5.5 Freeze/thaw test 49
5.5.1 Set up 49
5.6 Data collection 50
5.7 Results 50
5.7.1 Reinforcement bar mass loss 50
5.7.2 Crack propagation 54
5.7.3 Current resistance 58
5.7.4 Bond 58
5.8 Discussion & Conclusion 60
6 CASE STUDY 63
6.1 Introduction 63
6.2 Conditions 63
6.3 Cost analysis 63
IV CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

6.3.1 Performed repair 63
6.3.2 FRP repair 64
6.3.3 Sensitivity analysis 65
6.4 Result 66
7 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES 69
8 REFERENCES 71
CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 V

Preface
In this study interviews have been carried out with Stig Östfjord, Senior Adviser in
Civil Harbour Construction at Port of Gothenburg, Robert Klein, Engineer Diver at ÅF
Infrastructure AB, Martin Lindgren, Co-Owner at DAWAB Sweden AB and their
inputs have been valuable for the work.
The experiment in the study was carried out in the laboratory of the Department of
Structural Engineering at Chalmers University of Technology. The help from Carlos
Berrocal in the planning of the accelerated corrosion test by an impressed current,
Mohsen Heshmati in programming the climate chamber and Sebastian Almfeldt in the
laboratory work were of great appreciation.
This master thesis had not been possible without the technical knowledge, enthusiasm,
help and guidance from our supervisor Valbona Mara at ÅF infrastructure and examiner
Reza Haghani.
Göteborg June 2017

Johan Röös
August Uddmyr
VI CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Deterioration of concrete piles in marine structures due to harsh environmental
conditions has highlighted the need of continuous maintenance and renewal of such
structures. To repair these structures a new and emerging repair method is to wrap the
piles with fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) materials. The lightweight, high strength and
durability of FRP materials make them suitable for quick and efficient structural repairs
(Berver et al. 2001). This method has not been utilised in Sweden yet, but there is a
keen interest in the introduction of such methods, especially from the Port of
Gothenburg.
The modern part of the Port of Gothenburg is mainly built in concrete resting on piles
constructed in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s1. In the 50’s and 60’s due to lack of knowledge
about chloride ingress and its effect on reinforcement steel, concrete structures were
built with the belief that they were everlasting. However, in the 70’s concrete structures
were designed for a lifespan of 50 years. Along with poor maintenance until 2002 this
have created a significant need of repair of submerged concrete piles. The maintenance
budget for the Port of Gothenburg has increased since 2002 from 15 million to 200-250
million a year1 which has created the urge for new durable and efficient repair methods.
A submerged pile is divided into degradation zones dependent on the surrounding

conditions along the height of the pile (Yao 2016). The different zones are shown in
Figure 1 and starting from the top there is the atmospheric, splash/tidal, submerged and
mud zone. Worst effects of degradation are in the splash zone1 were continuous wetting
and drying occurs resulting in, for example, increased rate of corrosion and salt scaling.
Figure 1: The different degradation zones of a submerged pile
1
Stig Östfjord Port of Gothenburg, interview 30 Mars 2017
CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 1

1.2 Aim and objectives
The aim of this master thesis is to increase the knowledge and awareness of the FRP
repair method and to evaluate the effectiveness of this method for repairing submerged
concrete piles. Within the aim, six objectives are defined:
● What are the degradation causes of submerged concrete piles?

● What are the existing rehabilitation/repair methods today?
● What are the advantages/disadvantages of FRP repair of piles?
● How is this method executed onsite and what is the state-of-practice today?
● What are the durability benefits of repairing piles with FRP?
● What are the cost and intangible benefits of repairing piles with FRP?
● Experimental work to investigate if FRP wrapping of reinforced concrete has a
positive effect on corrosion rate.
1.3 Research approach

The aim is achieved by performing an extensive literature study and by interviews with
experts within the field. The interviewees are performed with Stig Östfjord, Senior
Adviser in Civil Harbor Construction at Port of Gothenburg, Martin Lindgren, Co-
Owner at DAWAB Sweden AB, and Robert Klein, Engineer Diver at ÅF Infrastructure
AB. The traditional techniques of repairing submerged piles are reviewed along with a
review of the new method consisting of repairing submerged piles with FRP. The
existing experience of this method is studied based on on-site applications. A case
study, with material provided by the Port of Gothenburg, is carried out where the costs
of a performed repair on a submerged concrete pile are compared with a hypothetical
FRP repair. Experimental work to study the durability of FRP wrapped concrete
specimens with a focus on corrosion resistance is carried out.
1.4 Limitations
The investigation is limited to the repair of existing submerged concrete piles with FRP
composites bonded with adhesives directly to the concrete. The causes of degradation
in Swedish climate and repair methods carried out underwater is studied.
In the experimental work to investigate the durability of FRP wrapped concrete

specimens, limitations are made to a bi-directional glass fibre reinforced polymer
(GFRP). The test is also limited to two layers of wrap applied by a wet layup with an
epoxy resin. The experimental work of accelerated long-term durability tests was
limited to two months. The evaluation of the durability tests is limited to measured
values of the steel mass loss and visual examination.
2 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

2 Degradation Causes of Submerged Concrete Piles
There are several degradation causes of submerged concrete piles that ultimately
requires the need of repair or retrofit of the piles. These can be damages resulting from
mechanical actions on the piles or by natural effects on the concrete and the
reinforcement steel. Mechanical actions are a physical impact on the piles, for example,
damages caused by piling or abrasion by drift ice. Natural effects can be initially
chemical resulting in loss of structural capacity or merely physical. The primary causes
of degradation are accounted for below.
2.1 Chemical causes

2.1.1 Chloride ingress
In a marine environment, chloride ions from the seawater penetrate the concrete and
disrupt the passive layer of the steel provided by the alkalinity of the concrete. The
ingress is specially located in the tidal/splash zone, where the salt is water-borne and
deposited to the surface by evaporation (Domone and Illston 2010). When the steel has
been de-passivated, a local anode can form in that area. The remaining steel forms a
cathode and electrons starts to flow from the anode to the cathode, resulting in corrosion
at the anode. The corrosion product, rust, has a larger volume than the original steel,
which creates an expansive force that leads to cracking, spalling and delamination of
concrete (Suh 2006), see Figure 2.
Figure 2: Spalled concrete and exposed corroded reinforcement (Robert Klein)
2.1.2 Sulphate attack

Sulphates in the seawater can react with the hydration products from the calcium
aluminate phases of the hardened cement (Domone and Illston 2010). These reactions
are expansive and form ettringite. Because the reaction is expansive it can cause cracks
and spalling, see Figure 3. The damage starts at corners and edges and progresses
inwards until failure. However, this process usually takes several years.

A delayed formation of ettringite can also occur from an internal sulphate attack during
the heat hardening of concrete. Ettringite formed during the cement hydration at normal
temperatures breaks down at temperatures higher than 70°C. The calcium silica hydrate
then absorbs the sulphates, but when the concrete cools down and hardens the sulphates
becomes active again and ettringite can re-form.
Figure 3: Vertical crack, ettringite (Robert Klein)
2.2 Mechanical causes

2.2.1 Freeze/thaw
Ice has 9% larger volume than water. Due to this, the volume of the water in the
concrete pores expands when it freezes (Domone and Illston 2010). If there is
insufficient space in the pores for the freezing water to expand an internal pressure is
created. Lower capillary porosity and a higher degree of saturation will increase the
pressure. The level of pressure also depends on if the pressure can be relieved through
an escape boundary. As result of the internal pressure, cracking and spalling can occur
and accumulate during freeze/thaw cycles. These phenomena occur in the splash zone
(Thoresen 2014).

2.2.2 Abrasion
The piles are mainly subjected to abrasion in the splash zone, see Figure 4. The sources
of the abrasion are waves and water-borne sediment and drift ice that wears on the
surface of the pile. Of this two, drift ice is the most severe which in time can wear
through the concrete cover and cause exposure of reinforcement (Bengtsson and
Thornström 2011). Newly-produced submerged piles are provided with an ice
protection to prevent this from occurring. However, in the Port of Gothenburg for the
modern docks built in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s no ice protection was included when the
piles were constructed1.
Figure 4: Abrasion in the splash zone (Robert Klein)
2.2.3 Accidental loads

The piles of a berth structure are protected from collisions with ships by the berth
platform2. However, there is a risk of collision with the piles when a ship needs to back
and turn out from the berth. The bulbous bow reaches out in front of the bow under the
water and as the ship backs and turns the bulbous bow can hit the piles under the berth
platform. This should usually be prevented by the bow thrust that pushes the bow out
from the berth, but strong side wind and insufficient bow thrust can cause accidents like
these to occur, see Figure 5.
Figure 5: Collision damage from ship (Robert Klein)
2
Robert Klein ÅF infrastructure, interview 9 February 2017

There is also a risk that piles get damaged when the port is dredged. The lack of vision
of where the underwater piles are located combined with the power of the excavator
enables the bucket to hit and cause damage during dredging close by the piles2.
In the port, ice layers can be pushed above and below each other by stream and ships.
The ice layers settle upon each other and form hard pressed ice blocks. The thrust from
ships can then cause these ice blocks to be slung into the piles causing damage upon
collision2.
2.2.4 Damage during production and installation

Damages on piles can occur already before installation. Defects can be missed at
production, introduced during transportation and/or at site. During installation of driven
piles horizontally aligned cracks can occur because of the applied stroke1,2, see Figure
6. Piles installed with an angle can intersect and accidentally collide during piling
resulting in cracks and spalling of concrete. Initial defects as these reduce the service
life of the piles, because of the reduced concrete cover which enables increased rate of
deterioration.
Figure 6: Horizontal cracks due to the applied stroke at installation

2.2.5 Salt scaling
In the tidal/splash zone of concrete piles, the salt will crystallise as the surface is
subjected to wetting and drying. The salt crystals are formed when the water evaporates
and the crystals will grow with continuous wetting and drying cycles (Domone and
Illston 2010). As the crystals grow, the pressure at the concrete surface will increase
which can cause disruption of the concrete. To reduce the deterioration due to salt
scaling a low permeability concrete can be used.
2.2.6 Scour
Deepening of the sea bottom by the removal of material can cause reduction of bearing
capacity for piles. Scour can influence bridge and berth piles as an effect of the massive
water streams caused by ships and the removal of sea bottom material can also be an
effect of active dredging1. As a result, the effective length of the piles increase and thus
also the buckling length. This leads to a decrease in bearing capacity and can require
strengthening or retrofit of the piles.
2.3 Concluding remarks

The first conclusion that can be made from studying degradation causes of submerged
piles are that the environment is harsh and the causes of degradation are several. In
Figure 7 the different degradation causes are summarised under the two groups,
mechanical and chemical. One type of deterioration is seldom alone to cause the
degradation in a submerged pile, for example, can physical degradations cause initial
damages and reduction of the concrete cover which enables faster penetration of
chlorides and sulphates.
Figure 7: Overview of degradation causes

The degradation causes have also been categorised after the zones where their effects
take place as shown in Figure 8. From this, the conclusion can be made that the
splash/tidal zone is the most common area for damages and need of repair.
From an interview with Stig Östfjord (Port of Gothenburg, 30 Mars 2017) conclusions
can be made that the most common degradation causes of submerged piles in the Port
of Gothenburg are due to installation damages and ettringite (sulphate attack).
Installation damages are due to the applied stroke when the piles are driven and
ettringite are due to heat hardening during the production of the piles.
Figure 8: Degradation causes at different zones of a submerged pile

3 Traditional Repairing of Submerged Piles
3.1 Introduction
Due to the harsh environment and the degradation causes mentioned in chapter 2, there
is a need for continuous repair of submerged piles with a focus on the splash/tidal zone.
However, in the Port of Gothenburg, the maintenance work has not always been
continuous. Almost no repair work had been done in the first 40-50 years1 of the piles’
service life. This has created an urge for repairs and large maintenance packages are
carried out every fifteenth year in the present.
To detect damaged piles and decide if, how and when they should be repaired, main
inspections are made every sixth year in the port1. The inspector evaluates the damage
on the piles and an engineer decides how severe the damages is to the construction and
if measures should be taken for repair. The result is analysed together with the project
manager and the administrator and a ten-year maintenance strategy is carried out. For
a repair to take place, the port of Gothenburg requires a minimum service life of 15-20
years of the repair. To achieve a reasonable solution the engineer designs the repair for
a theoretical service life of at least 40 years.
Most methods for pile reparation that can be applied above water can also be used under
water (Browne et al. 2010). However, the most efficient method above water may not
be the most efficient in a marine environment. A detailed planning of the work is of
great importance for an effective repair of submerged piles3. The marine environment
and the berth platform prevents easy access to the area in need of reparation. For the
repair work to take place, there are two alternatives, either the water must be excluded
from the area in need of repair or the work must be performed underwater.
One method to get access to the damaged area of the pile is to exclude the water by
installing cofferdams. There are cofferdams adjusted for pile repairs that consist of two
steel box halves that are put together from each side of the pile. Soft rubber is used to
seal the box and the water is pumped out. Thus, the repair can be performed under dry
conditions which increase the work rate. However, the temporary work of installing the
cofferdam and maintaining a dry environment is time-consuming and often results in
increased repair costs (Browne et al. 2010).
To perform repair work at wet conditions commercial divers are needed. They can start
the repair work more quickly as no installation of cofferdams is required. Divers also
provides high flexibility and they can move between different areas of the substructure
with ease. For the repair of berth and pier substructures, divers may provide the only
access method (McLeish 1994). Divers can perform complex repair work with
underwater adjusted equipment and they are most effective when the work is well
planned with easy to use components3 such as large bolts and pinholes.
3
Robert Klein ÅF infrastructure, interview 17 January 2017

3.2 Traditional repair methods
The cause and extent of degradation of a submerged concrete pile determine the most
suitable repair method. These can vary from providing a protective barrier from further
degradation to increasing the structural capacity. In the following subchapters, different
repairing methods are described.
3.2.1 Pile replacement

Replacements of complete piles can be necessary when for instance, the concrete is
subjected to ettringite or at severe damages of the structural integrity (Browne et al.
2010). Instead of removing the damaged pile, supplemental pile/piles, which fulfil the
same functions as the existing piles, are constructed in the vicinity of the damaged pile.
The construction is made possible by cutting holes in the deck/platform where the piles
are driven through. The pile cap and bracings are then modified to transfer the loads to
the new supplemental piles, see Figure 9, and the holes are repaired.
Figure 9: Supplemental pile bents (Browne et al. 2010)
Pile replacement is a labour intensive repair method (Browne et al. 2010). Lack of space
for supplemental piles may be a problem in a berth substructure with a high number of
structural members, for example a high number of piles.
3.2.2 Pile jacket

One method to repair piles is to cast a jacket of concrete along the full length or at the
damaged/deteriorated area of the pile (Browne et al. 2010). The encasement is
performed by divers and can offer both a protective barrier and an increased structural
capacity. For an increase in load bearing capacity, a reinforcement cage must be
included in the jacket.

At material degradation from within the concrete, such as ettringite, reparation of the
pile can be made by casting a new pile around the old1. The new pile is reinforced and
designed to replace the entire bearing capacity of the old pile.
Pile jackets can also be installed before degradation has occurred in a preventative
work. This is currently made in the port of Gothenburg where old piles without ice
protection are equipped with pile jackets1. These jackets are applied in the splash zone
and the concrete is cast in stay in place stainless steel forms which provide an extra
layer of abrasion resistance from drift ice.
The installation of a pile jacket is performed by following the steps:

• Pressure washing the surface to remove marine growth and loose material
(Browne et al. 2010).
• Applying a reinforcement cage around the pile if the structural capacity is in
need of an increase.
• If necessary, dredging the mud at the bottom for reaching the clay. The reason
to remove the mud is that it contains high amount of sulphates1. When the clay
is reached a bottom plug is installed which is left in place after concreting.
• Installing the formwork which is made by temporary forms of steel or glass fibre
reinforced composite material. These formworks consist of two half-cylindrical
parts that are bolted together around the pile and centred with clamps, see Figure
10.
• Pumping the concrete into the form from the bottom up by pressure.
• Removing the formwork after the concrete is cured.
Figure 10: Cylindrical forms in steel for submerged concrete casting, (Robert Klein)
Pile jackets increase the size of the piles and thereby the self-weight and the effective
area for current and wave loads also increases and the risk of buckling enhances. The
main drawback with underwater concreting is to often fail in achieving the best result
of the cast, especially in jacketing were thin layers of concrete are applied under
pressure1. The jacketing requires a high experience and good workmanship from the
divers and according to Thoresen (2014) lack of skill and expertise is one of the most
common causes of damages during underwater casting of concrete. In the port of
Gothenburg low downtime of the berths is of the essence, this creates a need for several
diving crews working simultaneously on major reparations. Here the urge for short
stoppage can compromise the quality of the repair due to lack of enough skilled and
experienced diving teams. Installing the formwork around piles in a berth structure can

be problematic where divers can’t be assisted by cranes 4 . This creates a dangerous
working environment where the form needs to be transported to the piles and lifted in
place by the diver.
3.3 Common procedures in underwater repair

3.3.1 Surface preparation
Marine growth such as algae, barnacles, muscles and seaweed develops at the surface
of submerged piles (McLeish 1994). This growth can both increase and decrease the
integrity of the structure where algae growth can seal the concrete while seaweed has
root systems that can grow into cracks and cause bursting actions. It is impossible to
inspect and estimate damages in the piles without removing the marine growth and
therefore it is removed before any inspection or reparation are performed (Browne et
al. 2010), see Figure 11. A clean surface is essential to enhance the bond between the
existing structure and the repair material in case of restoration. The cleaning is often
made by pressure washing the concrete surface with high-pressure water jets4. Due to
the surrounding water, the pressure decrease and the stream enlarge. Therefore, the jet
tube must be held close to the concrete surface to remove marine growth and break out
deteriorated concrete. For using high-pressure water jets efficiently, the divers must
attach themselves to the pile. Otherwise, the force of the water stream pushes them
away from the pile.
a) b)
Figure 11: a) Before surface preparation, b) after surface preparation
4
Martin Lindgren, Dawab Sverige AB, interview 21 April 2017

3.3.2 Reinforcing
New reinforcement bars are applied around the piles to replace the corroded
reinforcement or to increase the cross-sectional steel area so that the structural capacity
of the pile can be restored or improved. When removing corroded reinforcement bars,
hydraulically powered cutting tools can be used. It can be necessary to remove sound
concrete to provide the new reinforcement with a sufficient splice or anchorage area
(Browne et al. 2010). The removal of sound concrete can be reduced by using
reinforcement bars with small diameters which require less splicing length and
anchorage areas compared with bars with larger diameters. Reinforcement bars that are
not replaced should be cleaned with a high-pressure water jet to remove rust. At smaller
repair works, powered wire brushing can be used instead. For an increase of the service
life of a concrete repair, a reinforcement mesh should be applied even if the present
cross-sectional steel area is sufficient.
3.3.3 Casting concrete

The first method for underwater concreting was patented in 1910 by the Norwegian
engineer August Gundersen (Thoresen 2014). The key was, and still is, to separate the
fresh concrete and the water during the concreting and to prevent the cement to be
washed out. This is a complicated process that should be performed by experienced
divers to increase the quality of the work.
Divers carry out the casting of concrete underwater with the help of a hydraulic pump
which creates a pressure to transport the concrete through a pipe into a form (Browne
et al. 2010). The concrete used for underwater repairs is often low permeable and frost
resistant. The form is filled from the bottom and upwards to prevent washout as the
water floats upon the concrete and are pushed out from the form at the top.

To obtain and decide the need of repair for submerged piles, main inspections are
carried out every sixth year. The process, from detecting the damage to performing the
repair work is summarised in Figure 12. In the case of severe damages, the strategy and
repair can be executed more quickly.
Figure 12: Main inspection every 6:th year. Inspection year one, strategy year two and repair year three.

The reparation of submerged piles can be made to restore the structural capacity and to
restore the protective layer for degradation. Preventative work can also be undertaken
to increase the service life of the submerged pile. These are summarised with the
conventional repair methods in Figure 13.
Figure 13: Map of repair methods and their purpose
The most common repair method is pile jacketing which is installed by a process that
requires high experience and skilled workmanship. It is hard to guarantee a high quality
of submerged concreting and the work is often carried out under tight time schedules
to minimise the stoppage of the berth. In Figure 14 the advantages and disadvantages
for pile jackets are shown.
Figure 14: Pile jacket, advantages and disadvantages
The lack of skill for an underwater casting of concrete in thin layers has led to the urge
of new repairing methods that are more efficient and easier to install. Restoring and
strengthening piles by underwater concreting is a time-consuming technique and since
the berths downtime is of essence the need of new repair methods that are sound, quick
and durable has emerged.

4 FRP Repair of Submerged Piles
4.1 Introduction of the material
Fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) materials are composite materials made of fibre
reinforcement embedded in a resin matrix. The fibres carry the load while the resin
binds the fibres together, transfers loads between the fibres and provides protection to
the fibres. FRP materials are generally anisotropic depending on the fibre orientation.
By determining the arrangement of the fibres within the composite, specific material
properties can be achieved which allows an optimal use of the FRP. The particular
application of the FRP composite influences the choice of fibres and resin. In particular,
the choice is affected by cost, surrounding conditions, required service life and needed
strength (Au 2001).
4.1.1 Fibres
The properties of the FRP material are dependent on both the fibres and the resin. The
fibres can either be in different forms, such as discontinuous or continuous fibres
weaved randomly or in specific directions to achieve the desired properties. In structural
applications continuous fibres are mostly used (Au 2001). The most common types of
fibres used in the construction industry for FRP composites are glass, carbon and
aramid fibres.
4.1.1.1 Glass fibres

There are three different types of glass fibres adapted for various applications:
electrical, structural and corrosion glass. Electrical glass has great electrical insulation
features and is the most used one in civil engineering because of its lower cost (Berver
et al. 2001). Compared to electrical glass, structural glass fibres have higher strength
and corrosion glass fibres have greater resistance to corrosive environments. Glass
fibres are the most commonly used fibre type in civil engineering because it is more
economical than carbon fibre and still can provide high strength.
4.1.1.2 Carbon fibres

In contrast to glass fibres, carbon fibres are electrically conductive. Carbon fibres have
higher strength and are more brittle than glass fibres (Berver et al. 2001). Carbon fibres
have high fatigue resistance but are five to ten times more expensive than glass fibre.
4.1.1.3 Aramid fibres

Aramid fibres, also known by the commercial name Kevlar fibres, are organic and have
significant thermal resistance (Au 2001). Like carbon fibres, aramid fibres have high
fatigue resistance and high strength. The impact resistance of aramid fibres is greater
than for carbon fibres. However, the stiffness of aramid is considerably lower than the
stiffness of glass. Drawbacks with aramid fibres are their tendency to poor bonding
with most matrices and high absorption of moisture. Aramid is also sensitive to
ultraviolet radiation. Thus, it is not preferable in harsh environments.

4.1.2 Resin Matrices
The matrix is considered as the secondary material in FRP and influences the transverse
strength, shear and compression properties of the composite. Polymer matrices are
classified as thermoplastics or thermoset depending on their structure and behaviour
(Harichandran and Imad Baiyasi 2000). Thermoplastics soften or melt when heated and
hardens when cooled. This is reversible and thermoplastics can be reshaped by
reheating. For thermosets, the polymers cross-link and can therefore not be reshaped
after curing and remain solid when heated. In contrast to thermosets, thermoplastics
have higher impact strength and show better resistance to fracture and micro cracking.
However, they are not commonly used in structural applications due to their ability to
be reshaped.
Epoxy and polyester polymers are the most common used thermosetting resin matrices
due to their good chemical resistance and good adhesion abilities. The polyester resin
shows great mechanical properties and good environmental durability and is the most
commonly used matrix because it is less expensive than epoxy (Berver et al. 2001).
However, the adhesion for polyester to carbon and aramid is poor and the shrinkage
during curing is significant. Thus polyester is not as widely used in the construction
industry (Au 2001). Epoxy is superior to polyester regarding chemical and moisture
resistance. Epoxy resins show excellent mechanical properties and provide better
adhesion to more kinds of fibres than polyester and also good adhesion to substrates.
Therefore, epoxy is the most commonly used resin for repairing civil structures, and
the most expensive one.
Advancements in resin development have brought resins that can cure under water.
These resins are refined in the sense that the amines, the hardener, are aromatic and
water repellent, so that they react with the base and not water molecules 5 in contrastto
conventional resins, where the hardener is based on aliphatic amines that are water-
soluble. An example of such a resin is Fyfe’s Tyfo SW-1 underwater epoxy. There
are also resins that are water-activated and cure upon contact with water, such as the
proprietary urethane resin system in the Aquawrap by Air Logistics which cures
through a chemical reaction with water.
4.2 Reasons to use FRP

FRP composites have since the 80’s been a promising material for repair and
strengthening of concrete structures in civil engineering due to its advantageous
properties compared to other traditional construction materials (Sen and Mullins
2007b). The development of resins that can be applied and cured in water has made the
repair and strengthening with FRP composites a valid solution also for submerged
structures.
Compared with concrete jacketing, which is the most common repair method for
submerged concrete piles, there are several advantages of using FRP composites
instead. The composites high strength to weight ratio, which is several times greater
than for steel, and stiffness to weight ratio, lead to that repair and strengthening of
structures can be made without any substantial addition of weight or sectional area
5
Jonny Augustsson ([email protected]) (8 May 2017) Fråga till NM Lab. Personal mail to Johan
Röös ([email protected])

(Berver et al. 2001). Before curing, FRP materials are very flexible, which allows for
fit to any shape of the existing structure. Since FRP materials are lightweight and easy
to manage, they can provide a quick and easy installation without the need of heavy
machinery or tools which are required to install the heavy formwork for concrete
jacketing.
FRP is a dense and durable material and has excellent resistance to harsh environments
such as in marine conditions. By wrapping concrete piles with FRP materials the
migration of water, oxygen and ions into the concrete can be reduced and thus the
corrosion process and the formation of ettringite can be impeded (Wootton, Spainhour,
and Yazdani 2003). FRP wraps also provide confinement which will keep the concrete
from spalling due to the expansive forces caused by corrosion or ettringite.
Confinement of the piles also increases the axial strength and ductility due to increased
lateral pressure.
FRP materials can cure rapidly, which makes them beneficial for emergency repairs
where fast restoration is of the essence. Even though the initial costs of FRP materials
are high, the quick and easy installation means lower construction costs and minimal
time for the structure to be closed. Thus, the total cost of repairing a structure with FRP
may be lower than for other methods.
4.3 Limitations of FRP composites

The long-term behaviour is not well known but what is understood is that the properties
of FRP composite materials are affected by temperature and moisture content variations
and ultraviolet radiation.
The resistance of FRP composites to weathering is highly reliant on the resin matrix.
The most notable cause of degradation of resins is ultraviolet radiation as it causes
crosslinking degradation of the resin (Au 2001). This results in chalking of the resin
and making it more brittle.
High temperature variations increase the water absorption for FRP composites and
moisture leads to bond failure between the fibres and the matrix (Harichandran and
Imad Baiyasi 2000). Glass fibres are liable to moisture attack as they swell when
absorbing moisture causing expansive internal forces in the composite and moisture
also causes strength reduction of the fibres.
4.4 FRP repair method

The intention with an FRP repair method is to provide a quick and efficient repair with
externally bonded FRP composites. It can be applied along the whole height of the pile
or just over a particular area, such as the splash zone. The idea is that the low permeable
FRP material with good resistance to harsh environments will provide the pile with a
protective layer and thus increase the durability of the pile. Instead of replacing or
installing new reinforcement the structural capacity can be restored or improved by the
externally bonded FRP material. The usage of resins that can cure underwater allows
the wrap to be applied by divers at the submerged area of the pile.

4.4.1 State of practice
The state of practice for FRP repair of submerged concrete structures has been
reviewed. The focus is put on the method and the on-site application.
4.4.1.1 Friendship trails bridge

In (Sen and Mullins 2004) a field demonstration project in the application of FRP
composites for underwater pile repair has been performed. The project was carried out
on the Friendship Trails Bridge, which is part of a bridge network that spans Tampa
Bay between St. Petersburg and Tampa. The Friendship Trails Bridge was built in 1956
for vehicular traffic and the original plan was to demolish it in 1997 due to the
construction of the new Gandy Bridge but instead, it was converted to a pedestrian
bridge. The environment in Tampa Bay is harsh which has led to that 77 percent of the
piles in need for repair due to corrosion.
In this study, eight piles were selected, two for control and six for a demonstration of
the FRP pile repair method. The selected piles were equipped with two probes each,
see Figure 15, for comparing the corrosion rate by measuring the galvanic current
between the two sensors.
Figure 15: FRP wrapping area and probe placement (Sen and Mullins 2007a)
Two repair system were used, a pre-preg and a wet layup system. The pre-preg system,
which is called Aquawrap® and developed by Airlogistic, uses a water-activated resin
pre-impregnated in the FRP material, in this case both carbon fibre reinforced polymer
(CFRP) and glass fibre reinforced polymer (GFRP). The wet layup system, developed
by Fyfe, consists of Tyfo SEH-51A glass fibre weave and Tyfo SW-1 underwater
epoxy. The design of the wrap was made from an estimated capacity loss of 20 % due

to corrosion, see Figure 16. This resulted in the configuration of FRP showed in Table
1 with the material properties in Table 2.
Table 1: Repair system used for different piles.
Repair system Specimen type Longitudinal Transverse

Pre-preg/Aquawrap Carbon 1 layer 2 layers
Carbon 1 layer 2 layers
Glass 2 layers 4 layers
Wet layup/Tyfo Glass 2 layers 4 layers
Table 2: Material properties Aquawrap and Tyfo SEH-51A
Fabrics Composite Tensile strength Tensile modulus

[MPa] [GPa]
Aquawrap Uni-directional 586 35.9
glass fibre
Bi-directional 324 20
glass fibre
Uni-directional 827 75.8
carbon fibre
Bi-directional 586 22.0
carbon fibre
Tyfo SEH-51 Uni-directional 460 20.9
GFRP
Figure 16: Interaction diagram for corrosion repair of piles (Sen and Mullins 2007a)
For accessing the piles, a lightweight four-parted scaffolding system with cut-outs for
the piles was built and installed. The scaffolding was suspended from the pile cap, see
Figure 17 at a height that allowed the wrap to be applied from the pile cap and 1,84 m
down.

Figure 17: Scaffolding system suspended from the pile cap (Sen and Mullins 2007a)
With the access system in place, surface preparation was performed before wrapping.
Marine growth was removed with a scrapper and projecting parts of the concrete were
removed with a hammer and a chisel. Because the cross-sections of the piles were
rectangular, all four corners were ground to a 19 mm radius with an underwater
pneumatic grinder to avoid stress concentrations in the wrap. Voids in the surface of
the piles were filled with a quick-setting hydraulic cement to provide a smooth surface.
Just before wrapping the final preparation was to pressure wash the surface to remove
dust, debris and marine growth.
The pre-preg system was pre-impregnated with resin at the factory and arrived at the
work site in hermetically sealed pouches. Before the bags were opened Aquawrap®
base primer 4 was applied by hand on the prepared surface. The carbon fibre was used
in a longitudinal layer of uni-directional fibre, see Figure 18a, followed by two
transverse layers of bi-directional fibres, see Figure 18b. The transverse layers were
spirally wrapped around the pile without overlap. For the glass fibre wrap the same
process as the carbon fibre was used and repeated because of the double number of
layers. To consolidate the wrap and provide a better finish both the CFRP and GFRP
system was applied with a glass fibre veil that was wrapped with a 50 mm overlap. For
maintaining the wrap in place while curing, a plastic shrink film was used. The whole
wrapping procedure was made in less than one hour a pile. This was within the working
time of the Aquawrap® which according to (“Aquawrap®” 2017) is one hour. After a
day of curing the plastic film were removed and the wrap was painted with base primer
4 for protection against UV radiation.

a) b)
Figure 18: a) Applying the longitudinal CFRP layer (Sen and Mullins 2004), b) Applying the second transverse
CFRP layer (Sen and Mullins 2007a)

In the wet layup, the resin was impregnated by hand on-site which provided higher
flexibility of wrap lengths but also more planning of the logistics. One of the two piles
were wrapped using different epoxies for the dry and the submerged region. However,
this pile was re-wrapped three months later because of poor bonding in the dry area.
The weak bonding was a result of wave action and splashing, which made the dry region
wet. For the re-wrap, the epoxy was impregnated in the fabric with a resin impregnator,
see Figure 19, and the wrapping procedure was the same as for the pre-preg system.
Figure 19: On site saturation of fibreglass fabric (Sen and Mullins 2007a)
The galvanic current was measured during 160 days and due to that the currents were
very small and inconclusive no conclusions could be made about the effect wrapping
of piles have on corrosion rate (Sen and Mullins 2004).
Two years after the wrapping the bond strength was tested with a pull-out test (Sen and
Mullins 2007a). The results showed that the bond was poor with inter-layer failure
between the FRP layers for the pre-preg system and epoxy failure between the FRP and
concrete for the wet-layup. It also showed that the pre-preg system performed better in
the dry region and that the wet layup performed better in the wet region.
Rajan and Mullins conclude that the FRP repair system is viable for repairing of
corroded piles. The pre-preg system was easier to use than the wet layup, but the wet
layup provided greater flexibility than the pre-preg system. They also report that the
utilised scaffolding system in the field demonstration was inexpensive and quickly
fabricated.

4.4.1.2 Allen Creek Bridge
In Mullins et al. (2005) a field study is carried out to demonstrate underwater FPR repair
of prestressed piles. The study was made on Allen Creek Bridge which was constructed
in 1951 and widened to six lanes in 1982. The piles of the old part of the bridge are
500x500 mm reinforced concrete piles and those of the widened section are 350x350
mm prestressed concrete piles. The bridge is in the city of Clearwater and the water in
the creek flows into Old Tampa Bay. Due to the harsh environment, the piles have been
repaired several times.
Four of the 350x350 mm prestressed piles were selected for the study, two as control
piles without wrap, one with glass fibre and one with carbon fibre with the Aquawrap
system. As in (Sen and Mullins 2007a) the pre-preg system arrived at the work site pre-
impregnated with resin in hermetically sealed pouches and with the same material
properties as for the Aquawrap® in Table 2. The wrapping area of the pile was from
230 mm above the high-water line to 230 mm below the low water line, see Figure 20.
For measuring the corrosion rate, a probe system was installed before the application
of the wrap. The system is shown in Figure 21, and it measures the change in corrosion
potential due to the application of an incremental current or voltage. From the change
in potential, the corrosion rate can be determined by linear polarisation.
Figure 20: FRP wrapping are of pile Figure 21: Setup for measuring the corrosion rate
(Mullins et al. 2005)
The designing of the wrap was made in two steps. First, a strain compatibility analysis
was carried out for restoring a 20% strain loss. Second, this layup was checked if it
could withstand post repair expansion due to corrosion.
Before the application of the wrap, surface preparation was made by the same
procedures as in (Sen and Mullins 2007a). But because the piles were in shallow waters,
the work could be executed standing in the water without a scaffolding system or divers.

In the study, application of the carbon fibre composites was performed with one
longitudinal and two transversal layers. The first longitudinal layer was applied to the
pile in pre-cut 305x1524 mm long strips. These were placed on each side of the pile
which was pre-saturated with an underwater epoxy adhesive. The bi-directional carbon
fibre was then wrapped transverse and spirally from the top and down without overlap.
When the bottom was reached the next layer of carbon fibre was wrapped in the same
manner but starting from the bottom and up. For ease of wrapping rolls of 305 mm wide
and 5-6 m were used to apply the transverse layers. Water was sprayed at the area
located above the water to activate the resin. To provide a better finish and conceal the
wrap a 254 mm wide pre-preg veil of glass fibre were applied from the bottom up with
an overlap of 50 mm. Lastly, a plastic stretch film was used for securing the wrap during
curing. After one day of curing the plastic stretch film was removed and the wrap was
painted with an ultraviolet radiation protective paint. The entire wrapping was made
within one hour per pile.
The application of the glass fibre was made with the same procedure as for carbon fibre
except for that the number of layers was doubled.
After 413 days, the study showed that the corrosion rate of the wrapped specimens was
lower than for the control samples. The results for carbon fibre and glass fibre were
comparable. Mullins et al. (2005) conclude that underwater wrapping is a viable system.
The study also showed that the bond between the wet concrete and the FRP was poor.
However, laboratory tests showed that the bond strength was sufficient for the FRP
system to restore the capacity of the pile to the original.
4.4.1.3 Innovative FRP piling repair without the use of cofferdams

Two 305 mm square piles of a bridge over North River in North Carolina were restored
with an FRP system according to (Bazinet, Cerone, and Worth 2002). The bridge,
located in tidal waters was in need of repair to reduce further degradation due to spalling
from freeze/thaw cycles, splash zone water flow and corrosion of reinforcement.
The chosen repair system was a pre-preg system consisting of three layers of bi-
directional glass fibre and one layer of a veil. In the case of rectangular piles as in this
study, an epoxy layer must be applied between the concrete and the wrap. If the piles
instead are circular the bond strength provided by the pre-impregnated resin is adequate
on its own. The system had no volatile organic compound and was approved by NSF
International, which is a public health and safety organisation, as environmentally
friendly.
This system was applied from 350 mm below the low water line and up to the pile cap
resulting in an area along 2.44 m and 1.83 m of the first respectively the second pile.
The installation was made by first preparing the concrete surface. For the first pile, this
was made by thoroughly cleaning and patching the surface while the second pile only
was cleaned and marginally patched. When the surface preparation for the piles had
been performed, an underwater epoxy was applied to the concrete surface, see Figure
22a. The wrap was then applied using 200 mm wide rolls starting from the top of the
pile. One turn was wrapped around the top then the wrapping continued spirally
downwards without overlap. At the bottom one turn of wrapping was made before

proceeding back up. This was made until three layers were applied see Figure 22c.
Above the waterline, water had to be sprayed on the surface before wrapping to activate
the resin. To consolidate the wrap and provide a better finish a 250 mm wide veil was
wrapped with a 50 mm overlap. During curing the pile was also wrapped with a
temporary plastic stretch film, see Figure 22d. After removal of the stretch film, a layer
of epoxy adhesive was applied to the wrap as a protective coating. The entire operation
was made in less than a day by a crew that were new with this installation. The total
man hours were eighteen for the contractor staff and six for the diving team.
a)
b)
c) d)
Figure 22: Installation of Aquawrap repair system, a) epoxy applied by hand above water, b) epoxy applied by
divers below water, c) divers wrapping bi-directional GFRP, d) divers wrapping the plastic stretch film6
6
Franz Worth ([email protected]) (11 May 2017) Report of splash zone repair – Master thesis.
Personal mail to August Uddmyr ([email protected])

4.4.1.4 54” OD bridge pile reinforcement & repair
In 2012 a barge collided and damaged several 54” OD concrete piles of Chesapeake
Bay Bridge (Neptune Research Inc 2012). The damages were located in the splash zone,
in which the concrete cracked and exposed the reinforcement, see Figure 23. Site
conditions as tidal currents and rough waves increased the difficulties using traditional
repair methods.
Figure 23: Damaged pile at Chesapeake Bay bridge (Neptune Research Inc 2012)
The piles were repaired with Neptune Research Incorporate (NRI) product Titan-218
carbon fibre with Titan saturant epoxy. The application was made by pressure washing
the surface, resurface the concrete with a cementitious concrete patch, applying the
epoxy to the surface and impregnating the carbon fibre, see Figure 24a. The carbon
fibre was bi-directional and wrapped spirally in two layers from 1.8 m above to 1.8 m
below the waterline, see Figure 24b. During curing the wrap was secured with a plastic
shrink wrap, see Figure 24c.
a) b) c)
Figure 24: a) saturating carbon fibre with epoxy, b) application of the CFRP to the pile, c) applying plastic
shrink wrap to keep the wrap in place during curing (Neptune Research Inc 2012)
Repairing with the Titan system was according to Neptune Research Inc (2012) an
effective repair method adding structural integrity to the damaged piles. It was made
with minimal resources without disturbing the traffic.
4.4.1.5 Carbon FRP repair of underwater bridge piers

In 2012 QuakeWrap repaired the piles of Bay View Bridge. The piles were partially
submerged and subjected to several wet/dry cycles a day due to natural ocean tide
(QuakeWrap 2012). This caused severe corrosion in the splash zone of the reinforced
concrete piles.

QuakeWrap FRP repair system consisting of carbon fibre and their QuakeBond J333
epoxy resin was used to repair these piles. This system was chosen to achieve a long-
term and maintenance-free solution. The system was applied from the pile cap to a
couple of feet below the low water line. To provide a better finish the surface was
painted.
The reparation was made in 2007 and five years later, 2012, QuakeWrap revisit the
bridge. They observed marine growth and some paint loss in the submerged region, but
no damages to the FRP system, see Figure 25.
a) b)
Figure 25: CFRP repair of piles, a) directly after installation, b) revisit five years later (QuakeWrap 2012)
4.4.1.6 Port of Gothenburg

In the port of Gothenburg, full scale tests have been carried out on piles with a repair
system called pile cap1. This system consists of a glass fibre fabric with an epoxy grout
and it was sealed with Syntho-glass. Syntho-glass is a pre-impregnated glass fibre that
is water activated that originally have been used for sealing piles.
The application of the system was made by divers that had been certified on the system
under training in a controlled environment1. It was carried out on three “out-of-action”
piles that could be removed and sent for analysis at RISE which is a technical research
institute in Sweden. Testing was made on strength, permeability and soaking leaching
under accelerated long-term testing to determine the long-time behaviour. The result of
the pile cap system with Syntho-glass was an increase of seven years in the service life
of the piles. This was regarded as an insufficient increase of the service life and the Port
of Gothenburg are currently investigating two other alternatives both involving Syntho-
glass. The first option is to wrap the first layer with a thick stretch film followed by
Syntho-glass and the second is to wrap the pile with Denso tape and Syntho-glass1.
4.5 Limitations for repair with FRP

Wrapping concrete piles with FRP could lead to trapping moisture and chlorides inside
the concrete and because of the wrap the concrete may not be able to dry out and thus,
enhance the corrosion process. If the pile isn’t completely wrapped moisture may find
its way behind the wrap, through the concrete, and deteriorate the bond between the
FRP and concrete. Moisture trapped behind the wrap can upon freezing increase

considerably in volume and also damage the wrap. Since the wrap surrounds the pile,
it may be difficult to detect what is going on behind it by visual inspection.
Abrasion and physical damage can cause cracks and fracture in the wraps making them
ineffective as it leads to easier access for moisture. Exposure of the FRP wrap to
ultraviolet radiation acts as a synergy effect as it causes embrittlement of the resin and
thus lower crack resistance upon impact.
The surface preparations of piles to be repaired with FRP wraps are of great importance
to achieve an efficient repair with a good bond. Depending on the particular case this
could be a limitation of the FRP repair method as proper grinding and smoothening of
the surface can be a time-consuming procedure.
As the resin protects the fibres, it is important to provide the resin with protection.
Therefore, to prohibit degradation of the composite, there is a need for protective
coatings.
4.6 Literature review of experimental studies

Several other research projects have been made to evaluate the durability of FRP
wrapped reinforced concrete. This section focuses on experimental studies that have
investigated the durability by subjecting specimens to accelerated corrosion by an
impressed current and by subjection specimens to wet/dry and freeze/thaw cycles. In
addition, it includes studies on the bond between FRP wraps and concrete.
4.6.1 Corrosion potentials of lightweight concrete wrapped with fibre

reinforced polymers (FRP)
Goucher (2013) studied how wrapping reinforced concrete with FRP would affect the
corrosion for both lightweight and normal concrete. Forty-two concrete cylinders with
a diameter of 50 mm and a height of 100 mm with one single reinforcement bar in the
centre were subjected to an accelerated corrosion test by an impressed current. The
samples were submerged in 5% saltwater and the test lasted for 50 days. As a sample
failed, it was removed from the test and analysed considering reinforcement bar mass
loss and time to failure. Failure incorporated current spike due to concrete cracking,
FRP separation from the concrete and rupture of the FRP. Goucher used three different
FRP systems. One glass FRP Tyfo SEH-51A system, one carbon FRP Tyfo SCH-41
system and one carbon FRP SikaWrap Hex 103C system. To declare for the legend in
the figures in this section, the labelling of specimens was according to: LW or NW
(lightweight or normalweight concrete), G or C (glass or carbon FRP), F or S (Fyfe or
Sika) and 1L or 2L (1 or 2 layers of wrap).
The research showed that FRP wrapped specimens, both lightweight and normal
concrete, had better protection against corrosion than unwrapped specimens, see Figure
26. Samples with two layer wraps performed better than samples with one layer wraps.
Overall wrapped specimens had longer life span and less reinforcement bar mass loss
than those who were unwrapped, see Figure 27 and Figure 28.

Figure 26: Average reinforcement bar mass loss (Goucher 2013)
Figure 27: Lightweight concrete sample test life (Goucher 2013)

Figure 28: Normalweight concrete sample test life (Goucher 2013)
4.6.2 Repair of corrosion-damaged columns using FRP wraps

Baiyasi et. al. (2000) studied the effects of repairing corrosion damaged concrete with
FRP wraps of both carbon and glass. The durability of FRP wrapped concrete
specimens subjected to freeze/thaw and the corrosion rate for such specimens through
accelerated corrosion test were examined. Cylindrical test specimens with dimensions
of 152 mm diameter and 305 mm height were tested. The samples were provided with
four reinforcing bars and the test was set up so that two of the bars were anodic and the
other two cathodic. 24 concrete cylinders were submerged in 3% saltwater and exposed
to accelerated corrosion for 13 days before being wrapped. After wrapping the
accelerated corrosion was resumed and specimens were removed from the test at two
different stages, after 130 days and 190 days, and analysed considering the
reinforcement bar mass loss. The test showed that FRP wraps effectively reduced the
corrosion rate by up to 59% compared to unwrapped specimens and that carbon and
glass FRP impedes the corrosion equally. They also examined the effect of bonded and
un-bonded FRP wraps and concluded that unbonded specimens had 20% higher
corrosion rate than bonded specimens. The freeze/thaw test was made on 30 specimens
similar to those in the accelerated corrosion test. The specimens were subjected to 300
freeze/thaw cycles and an expansive internal force, created by filling a longitudinal
centric hole in the specimens with expanding cement, simulating the internal force by
corroding steel. After the freeze/thaw cycles, the samples were subjected to
compression strength tests. The study showed that the freeze/thaw environment did not
cause any substantial damage to the FRP wrapped specimens as there was no significant
difference in compression strength compared to the wrapped specimens which weren’t
subjected to freeze/thaw.

4.6.3 Corrosion of steel reinforcement in carbon fibre-reinforced
polymer wrapped concrete cylinders
Spainhour et. al. (2003) studied how the application of carbon FRP wraps affects the
corrosion of reinforcing steel in concrete. Different types of epoxy, the orientation of
the fibre wrap and different numbers of layers were studied. A total of 42 cylindrical
concrete specimens with diameter of 51 mm and a height of 102 mm reinforced with
one steel bar in the centre of the specimen were used for the test. The test incorporated
accelerated corrosion through an impressed anodic current and the concrete specimens
together with the cathodes, consisting of steel bars, were placed in 5% saltwater. The
accelerated corrosion test run continuously and as a sample failed it was removed.
Failure included cracking of concrete, a spike in current flow or disruption of the wrap.
The mass loss of the reinforcement bar and the chloride content of the failed specimens
were then studied. The research showed that samples wrapped with FRP had beneficial
measurements regarding service life, mass loss and chloride content compared to
unwrapped samples. They conclude that corrosion of steel in concrete is impeded by
the wrapping of carbon FRP composites. The research shows that wrapped specimens
have up to 375% longer life span than unwrapped and that unwrapped specimens have
over seven times higher corrosion rate than wrapped samples. They also conclude that
samples with two layer wraps performed better than samples with one layer wraps, but
increasing the wraps to three layers showed no considerable improvement compared
with two layers.
4.6.4 Corrosion of steel reinforcements embedded in FRP wrapped

concrete
Gadve et. al. (2009) studied the further development of corrosion in reinforced concrete
after wrapping the concrete with both carbon and glass FRP. The research consisted of
concrete cylinders subjected to accelerated corrosion by an impressed current. The
specimens were cylinders with a diameter of 100 mm and a height of 230 mm with one
reinforcement bar in the centre. The cathode consisted of a stainless-steel mesh. The
cathode and the concrete cylinders were submerged in 3.5% saltwater and then exposed
to anodic current. Before wrapping the specimens with FRP they were corroded in three
different categories, pre-corrosion of specimens for 2, 4 and 8 days, respectively. This
was done to model alternative corrosion damage before wrapping. After the specimens
were wrapped, they were subjected to further accelerated corrosion for 24 days. At the
end of the test, the samples were analysed by reinforcement bar mass loss and pull-out
tests to study the effects of FRP wraps on the corrosion of steel. The pull-out force for
specimens with FRP wraps was significantly higher than for unwrapped specimens,
whereas the reinforcement bar mass loss was significantly lower for wrapped specimens
compared with unwrapped specimens. Figure 29 shows the reinforcement bar mass loss
versus pull-out strength. In the test, they also evaluated the resistance of the specimens
as higher resistance indicates better protection of the reinforcement bar by subjecting
the samples to a constant current of 100 mA and measuring the cell voltage. Figure 30,
Figure 31 and Figure 32 shows the cell voltages for the specimens wrapped after 2, 4
and 8 days respectively. From the results, they concluded that applying FRP wraps on
concrete with embedded steel impedes the rate of corrosion.

Figure 29: Variation of pull-out strength with % reinforcement bar mass loss (Gadve et al. 2009)
Figure 30: Cell voltage for specimens wrapped after 2 days with glass (G-2) and carbon (C-2) FRP (Gadve et al.
2009)

2009)
2009)

4.6.5 Effectiveness of fibre-reinforced polymer in reducing corrosion
in marine environment
Suh et al. (2007) investigated the effectiveness of FRP in reducing corrosion in a marine
environment. This was made by accelerated long-term durability testing on twenty-two
pre-stressed specimens with the cross-section of 150x150 mm and length of 1520 mm,
see Figure 33. The splash zone was fabricated along 550 mm of the centre of the pile
with a 3% chloride content by weight. To allow potential measurements inside the
wrapped region, the specimens were made with embedded reference electrodes which
can be seen in Figure 33.
Figure 33: Geometry of specimens (Suh et al. 2007)
The wrapping was made over a length of 910 mm at the centre of the specimen,
extending 175 mm above and below the chloride contaminated area. Sixteen specimens
were wrapped with 1-4 layers of FRP, eight with CFRP and eight with GFRP. The
accelerated long-term durability testing was made during three years of tidal
simulations in a 3.5% salt water solution. Twenty specimens were placed in an outdoor
tank and two of the control specimens were placed in an indoor tank to provide a
controlled environment. The tide in the tanks were changed every 6 hours where the
water level, from the bottom, changed between 800 mm at high tide to 350 mm at low
tide. The corrosion rate was measured with linear polarisation during the test. The result
showed that the average corrosion rate of the control specimens was 0.018 mm/year
while the corrosion rate of the wrapped specimens was 0.0055 mm/year. Both the linear
polarisation and gravimetric testing showed that CFRP and GFRP were equally
effective in reducing corrosion. The result of the gravimetric testing, see Table 3, also
showed that two layers of FRP were optimal. Another discovery made was that 30 wires
in the six unwrapped specimens had breakage due to localised corrosion while only one
wire had breakage among the sixteen wrapped specimens.

Table 3: Average metal loss, gravimetric testing (Suh et al. 2007)
Specimen type Layers Metal loss [%]

Strand Tie
Outdoor 0 6.6 10.1
Indoor 0 6.6 8.9
CFRP 1 3.5 7.1
2 3.1 5.7
3 3.4 6.9
4 3.3 6.9
Average 3.3 6.9
GFRP 1 3.6 6.7
2 3.3 6.2
3 3.5 5.9
4 3.3 6.5
Average 3.4 6.3
The bond between the FRP and the concrete was tested after the tidal simulations. This
was made with pull-out tests on four CFRP specimens and four GFRP specimens with
one, two, three and four FRP layers. The test was performed in three different zones,
the dry zone, tidal zone and the submerged zone. At the dry and tidal zones, most bond
failures occurred in the concrete. In the submerged zone, most bond failure occurred in
the epoxy. However, the average bond for the CFRP, 1.8-2.0 MPa, and the GFRP, 1.8-
2.1 MPa were similar and largely unaffected by exposure. The number of layers did not
show any difference in bond strength indicating that the interlayer bond between the
FRP layers was good.
4.6.6 Bond enhancement for FRP pile repair in tidal waters

Winters et al. (2008) studied if pressure bagging and vacuum bagging could enhance
the bond for FRP pile repair in tidal waters. The idea is to provide a pressure that ensures
contact between the FRP and concrete during curing and thus enhance the bond. The
schematic of the two systems can be seen in Figure 34.
a) b)
Figure 34: Schematics of the two systems, a) pressure bagging, b) Vacuum bagging (Winters et al. 2008)

Testing was made on eight pre-stressed concrete specimens with a cross-section of
305x205 mm and a height of 1520 mm. These samples were placed in a fresh water
tank with the water level of 934 mm from the bottom. To encourage marine growth the
piles was left in the tank for three months before wrapping. The wrapping was made
from 457 mm above the water level to 457 mm below with two different systems. A
pre-preg system developed by Air Logistic Corporation and a wet lay-up system
designed by Fyfe. These systems were identical to the ones used in (Sen and Mullins
2007a). A summary of the wrapping systems is provided in Table 4.
Table 4: Wrap systems (Winters et al. 2008)
Test Confinement Applied

pile Wrapping system system pressure (kPa)
A1 Air logistic Control 0
One longitudinal layer, (stretch wrap)
A2 Two transverse layers N/A N/A
A3 Vacuum bag 68.9
A4 Vacuum bag 68.9
A5 Pressure bag 68.9
F1 Tyfo SHE-51A Pressure bag 34.5
F2 One longitudinal layer, Pressure bag 14.5
F3 Two transverse layers Control 0
(stretch wrap)
For increasing the FRP-concrete bond, a base resin coating was applied before
wrapping the pre-preg system. Two different resins were tested in this experiment,
Aquawrap Base Primer 4 and Bio-dur 563. Both were applied at two surfaces each of
the four piles The first pile (A4) to be tested with the vacuum system encountered
problems to seal the vacuum bag due to cracks below and above the wrapping area.
This was solved by filling the cracks with epoxy and vacuum was obtained 45 minutes
after wrapping For pile A2 and A3, the base resin was applied beyond the wrapping
area for sealing of the cracks. Pile A3 was wrapped before the applied base resin had
cured and the uncured resin had difficulties in sealing the cracks and providing an
airtight layer. The base resin on pile A2 was allowed to cure for 24 hours before
wrapping. However, before installation, the bond between the base primer and the
concrete was inspected and it was found that the bond was inadequate. Thus, no
wrapping was made on pile A2. The difficulties to achieve an airtight layer for the
vacuum bagging in the experiment shows that this approach can be problematic for
field repairs. However, the testing with the pressure bagging was made without any
significant difficulties.
The bond was evaluated with the results from pull-out tests with and Elcometer 106
adhesion tester by ASTM D 4541. For the pre-preg system, the result showed that
pressure bagging increased the bond strength, from 0.26 MPa to 1.17 MPa, in the wet
region and, from 0.94 MPa to 1.57 MPa, in the dry region. The result from the wet
layup was mixed with a marginal reduction, from 2.01 MPa to 1.95 MPa, in bond
strength in the dry region and an increase, from 1.65 MPa to 1.77 MPa, in bond strength
in the wet region.

To distinguish between satisfactory and unsatisfactory bond strengths a cut of limit was
used. The chosen limit, 1.38 MPa, is specified in ACI 441 as the minimum pull-out
strength for bond critical applications. The percentage of satisfactory pull-out tests is
shown in Figure 35
Figure 35: Percentage of satisfactory pull-out results using 1.38 MPa cut off (Winters et al. 2008)
4.6.7 Effective repair for corrosion control using FRP wraps

Suh et al. (2010) investigated the influence on corrosion by two different repairing
strategies using FRP wraps. The first strategy, “full repair”, includes removing of
chloride-contaminated concrete, cleaning of reinforcement and reshaping the cross-
section while the second repair, “resin injection repair”, consisted of injecting cracks
with epoxy and smoothening of the surface. Both strategies were then wrapped with bi-
directional CFRP.
The testing was made on seventeen pre-stressed piles with the dimensions and splash
zone set-up as in (Suh et al. 2007), see Figure 33. Before repair, the specimens were
subjected to a constant current of current 110 mA during 125-days to achieve a 20%
metal loss. For confining the corrosion to the splash zone, a soaker hose-sponge was
used to keep this area moist.
After 125-days the specimens were repaired, three with the “full repair”, eleven with
the “epoxy injection repair” and the three remaining was left for control. The wrapping
was made in one to three layers of the splash zone or the whole pile, see Table 5 and
Figure 36. For some of the specimens, the top side of the piles was sealed, see Table 5,
to prevent chloride ingress from above.

Table 5: Summary of results (Suh et al. 2010)
Metal loss Number of broken

wires
Single strand Increase
Pile due to Average Total Average
Repair Wrap Wrap Max Min average exposure increase per per repair
type height layers Seal [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] pile type
Baseline N/A N/A N/A 22.3 16.9 20.5
controla
Unrepaired N/A N/A N/A 86.0 77.8 82.3 61.8 59.6 28 28
control 86.5 69.3 77.9 57.4 28
Full repair 0.9 m 2 Yes 23.2 20.4 22.0 1.5 1.1 17 10
23.4 18.9 22.0 1.5 6
No 21.5 19.4 20.7 0.2 7
Resin 0.9 m 1 Yes 26.5 22.1 24.2 3.7 4.3 26 21.5
injection 27.3 21.4 25.3 4.8 17
repair 2 Yes 24.1 19.9 22.3 1.8 0.6 10 13.4
21.9 19.9 20.8 0.3 13
No 21.0 19.4 20.3 -0.2b 17
3 Yes 24.3 19.7 22.4 1.9 3.2 12 17.4
34.3 22.4 27.6 7.1 24
No 23.2 17.5 21.0 0.5 16
1.5 m 2 Yes 24.0 20.7 22.1 1.6 0.9 16 13.7
22.1 20.1 20.7 0.2 12
No 24.9 19.4 21.4 0.9 13
a
This specimen were gravimetric tested after the 125 days of 110 mA to control that 20% corrosion was achieved.
b
Average steel loss in this specimen was less than the baseline control of 20.5%.
For testing of the effectiveness of the repair, the specimens were placed in a tank with
a 3% chloride solution see Figure 36. The water temperature was maintained at 60C
and the tide was changed every six hours. During the incoming tide, hot salt water was
sprayed on the piles to simulating water splash above the wrap.
Figure 36: Tidal simulation (Suh et al. 2010)
After 2.3 years and 1,700 tidal cycles, the metal loss was measured by gravimetric
testing and the result is shown in Table 5. The average increase in metal loss for the
unwrapped specimens were 60% compared to 1.8% for the wrap. From this, they
concluded that FRP wraps effectively slows down the corrosion rate. The research also
showed that the results of the “full repair” and “epoxy injection repair” were
comparable and that two layers of wrap are the most efficient number for slowing down
corrosion.

As can be concluded from the state of practice review, repair of submerged reinforced
concrete piles with FRP composites is made primarily to achieve durable protection
from degradation. The FRP wraps are mainly applied in the splash zone where the
deterioration is most substantial.
Since FRP composites are lightweight and flexible, they provide a quick and easy
installation and a more beneficial work environment for the workers. This may offset
the high initial cost of the material and lead to a more cost-effective repair method
compared to the ones used today. Because FRP composites don’t corrode and are a low
permeable material, it acts as a protective layer impeding chemical degradation and
may also lead to a more durable solution.
To achieve an effective result with FRP repair the surface preparation is important to
get an adequate bond between the FRP and substrate. It is also important to provide the
FRP wrap with a protective coating to prevent degradation of the composite. Because
of FRP’s high strength to weight ratio repair can be made slender and with the proper
choice of protective coating, it can be made indistinguishable from unrepaired piles.
Upon review, epoxy is the favourable resin to use in the composite since it is superior
to polyester in the considered application together with either glass or carbon fibres.
Advantages and disadvantages of the FRP repair method are summarised Figure 37.
From the review of the performed experimental tests in the literature, it can be
concluded that CFRP and GFRP wraps are equally effective in reducing the corrosion
rate of reinforced concrete. It is also found that two layers of wrap are the most effective
number of layers for reducing the corrosion rate. Wraps with a better bond between the
FRP and concrete proved to be more efficient in reducing the corrosion rate which
further indicates the importance of achieving a good bond to get an effective repair. The
review shows that the bond can be enhanced by pressure bagging the wrap while it
cures. It can also be concluded that the bond between the FRP and the concrete is
deteriorated by moisture as the failure, according to performed pull-out test, is in the
epoxy for the submerged zone while in the concrete for the dry and tidal zones.

Figure 37: Advantages/disadvantages of FRP repair

5 Durability test of Repairing Concrete with FRP
5.1 Introduction
Accelerated long-term tests have been carried out to check the durability of FRP
wrapped reinforced concrete. The experiment is made in a simulated marine
environment and includes one accelerated corrosion test series through impressed
current and one freeze/thaw test series.
The objectives of the experiment are to investigate the effect of wrapping reinforced
concrete with FRP on the corrosion rate, to study what effect confinement of the wrap
has on the crack propagation, as well as to investigate the durability of the FRP/concrete
bond in a marine environment.
Henceforth, the preparation of specimens is described and the test scheme with set up
for the different tests are explained followed by results and conclusions.
5.2 Specimens
For the experiment 15 specimens were prepared, nine for the accelerated corrosion test
and six for the freeze/thaw test. The specimens were cylindrical “lollipop” specimens
with the reinforcement placed in the centre and protruding out from the top surface. The
performed literature review showed that this is a common type of sample for accelerated
corrosion testing. The specimens had a diameter of 100 mm and a height of 180 mm
with a reinforcement bar of 16 mm in diameter.
5.2.1 Concrete
Two 25 kg premixed bags of Weber fine concrete C30/37 were mixed with 5 kg of
water resulting in a water/cement ratio of 0.51. When the concrete and the water had
been mixed, a superplasticizer was added until the concrete achieved a satisfying
workability. Properties of the concrete can be seen in Table 6.
Table 6: Concrete specifications
Compressive strength C30/37

Water/cement ratio 0,51
Aggregate Natural sand 0-4 mm
Pot time 2 hours
Air 5%
Cement content C450 kg/m3
Exposure class XC4 XF3 (SS EN 206-1)
Frost-resistant Yes (SS 13 72 44)

5.2.2 Reinforcement bars
Reinforcement bars of 16 mm diameter and 200 mm length were chosen for the tests.
A small area around the bar was sandblasted in order to provide a better electrical
connection between the reinforcement bars and the wires during the accelerated
corrosion test, see Figure 38.
Sandblasted area
Figure 38: First three centimetres to the left is the sandblasted area.
After the sandblasting, the reinforcement bars were weighed and the individual weight
of the bars was recorded. In preparation for the casting, the sandblasted side of the
reinforcement bars was attached to wooden boards of 10 mm thickness through
predrilled holes, see Figure 39. The free length of the bars was 170 mm.
Figure 39: Reinforcement bars attached to wooden boards prior to casting

5.2.3 Casting
Cylindrical steel forms, see Figure 40, with a diameter of 100 mm and a height of 200
mm were used for the casting.
Figure 40: Cylindrical steel forms used for casting
Before casting, the forms were greased with form oil to ease the demoulding. The forms
were then partially filled with concrete and the prepared reinforcement bars were placed
in the centre of the cylinder, held in place by the wooden boards resting on the top edges
of the form, see Figure 41.
Figure 41: Casting of the specimens
This setup resulted in concrete specimens with the height of 180 mm with a concrete
cover for the reinforcement bars of 30 mm at the bottom and 42 mm on the side, see
Figure 42.
Figure 42: Dimensions of specimen

5.2.4 Curing
The concrete had cured for one and a half day at room temperature before the cylindrical
forms were demounted and the specimens were placed to cure in a water bath for 12
days, see Figure 43. The tests started before the concrete was completely cured due to
time limitations in the project. This was judged as reasonable considering that tests
regarding structural capacity were not an objective of the experiment.
Figure 43: Water curing
5.2.5 FRP configuration

With the results of the literature review presented in section 4.7, it was decided to wrap
the concrete specimens with two layers of GFRP since it showed that this was the
favourable number of layers.
5.2.5.1 Fibres
The used material in the tests was a 0°/90° bi-directional glass fibre weave with a
density of 1273 g/m2. It was delivered in a 10 m long and 1.270 m wide roll and the
first step was to cut the glass fibre in sheets with dimensions of 180x350 mm and
180x380 mm for the first respectively second layer, Figure 44.
Figure 44: Cutting of glass fibre mats
5.2.5.2 Resin
A two-component epoxy resin consisting of 0.5 kg NM 275A laminate and 0.275 kg
NM 275B hardening agent was used in the test. This epoxy was chosen because its
ability to be applied to a moist surface and that it is very water resistant. By mixing the
two-components the epoxy started to cure. The work had then to be completed during
the pot time of forty minutes.

5.2.5.3 Wet layup
Wet layup method was used for applying the GFRP to the specimens. The pre-cut glass
fibre sheets were saturated with epoxy in a tray before being applied to the concrete
specimens. The first layer was wrapped around the specimen with the second layer of
wrap applied directly after the first, which can be seen in Figure 45. The second layer
was applied with a one-quarter lap shift to ensure that the joints of the different layers
were separated. After wrapping the epoxy was allowed to cure for a day.
Figure 45: Wrapping of concrete specimens with

saturated GFRP sheets
As a security measure, the work involving epoxy and curing was made in a fume hood,
see Figure 46, to lead away by-products from the curing of the epoxy which can cause
allergic reactions.
Figure 46: Fume hood, work station for epoxy

5.3 Test scheme
The specimens were subjected to accelerated corrosion and freeze/thaw cycles for two
months. Different groups of specimens were tested under different configurations
regarding the time of wrapping and the conditions they were subjected to. The test
scheme is shown in Figure 47.
Group A-C were subjected to accelerated corrosion for the entire test period of two
months. The specimens in group A were wrapped from the very beginning, the
specimens in group C were wrapped after 1 month and group B were control specimens
without any wrap.
Group D and E were subjected to accelerated corrosion until the reinforced concrete
specimens had developed cracks due to corrosion, which occurred after a month. Then
group D was wrapped and inserted in a climate chamber together with the specimens
without wrap in control group E. These two groups were subjected to freeze/thaw cycles
during the remaining time of the test period, see Figure 47.
Figure 47: Test scheme of experiment

5.4 Accelerate corrosion test
The natural corrosion processes can take several years before causing damage to the
reinforced concrete. It is not viable to make use of natural corrosion for experimental
testing. Instead, the rate of corrosion is increased by performing an accelerated
corrosion test with an impressed current. The electrochemical reactions can be
simulated and enhanced by a constant voltage or a constant current, see Figure 48.
Figure 48: Electrochemical reaction with impressed current
For the accelerated corrosion test, it was decided to subject the specimens to a constant
current so that the corrosion rate for the different specimens would be the same to
evaluate if the confinement provided by the wraps had any effect on the cracking of the
concrete. For maintaining the natural corrosion process, the applied current density
should be below 350 µA/cm2 (Berrocal et al. 2017). The constant current of 17 mA was
applied and was calculated according to Appendix A to provide a corrosion rate of 10%
of the diameter of the reinforcement bar. However, after two weeks of accelerated
corrosion there was no evidence of crack initiation in the specimens and therefore it
was decided to increase the current to 19.5 mA to increase the rate of corrosion.
5.4.1 Set up
All the specimens were placed in one bucket each and sealed to the bottom with a layer
of silicone to prevent chloride penetration from the bottom, see Figure 49. To achieve
the electrochemical cell a copper mesh was wrapped around each specimen and kept in
place with rubber bands. Wires were attached to the reinforcement bar, acting as the
anode, and to the copper mesh, acting as the cathode, for connecting the specimens in
series. The cell was then completed by filling the bucket with 3.5% salt solution, acting
as the electrolyte, so that the water level covered two-thirds of the specimen, see Figure
50.

Figure 49: Sealing of bottom surface
Figure 50: Wiring to and from one specimen
The electric wiring was then made in a series circuit, one for each specimen group A,
B and C, to ensure the same amount of current through each specimen. Figure 51 shows
a schematic drawing of one circuit.
Figure 51: Specimens connected in series

5.5 Freeze/thaw test
The worst deterioration of submerged concrete piles occurs in the splash zone of the
pile where it is subjected to wet and dry cycles. Corrosion of the reinforcement is
dependent on access to moisture and oxygen and is accelerated by high temperatures
and the presence of chlorides. To maximise the effect of these factors and to simulate a
Swedish marine environment the specimens were subjected to cycles of high and low
temperature combined with high and low relative humidity inside a climate chamber.
5.5.1 Set up
After one month of accelerated corrosion through impressed current, the specimens in
group D and E were inserted in the climate chamber. The chamber was programmed to
provide cycles that start at a temperature of 20°C and an RH of 95 % for two hours.
Then the RH changes to 0% and the temperature decrease linearly to -20°C during one
hour. The temperature and the RH remain constant for two hours before both the
temperature and the RH increase linearly during one hour back to the starting values of
20°C and 95% RH, see Figure 52. With this configuration one cycle is made during 6
hours, resulting in 4 cycles a day and a total amount of 110 cycles during the test period.
Cycle
30 100
20
Temperature [°C]
80
10
60
RH [%]
0
0 2 2 3 5 6 67 8 8 99 11 12 40
-10
-20 20
-30 0
Time [h]
Temperature RH
Figure 52: Climate cycle inside the climate chamber

5.6 Data collection
To evaluate if the FRP wraps had a positive effect on the corrosion of the reinforcement,
voltage measurements were made to determine the current resistance of the specimens.
Higher resistance indicates that the FRP wraps provide protection of the reinforcement
bars.
During the experiment the cracks were measured continuously with the card shown in
Figure 53 for comparison of the crack propagations.
Figure 53: Measure card for cracks
After the experiment had been completed, the FRP wraps were carefully removed so
that the crack propagation in the concrete could be recorded and compared between the
different test groups.
To further investigate the effect of wrapping concrete with FRP on the corrosion rate
the reinforcement bars from all specimens in the experiment were extracted from the
concrete, sandblasted to remove all rust and weighed to record the reinforcement bar
mass loss.
For investigation of the FRP/concrete bond durability, no measurements were made,

but continuous ocular inspection of the wraps was made. The bond durability was also
evaluated based on the difficulty to remove the wraps and the state of the interface
between the concrete and the FRP.
5.7 Results
5.7.1 Reinforcement bar mass loss
Figure 55 displays the initial weight compared to the final weight of the reinforcement
bars for all specimens included in the experimental study. It is from this figure clear
that groups B and C suffer the most steel mass loss.

Steel weight - Start/End
320
315
310
305
Grams
300 Start weight [g]

295 End weight [g]
290
285
A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 C1 C2 C3 D1 D2 D3 E1 E2 E3
Specimens
Figure 54: Comparison of the start and end weight of reinforcement bars for the different specimens

5.7.1.1 Accelerated corrosion test
The mass loss of reinforcement bars for the specimens subjected to accelerated
corrosion by an impressed current is compiled in Table 7. The average mass loss per
group is displayed in Figure 55. Groups B and C has significantly higher mass loss
compared to group A. Between groups B and C there is only a marginal difference
where group A has an average mass loss of 0.65%, group B of 4.23% and group C of
4.98%.
Table 7: Reinforcement bar mass loss for specimens in the accelerated corrosion test
Reinforcement bar Start weight [g] End weight [g] Mass loss [%]
A1 317.47 314.87 0.82
A2 317.04 315.1 0.61
A3 314.65 313 0.52
B1 316.14 303.35 4.05
B2 313.5 300.32 4.20
B3 317.75 303.62 4.45
C1 316.59 300.47 5.09
C2 317.17 301.78 4.85
C3 314.35 298.65 4.99
Average steel mass loss per group

6,00%
5,00%
4,00%
3,00%
2,00%
1,00%
0,00%
Group A Group B Group C
Figure 55: Average reinforcement bar mass loss and spread per group in the accelerated corrosion test

5.7.1.2 Freeze/thaw test
The mass loss of reinforcement bars for the specimens subjected to freeze/thaw cycles
is compiled in Table 8. The average mass loss per group is displayed in Figure 56. There
is a negligible difference between the two groups where the average mass loss is 1.04%
for group D and 1.00% for group E.
Table 8: Reinforcement bar mass loss for specimens in the freeze/thaw test
Reinforcement bar Start weight [g] End weight [g] Mass loss [%]
D1 315.63 312.44 1.01
D2 311.54 308.11 1.10
D3 311.52 308.35 1.02
E1 313.88 310.9 0.95
E2 317.33 314.11 1.01
E3 316.54 313.23 1.05
Average mass loss per group

1,20%
1,00%
0,80%
0,60%
0,40%
0,20%
0,00%
Group D Group E
Figure 56: Average reinforcement bar mass loss and spread per group in the freeze/thaw test

5.7.2 Crack propagation
5.7.2.1 Accelerated corrosion test
The crack propagation is shown in Table 9 and Figure 57. The specimens in group A
didn’t have any cracks with a bandwidth above 0.1 mm while the specimens in group
B and C had cracks with a bandwidth of 0.1 mm or above at all surfaces. The specimens
in group B had longitudinal cracks reaching the full height of the specimens while the
specimens in group C had shorter longitudinal cracks reaching partly along the height
of the specimens. The samples in group B also had transverse cracks which couldn’t be
seen for the specimens in group C.
Table 9: Crack propagation for specimens in the accelerated corrosion test
Crack band width >= 0.1 [mm]

Specimens Top Bottom Side surface
surface surface Longitudinal Transverse
Partial/full height
A1 No No No No
A2 No No No No
A3 No No No No
B1 Yes Yes Full Yes
B2 Yes Yes Full Yes
B3 Yes Yes Full Yes
C1 Yes Yes Partial No
C2 No Yes Partial No
C3 No Yes Partial No
The bandwidth of the largest cracks at the different surfaces is shown in Table 10. It
can be seen that the specimens in group B had the largest crack bandwidths and that the
specimens in group A had the smallest crack bandwidths.
Table 10: Crack bandwidth for specimens in the accelerated corrosion test
Crack bandwidth [mm]

Specimens Top surface Bottom surface Side surface
A1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
A2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
A3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
B1 0.2 0.9 0.9
B2 0.1 0.8 0.6
B3 0.1 0.8 0.7
C1 0.1 0.3 0.1
C2 < 0.1 0.1 0.1
C3 < 0.1 0.3 0.1

a) b) c)
d) e) f)
Figure 57: Crack propagation, a) specimen A2, b) Crack along the full height of specimen B3, c) Crack partly
along the height of specimen C2, d) No cracks at the bottom of specimen A1, e) Crack at bottom of specimen
B2, f) Crack at bottom of specimen C3

5.7.2.2 Freeze/thaw test
The crack propagation is shown in Table 11 and Figure 58. No cracks with a bandwidth
of 0.1 mm or above could be seen at the top surface for any of the specimens in group
D or E. Cracks at the bottom surface could only be seen at two of the specimens in
group E. These two specimens also had longitudinal cracks reaching the full height of
the specimens while the other specimens had shorter longitudinal cracks reaching partly
along the height of the specimens. Transverse cracks could be seen on all specimens in
group E but not on any of the specimens in group D.
Table 11: Crack propagation for specimens in the freeze/thaw test
Crack bandwidth >= 0.1 [mm]

Specimens Top Bottom Side surface
surface surface Longitudinal Transverse
Partial/full height
D1 No No Partial No
D2 No No Partial No
D3 No No Partial No
E1 No Yes Full Yes
E2 No Yes Full Yes
E3 No No Partial Yes
The bandwidth of the largest cracks at the different surfaces is shown in Table 12. The
crack bandwidths were in general small for all the specimens. It can be seen that the
specimens in group E had larger crack bandwidths than the specimens in group D.
Table 12: Crack bandwidth for specimens in the freeze/thaw test
Crack band width [mm]

Specimens Top surface Bottom surface Side surface
D1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1
D2 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1
D3 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1
E1 < 0.1 0.1 0.1
E2 < 0.1 0.2 0.3
E3 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2

a) b)
Crack
c) d)
Figure 58: Crack propagation, a) Crack partly along the height of specimen D1, b) Crack along the full height
of specimen E2, c) No crack at the bottom of specimen D1, d) Crack at the bottom of specimen E2

5.7.3 Current resistance
The current resistance of the specimens in groups A, B and C is shown in Figure 59 and
is displayed over the last month of testing, in other words after group C were wrapped.
For the specimens in group A, which were wrapped from the very beginning of the
experiment, it took 45 days before any current flowed through the specimens. The
resistance of the specimens in group A was then around 1700 ohms. The specimens in
group B had a constant resistance around 160 ohms. The specimens in group C showed
a resistance of 1500 ohms directly after wrapping but declined with time and converged
to around 700 ohms.
Resistance of specimens
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
Group A
R [Ω]
1000
Group B
800
Group C
600
400
200
0
21-apr 24-apr 28-apr 02-maj 05-maj 08-maj 13-maj 15-maj 19-maj 22-maj
Figure 59: Current resistance o for groups A, B and C
5.7.4 Bond
The inter-laminar bond between the GFRP layers was stronger than the bond between
the GFRP and the concrete. The specimens in group A had the strongest concrete/GFRP
bond followed by the specimens in group D and the specimens in group C had the
weakest concrete/GFRP bond. For the specimens in group A the bond failure occurred
in the concrete, see Figure 60, in group D failure could be seen in both concrete and
epoxy, see Figure 61, while the failure in group C mostly occurred in the epoxy, see
Figure 62. It was also noted that the concrete/GFRP bond was weak at rust deposits as
can be seen in Figure 62. Bubbles that could be seen in the GFRP were a result of poor
wrapping and no new or enlargement of the existing bubbles could be observed during
the experiment.

a) b)
Figure 60: Bond failure in concrete, a) specimen A3, b) inside of wrap A3
a) b)
Figure 61: Bond failure in concrete and epoxy, a) specimen D1, b) inside of wrap D1

a) b)
Figure 62: Bond failure mostly in epoxy, a) specimen C2, b) inside wrap C2
5.8 Discussion & Conclusion

From the results of the experiment, it can be concluded that wrapping reinforced
concrete with GFRP has a positive effect on reducing the corrosion rate. The current
resistance of the wrapped specimens in group C is well above four times higher than
the current resistance of the unwrapped specimens in group B, which proves this. As
well as it took 45 days before any current flowed through the specimens in group A and
when it did, the resistance of these specimens was about 10 times higher than for the
unwrapped specimens in group B. Why current flowed through the specimens in group
C directly after wrapping but not for the specimens in group A could be because group
A was wrapped when dry and before any degradation of the specimens. So, the
specimens were sealed by the wrap with no access to moisture and therefore no
corrosion. The specimens in group C were wrapped while moist and after being
subjected to one month of accelerated corrosion which caused cracks and contaminated
the concrete with chlorides. Via inspection one could also detect better seal of the
bottom of the specimens in group A than for group C, which creates easier access for
the electrolyte in the specimens of group C. However, why current started to flow
through specimens in group A is assumed to be because the electrolyte penetrated near
the bottom of the specimens. This is assumed since it was detected when extracting the
reinforcement bars, that the reinforcement was only corroded at the end of the bar with
internal cracks in the concrete near the bottom as a consequence. Studying the different
curves in Figure 59 one can see that they are fluctuating. This is assumed to depend on
that during the inspection of the specimens they were removed from the buckets and as
a result, rust deposit may detach from the cracks and increase the permeability. In
combination with that, the electrical path in the circuit may end up with a higher or
lower resistance when the copper mesh was reattached on the specimens with a different

position. Another observation made was that the water in which the wrapped specimens
were placed was coloured blue while the water for the unwrapped specimens didn’t
have any discoloration. So, it can be assumed that this is a deposit from the FRP.
However, the water was not analysed so it can’t be stated if this has any significant
environmental impact.
By reviewing the reinforcement bar mass loss no obvious conclusion can be made about
the effect of wrapping the reinforced concrete with GFRP. For the specimens in the
accelerated corrosion test there is only a marginal difference between the different
groups except for group A. This can be explained by that the specimens were subjected
to the same amount of current and therefore the same corrosion rate and that the
specimens in group A were subjected to current flow for a much shorter time than the
other groups. However, there is a slight difference between group B and C where group
C has a higher corrosion rate even though it has been concluded that wrapping with
GFRP should reduce the corrosion rate. This is a result of that the power sources used
in the test had different setting accuracy leading to a slightly higher current for the
specimens in group C. For the specimens in the freeze/thaw test, there is no difference
in corrosion rate. This could be a result of the limited time for the experiment as
corrosion is a slow process and may show a different result if the test was run for a
longer period. The corrosion may also have been accelerated if the specimens were
subjected to higher temperatures during the freeze/thaw test but it was decided to
simulate Swedish climate and therefore the upper limited was set to 20°C.
From studying the cracks in the specimens, it can be concluded that wrapping the
concrete with GFRP creates confinement of the concrete and reduces the crack
propagation. Considering the accelerated corrosion test, there were only indications of
micro cracks in the specimens of group A because of the rust deposits on the concrete
surface, but no cracks with a bandwidth over 0.1 mm were found. This is reasonable
concerning their corrosion rate. The specimens in group B had more and greater cracks
than the specimens in group C. For group B, the cracks larger than 0.1 mm bandwidth
ran through the whole specimens from the reinforcement bar to the edge of the concrete
at the top, down and through the bottom. There were also transverse cracks in these
specimens. While for group C, the cracks larger than 0.1 mm bandwidth ran through
the bottom and progressed partly and longitudinally up along the sides of the specimens.
For these specimens, there were no cracks at the top surface except for specimen C1,
this crack was however not connected with any crack along the side of the specimen,
and no transverse cracks were found. The cracks were overall larger for the specimens
in group B than for the specimens in group C when comparing the different sides of the
specimens. The largest crack bandwidth for group B was 0.9 mm while the largest for
group C was 0.3 mm. However, the cracks are not measured with precise instruments
so these numbers should be taken more as an indication of the crack propagation. Even
though the specimens in group C had somewhat higher corrosion rate than the
specimens in group B, the cracks are fewer and smaller for the specimens in group C
which indicate that the confinement of the concrete provided by GFRP wraps reduces
the crack propagation. Similar comparisons can be made for the specimens in the
freeze/thaw test where the wrapped specimens of group D both had less and smaller
cracks compared to the unwrapped specimens in group E. Neither of the specimens had
cracks with a bandwidth larger than 0.1 mm on the top surface but all the specimens in
group E had transverse cracks and specimens E1 and E2 had longitudinal cracks along
the full height of the specimens which progressed through the bottom. While the

specimens in group D only had shorter longitudinal cracks at the side surfaces. The
largest crack bandwidth for group D was 0.1 mm while the largest for group E was 0.3
mm. Since there were both less and smaller cracks for the wrapped specimens of group
D than for the unwrapped specimens of group E, although the corrosion rate was the
same for both groups, further strengthens the conclusion that GFRP wraps impede the
crack propagation of the concrete.
The results of the bond strength were achieved by comparing the difficulties to remove
the GFRP wrap with manual labour. This gives no exact result, but an indication of the
effects a marine environment has on the bond strength. The bond was strongest for the
specimens in group A and the failure mode was discovered in the concrete and thus no
extensive deterioration of the adhesive layer was found. The bond was weakest for the
specimens in group C and the failure mode for the specimens was discovered in the
epoxy. The adhesive layer for the specimens in group C was the most deteriorated as a
result of being submerged, leading to access of more moisture behind the wrap, and a
higher corrosion rate, resulting in more rust deposits between the wrap and the concrete.
The failure mode for the specimens in group D was discovered in both the epoxy and
the concrete. The bond for the specimens in group D was stronger than for group C but
weaker than for group A. It can therefore be concluded that the concrete/GFRP bond
was better when the GFRP was applied to a dry and intact surface as it was harder to
remove the wrap for group A, which was wrapped from the very beginning, than for
groups C and D, which were wrapped after one month of accelerated corrosion. As well
as the concrete/GFRP bond is deteriorated by moisture and rust deposits as group C had
weaker bond than group D.
Finally, it can be concluded from the results of the experiment that GFRP wrapping of
reinforced concrete reduce the corrosion rate due to that wrapped specimens had higher
current resistance than unwrapped and that it is more effective when wrapped on intact
concrete. The GFRP wraps provide confinement which impedes the crack propagation
of the concrete. The concrete/GFRP bond is stronger when wrapped on a clean and
intact concrete surface and that the bond is deteriorated by moisture ingress and rust
deposits.

6 Case study
6.1 Introduction
To investigate if the FRP repair method is a competitive alternative to traditional repair
methods of submerged concrete piles the costs of an FRP and a traditional repair system
is compared. The Port of Gothenburg has provided material from a performed repair of
a pile. The cost of this repair is then compared to the cost of repairing the same pile
with an FRP system.
6.2 Conditions
The submerged concrete pile selected for the case study was part of a larger repair
project of 70 piles located in Skarvikshamnen berth site 510-511. This is part of
Gothenburg’s energy harbour where ships with a maximum length of 250 m and a
maximum depth of 12.5 m can dock (“Port of Gothenburg” 2017). The cross-section of
the piles supporting these berth structures are 450x450 mm and the repair should be
made along 10 m of the selected pile7, see Figure 64 and Appendix C, to decrease the
ingress of sulphates and chlorides.
6.3 Cost analysis

6.3.1 Performed repair
The completed repair was made by casting a circular concrete pile jacket with a
diameter of 670 mm, see Figure 63. The pile jacket was applied from just below the
ice-protection down to solid clay, see Figure 64 and Appendix C. This repair had a
construction cost of 200-250 kkr7. The procedures for installing the pile jacket were as
follows:
1. Remove mud until the clay is reached

2. Pressure wash the pile surface to remove marine growth and loose concrete.
3. Installation of the bottom plug
4. Installation of the formwork
5. Cast concrete in the formwork
6. Demounting of the formwork
Table 13 shows required times for different working moments estimated with inquiries
from Robert Klein, Engineer Diver at ÅF Infrastructure AB.
Table 13: Time requirement estimation of installing the pile jacket
Estimated time required

Surface cleaning 8 [h]
Installation of formwork, including 16 [h]
bottom plug
Apply concrete 4 [h]
Demounting formwork 8 [h]
7
Stig Östfjord ([email protected]) (8 May 2017) Examensarbete Personal mail to August
Uddmyr ([email protected])

Figure 63: Cross-section of the original pile and
the pile jacket7
Figure 64: Section of pile jacket repair7
6.3.2 FRP repair

Since the repair in this comparative case study only has been made with concrete
jacketing the FRP repair is designed with the help of the findings in the literature review
above and by consulting experts within the field.
The FRP repair is made with the Aquawrap pre-preg system by Air Logistics where
both glass and carbon fibres are considered. For repair, the idea is to wrap the pile with
two layers of bi-directional fibre along the whole height of 10 m, as for the concrete
jacket. The work is performed by hand by divers. The procedures for installing the FRP
system are the same for both glass and carbon and are as follows:
1. Pressure wash the pile surface to remove marine growth and loose concrete.
2. Apply cement filler to fill voids and to create a smooth surface of the pile.
3. Apply base primer to the pile surface simultaneously as wrapping the pile
spirally with two layers of bi-directional fibre with overlap.
4. Apply a plastic stretch film over the wrap to hold it in place while curing.
5. After one day of curing, remove the plastic stretch film and paint the wrap with
the base primer.

Table 14 shows detailed information about the amount of time required for the different
working moments. The numbers are based on the literature review and inquiries via
Robert Klein, Engineer Diver at ÅF Infrastructure AB.
Table 14: Time requirement estimation of installing FRP system
Estimated time required

Surface cleaning 8h
Surface smoothening 8h
Wrapping, include applying base primer 8h
and plastic stretch film
Coating of wrap with base primer 4h
Table 15 shows detailed information about the costs for material and required work for
installing the intended FRP system. The information is provided by Franz Worth6 and
by Robert Klein, Engineer Diver at ÅF Infrastructure AB.
Table 15: Cost estimation of Aquawrap FRP repair system
Estimated labour cost

One diving crew 2000 [kr/h]
Surface cleaning (8h) 16000 [kr]
Surface smoothening (8h) 16000 [kr]
Wrapping (8h) 16000 [kr]
Coating of wrap (4h) 8000 [kr]
Material cost
Cement filler, Lampocem 109 [kr/m2]
Base primer, BP-4 422 [kr/m2]
Carbon fibre 1651 [kr/m2]
Glass fibre, G-05 887 [kr/m2]
Material cost per pile
Cement filler, Lampocem 1960 [kr]
Base primer, BP-4 15178 [kr]
Carbon fibre 59429 [kr]
Glass fibre, G-05 31926 [kr]
Total cost per pile
Carbon wrap 132567 [kr]
Glass wrap 105063 [kr]
6.3.3 Sensitivity analysis

In the FRP repair, appreciations and assumption are made to calculate the cost of a
repair with 40 years of service life. This provides a degree of uncertainty in the results
and therefore a sensitivity analysis is carried out to regard the most sensitive and
uncertain parameters.

Five different cases are regarded in the sensitivity analysis for both the CFRP and GFRP
system. These cases are:
1. The described FRP repair

2. FRP repair but with twice as long wrapping time
3. FRP repair which is remade after 20 years
4. FRP repair with one layer extra wrap after 30 years
5. FRP repair re-coated every 10:th year
In these five cases costs emerge at different years, because money is worth more as
asset today than in the future (Hjelm and Karlsson 2014) the net present value (NPV)
is calculated. This is made according to equation 1 with a 2 % discount rate.
𝐿
𝐶𝑛
𝑁𝑃𝑉 = ∑ (Eq. 1)
(1 + 𝑟)𝑛
𝑛=0
there
NPV life-cycle cost expressed as net present value

n the year the cost occurs
Cn sum of cost year n
r discount rate
L service life
6.4 Result
Costs of the different cases of FRP repair is calculated in Appendix D and the result is
shown in Table 16. All assumed FRP repair cases, except for case 3 with the CFRP
repair, are less expensive than the traditional pile jacket repair. The CFRP repair ranges
from 11% more expensive to 34% less expensive than the pile jacket repair. The GFRP
repair are 12% to 47% less expensive than the pile jacket repair. In Figure 65 and Figure
66 the NPV is shown with the year the cost emerges. The time estimations of the FRP
repair resulted in an installation time of 4 days while the time installing the pile jacket
were made during 5 days.
Table 16: Result, cost calculations according to net present value
Installation Cost, year 0 [kr] NPV over 40 years [kr]

Pile jacket 200 000 200 000
CFRP – case 1 133 000 133 000
CFRP – case 2 149 000 149 000
CFRP – case 3 133 000 222 000
CFRP – case 4 133 000 179 000
CFRP – case 5 133 000 197 000
GFRP – case 1 105 000 105 000
GFRP – case 2 121 000 121 000
GFRP – case 3 105 000 176 000
GFRP – case 4 105 000 144 000
GFRP – case 5 105 000 170 000

250000
CFRP
Pile
jacket
Case 1
200000 Case 2
Case 3
150000 Case 4
Case 5
kr
100000
50000
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Year
Figure 65: NPV of CFRP repairs at different years
250000 GFRP
Pile
jacket
Case 1
200000 Case 2
Case 3
150000 Case 4
Kr
Case 5
100000
50000
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Year
Figure 66: NPV of GFRP repairs at different years

The conclusion can be made that the FRP repair system is a competitive alternative to
repairs made with pile jackets in concrete. The results of the case study show that all
cases, except for the CFRP – case 3, were less expensive than the performed pile jacket.
It also showed, from an economical view at repairs, that GFRP is favourable to CFRP
for increasing the durability of the structure.
The costs of the performed pile jacket are from a repair project regarding seventy piles,
a repair of only one pile would lead to a higher cost for the pile jacket than used in the
studied case. This further shows that the FRP repair method is a competitive alternative.
A faster repair method, like FRP repair compared to concrete pile jacket, is not only
economically beneficial with regard to fewer man hours but also in the sense of
attendant costs in the view of stoppage of the berth.
Considering a larger repair project, like the one in this case study, with a lot of piles it
can be hard and time-consuming to reach the piles and install the unwieldy formwork.
Here, the FRP system may offer a better solution because of its lightweight and that it
is easier to handle.
Analysis of the costs for the systems is made for cases were the FRP repair method is
assumed to have the same or shorter service life than the pile jacket. This assumption
could be seen as conservative since the reason for investigating the FRP system is the
belief that it is more efficient in increasing the durability of submerged piles.
To get the FRP system to correspond with the pile jacket which is installed down to
solid clay there are some uncertainties of how to solve the detail at the bottom for the
FRP system. One can either dredge and wrap the whole way down and then fill back
up with clay or, install a bottom plug similar to the one for the pile jacket. Depending
on how to solve this it may amount in extra costs and longer installation time. However,
this is not considered in the cost analysis.

7 Summary and recommendations for further studies
The most common area for damages is in the splash/tidal zone of a submerged concrete
pile and the degradation are mostly due to chloride ingress and sulphate attack. The
most common repair method today is pile jacketing which is a difficult, time consuming
and expensive method. This has led to the urge of new repair methods that are sound,
quick and durable. To achieve this, the method of wrapping piles with FRP composites
has emerged on account of the FRP’s advantageous properties compared to traditional
construction materials. The FRP wraps are mainly applied in the splash/tidal zone to
achieve durable protection from degradation and thus enhance the service life of the
pile. Both GFRP and CFRP wraps are equally effective in reducing the corrosion rate
of reinforced concrete and two layers of wrap is the most effective number of layers for
impeding the corrosion rate.
It is concluded from the results of the experiment that GFRP wrapping of reinforced
concrete reduce the corrosion rate due to that wrapped specimens had higher current
resistance than unwrapped and that it is more effective when wrapped on healthy
concrete. The GFRP wraps provide confinement which impedes the crack propagation
of the concrete. The concrete/GFRP bond is stronger when wrapped on a clean and
intact concrete surface and that the bond is deteriorated by moisture ingress and rust
deposits.
According to the performed case study in this report it can be concluded that the FRP
repair system is a competitive alternative to repairs made with pile jackets in concrete
when considering costs.
Based on the result and experience gained during this project a summary of why to use,
challenges with and recommendations for further studies of the FRP repair method is
summarised below.
Reasons to use:
• Durable material.
• Lightweight material.
• Flexible material that can fit any existing shape of a pile.
• Provides for quick and easy installation without the use of heavy machinery.
• Offers confinement of the concrete and reduces crack propagation and prevents
spalling.
• Reduces corrosion rate of reinforced concrete.
• Economically viable in comparison to repair with concrete jacket.
Challenges:
• Development/introduction of underwater epoxy that is environmentally
approved in Sweden.
• Develop installation procedure to achieve an efficient repair with a good bond.
• How to provide the FRP wrap with ice/abrasion protection.
• How to inspect and detect degradation behind the FRP wrap
Recommendations for further studies:

• Investigate how the FRP withstand abrasion and physical damages that occur in
a marine environment.

• Investigate how ice protection should be implemented in a FRP repair system.
• Further studies on long-term durability of externally bonded FRP to investigate
how the bond strength is affected by a marine environment.
• Investigate what strengthening effects that can be achieved by wrapping
submerged concrete piles with FRP.
• Testing of the FRP repair method in the field to gain knowledge of the ease of
installation and to optimize the installation procedure.
• Investigations on externally bonded FRP of new piles before driving. This may
enhance the service life of the piles and benefit the life cycle cost compared
with repairing them with FRP or traditional methods.

8 References
“Aquawrap®.” 2017. Airlog. Accessed May 8.
http://www.airlog.com/FACS/FACS%20Aquawrap.htm.
Au, Ching. 2001. “Behavior of FRP-Confined Concret.” M.S., United States --
Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Bazinet, Steve, Larry Cerone, and Franz Worth. 2002. “Innovative FRP Piling Repair
without the Use of Coffer Dams.” Pasadena, California.
Bengtsson, Anders, and Gustav Thornström. 2011. “Utformning av nytt Isskydd i
Plast, Skydd för Kajpålar i Göteborgs hamn.” Bachelor Thesis. Chalmers
studentarbeten. http://studentarbeten.chalmers.se.proxy.lib.chalmers.se.
Berrocal, Carlos G., Ignasi Fernandez, Karin Lundgren, and Ingemar Löfgren. 2017.
“Corrosion-Induced Cracking and Bond Behaviour of Corroded
Reinforcement Bars in SFRC.” Composites Part B: Engineering 113 (March):
123–37. doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.01.020.
Berver, E. W., James O. Jirsa, D. W. Fowler, H. G. Wheat, and T. Moon. 2001.
“Effects of Wrapping Chloride Contaminated Concrete with Fiber Reinforced
Plastics,” October. https://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=696570.
Browne, Terence M., Thomas J. Collins, Michael J. Garlich, John E O’Leary, and
Katherine C. Heringhaus. 2010. “Underwater Bridge Repair, Rehabilation, an
Countermeasures.” FHWA-NHI-10-029. United States -- Illinois.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/nbis/pubs/nhi10029.pdf.
Domone, Peter, and John Illston. 2010. Construction Materials. 4th ed. Vol. 2010.
Spon pres.
Gadve, Sangeeta, A. Mukherjee, and S. N. Malhotra. 2009. “Corrosion of Steel
Reinforcements Embedded in FRP Wrapped Concrete.” Construction and
Building Materials 23 (1): 153–61. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.01.008.
Goucher, Erik. 2013. “Corrosion Potentials of Lightweight Concrete Wrapped with
Fiber Reinforced Polymers (FRP).” M.S, United States -- Texas: The
university of Texas at Arlington.
Harichandran, Ronald S, and M Imad Baiyasi. 2000. “Repair of Corrosion-Damage
Columns Using FRP Wraps.” United States -- Michigan: Michigan State
University.
Hjelm, Marcus, and Niclas Karlsson. 2014. “En jämförande studie om
kostnadseffektiviteten hos fiberarmerade kompositbroar.” Bachelor Thesis,
Göteborg: Chalmers University of Technology.
http://studentarbeten.chalmers.se.proxy.lib.chalmers.se.
McLeish, Andrew, ed. 1994. Underwater Concreting and Repair. New York :
London: Halsted Press; Edward Arnold.
Mullins, Gray, Rajan Sen, Kwangsuk Suh, and Danny Winters. 2005. “Underwater
Fiber–Reinforced Polymers Repair of Prestressed Piles in the Allen Creek
Bridge.” Journal of Composites for Construction 9 (2): 136–146.
Neptune Research Inc. 2012. “54" OD Bridge Pile Reinforcement & Repair.” 1111 T-
218 CS 0412. Lake Park, Florida.
“Port of Gothenburg.” 2017. Accessed May 19.
https://www.goteborgshamn.se/maritimt/kajplatser-i-goteborgs-
hamn/detaljerad-information-om-energihamnens-kajplatser/.
QuakeWrap. 2012. “Carbon FRP Repair of Underwater Bridge Piers.” Ft. Lauderdale.
http://www.quakewrap.com/project_sheets/Carbon-FRP-Repair-of-
Underwater-Bridge-Piers.pdf.

Sen, Rajan, and Gray Mullins. 2004. “Underwater FRP Pile Wrap of the Friendship
Trails Bridge.” Tampa, FL: Departement of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, University of South Florida.
———. 2007a. “Application of FRP Composites for Underwater Piles Repair.”
Composites Part B: Engineering, Infrastructure Composites under Extreme
Loadings, 38 (5–6): 751–58. doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.07.011.
———. 2007b. “Further Developments in Underwater FRP Pile Repair.” In , 5.
Tampa, FL.
Suh, Kwangsuk. 2006. “Underwater FRP Repair of Corrosion Damaged Prestressed
Piles.” Graduate Theses and Dissertations, June.
http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/2717.
Suh, Kwangsuk, Gray Mullins, Rajan Sen, and Danny Winters. 2007. “Effectiveness
of Fiber-Reinforced Polymer in Reducing Corrosion in Marine Environment.”
ACI Structural Journal; Farmington Hills 104 (1): 76–83.
———. 2010. “Effective Repair for Corrosion Control Using FRP Wraps.” Journal of
Composites for Construction 14 (4): 388–96. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-
5614.0000094.
Thoresen, Carl A. 2014. Port Designer’s Handbook. 3rd Edition. Vol. 2014. London:
ICE Publishing.
https://app.knovel.com/web/toc.v/cid:kpPDHE0011/viewerType:toc/root_slug
:port-designers-handbook.
Winters, Danny, Gray Mullins, Rajan Sen, Andy Schrader, and Michael Stokes. 2008.
“Bond Enhancement for FRP Pile Repair in Tidal Waters.” Journal of
Composites for Construction 12 (3). doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-
0268(2008)12:3(334).
Wootton, Isaac A., Lisa K. Spainhour, and Nur Yazdani. 2003. “Corrosion of Steel
Reinforcement in Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Wrapped Concrete
Cylinders.” Journal of Composites for Construction 7 (4): 339–47.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2003)7:4(339).
Yao, Sam. 2016. “Applications of Fiber Reinforce Plastics in Major Bridges and
Marine Structures.” March.
http://kupce.ku.edu/sites/kupce.ku.edu/files/docs/cpep/structural/speaker-
presentations-2016/yao.pdf.

Appendix A
Calculation of current for accelerated corrosion test
Corrosion rate:
i M
CR = K 
ρ n
M/n Considered dimensionless

M  55.847 [g/mol] Atomic weight
n  2 the ionic charge for iron
3 mm g
K  3.27 10 
μA cm yr
g
ρ  7.87 density of steel
3
cm
mm
CR  corrosion rate
yr
μA
i  current density
2
cm
Decrease in cross-secion area of 10% during 60 days:

ϕ  16mm Reinforcement diameter
ϕ
r   8  mm
2
2
π ϕ 2
0.9 = ( r  x)  π
4
x  0.01mm
 π ϕ
2  4
x  root 0.9  ( r  x)  π x  4.103  10
2
m decrease in 60 days
 4 
365 1 mm
CR  x   2.496
60 yr yr
Calculate current densiy with obtained corrosion rate:

CR ρ n μA
i   215.117
KM 2
cm
Surface area of reinforcement:

l  155mm
2
As  l 2π r  77.911cm

Current:
I  i As  16.76  mA
Voltage:
n 15  15 n 9  9 n 3  3 number of speceimens in serie
R  700Ω Assume one specimen gives 700Ω resistance
U15  n 15 R I  175.981 V
U9  n 9  R I  105.589 V
U3  n 3  R I  35.196 V
Adjustment of current:
μA
i  250 10/4, increased current density to speed up the
2 corrosion
cm
250  215.117
Inc   0.162 An increase with 16.2%
215.117
I  i As  19.478 mA New current

Appendix B
Reinforcement bar mass loss
This excel sheet shows the reinforcement bar weight before the starting of the testing, 6/3-2017, and the weight after the
testing, 22/5-2017. The metal loss have been calculated and the results are displayed in different diagrams.
Reinforcement bar A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3
6/3-2017 Start weight [g] 317,47 317,04 314,65 316,14 313,5 317,75
22/5-2017 End weight [g] 314,87 315,1 313 303,35 300,32 303,62
Metal loss [g] 2,6 1,94 1,65 12,79 13,18 14,13
Metal loss [%] 0,82% 0,61% 0,52% 4,05% 4,20% 4,45%
Average metal loss [%] 0,65% 4,23%
Metal loss Metal loss

1,00% 4,60%
0,80% 4,40%
0,60%
4,20%
0,40%
0,20% 4,00%
0,00% 3,80%
A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3
Reinforcement bar C1 C2 C3 D1 D2 D3 E1 E2 E3
Start weight [g] 316,59 317,17 314,35 315,63 311,54 311,52 313,88 317,33 316,54
End weight [g] 300,47 301,78 298,65 312,44 308,11 308,35 310,9 314,11 313,23
Metal loss [g] 16,12 15,39 15,7 3,19 3,43 3,17 2,98 3,22 3,31
Metal loss [%] 5,09% 4,85% 4,99% 1,01% 1,10% 1,02% 0,95% 1,01% 1,05%
Average metal loss [%] 4,98% 1,04% 1,00%
Metal loss Metal loss Metal loss

5,20% 1,15% 1,10%
5,10% 1,10% 1,05%
5,00%
1,05% 1,00%
4,90%
4,80% 1,00% 0,95%
4,70% 0,95% 0,90%
C1 C2 C3 D1 D2 D3 E1 E2 E3
Metal loss
6,00%
5,00%
4,00%
3,00%
2,00%
1,00%
0,00%
Average metal loss

6,00%
5,00%
4,00%
Percent
3,00%
2,00%
1,00%
0,00%
Specimens
Steel weight - Start/End
320
315
310
305
Grams
300 Start weight [g]
295 End weight [g]
290
285
Specimens
Metal loss - Impressed current Metal loss - Freeze/thaw

6,00% 1,15%
5,00% 1,10%
4,00% 1,05%
3,00% 1,00%
2,00% 0,95%
1,00% 0,90%
0,00%
0,85%
D1 D2 D3 E1 E2 E3
Accelerated corrosion
ReinforcementStart
bar weight [g]
End weight [g] Mass loss [%] Average mass loss per group
A1 317,47 314,87 0,82% Group A - Wrapped from the start 0,65%
A2 317,04 315,1 0,61% Group B - Unwrapped 4,23%
A3 314,65 313 0,52% Group C - Wrapped after 1 month 4,98%
B1 316,14 303,35 4,05%
B2 313,5 300,32 4,20% Spread
B3 317,75 303,62 4,45% plus minus
C1 316,59 300,47 5,09% Group A 0,17% 0,13%
C2 317,17 301,78 4,85% Group B 0,21% 0,19%
C3 314,35 298,65 4,99% Group C 0,11% 0,13%
Standard error
Group A 0,087%
Group B 0,117%
Average steel mass loss per group Group C 0,070%
6,00%
5,00%
4,00%
3,00%
2,00%
1,00%
0,00%
Group A - Wrapped from the Group B - Unwrapped Group C - Wrapped after 1
start month
Freeze/thaw test
ReinforcementStart
bar weight [g]
End weight [g] Mass loss[%] Average mass loss per group
D1 315,63 312,44 1,01% Group D - Wrapped after 1 month 1,04%
D2 311,54 308,11 1,10% Group E - Unwrapped 1,00%
D3 311,52 308,35 1,02%
E1 313,88 310,9 0,95% Spread
E2 317,33 314,11 1,01% plus minus
E3 316,54 313,23 1,05% Group D 0,06% 0,03%
Group E 0,04% 0,05%
Average mass loss per group Standard error

1,20% Group D 0,0003
Group E 0,0003
1,00%
0,80%
0,60%
0,40%
0,20%
0,00%
Group D - Wrapped after 1 month Group E - Unwrapped
Appendix C
Case study – Drawings of performed pile jacket repair
Appendix D
Case study - Cost calculation of FRP repair
Case study - Cost of FRP repair
Dimension of the repair area of the pile
Pile
Depth [m] 0,45
Width [m] 0,45
Height [m] 10
Surface area [m2] 18
Calculation of the amount of filler needed for smoothening of the surface
Filler
Thickness [m] 0,005 Assumed thickness of filler
Volume [m3] 0,09
Lampocem The used filler, recommended by Robert Klein

kg/m3 1800
kr/kg 12,1
kr/m3 21780
Time estimations
Time estimations of different procedurs that need to be made for underwater repair of piles. The estimations are made with help of Robert
Klein, engineer diver at ÅF infrastructure and the report “Underwater FRP Pile Wrap of the Friendship Trails Bridge.” Tampa, FL:
Departement of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of South Florida by Sen, Rajan, and Gray Mullins. 2004.
Procedur time [h]

Cleaning surface 8 Pressure washing the surface to remove marine growth and loose concrete
Smoothen surface 8 Filling voids and smoothening of the surface with filler
Wrapping 8 Applying 1 layers BP-4 and 2 layers carbon/G-05 fabric
Coating 4 Applying 1 layer BP-4
Costs
The cost of the carbonfibre, glassfibre(G-05) and Base primer 4 (BP-4) were provided by mail from Franz Worth at airlog.
Franz Worth ([email protected]) (11 May 2017) Report of splash zone repair – Master thesis. Personal mail to August Uddmyr
([email protected])
The setup of the repair was made out from the litterature review and resuktet in two layers of wrap and two layers of BP-4, one as
primer and one as protective coating.
The cost of the divers was assumed with the help of Robert Klein, engineer diver at ÅF infrastructure
Costs
Divers [kr/h] 2000 Price from Robert Klein (1 diving crew incluing 3 divers and equipment)
Filler [kr/m3] 21780
Airlog Costs provided by Franz Worth at airlog for a carbon and a glasfiber (G-05) aquawrap
Carbon [$/pile] 6236 2 layers of wrap
G-05 [$/pile] 3350 2 layer of wrap
BP-4 [$/sqft] 4,11 Base primer 4, primer and protective coating
Bp-4 [$/m^2] 44,24
Currency 2017-05-15 Currency collected at forex.se at the 2017-05-15
kr/USD 9,53
Cost per pile

Cost/pile [kr/pile]
Material
Filler 1960
G-05 31926 2 layers of wrap
Carbon 59429 2 layers of wrap
BP-4 15177,75 2 layers, first layer to increase the bond between Concrete/FRP and one as protective coating
Labour
Cleaning surface 16000
Smoothen surface 16000
Wrapping 8 h 16000
Coating 4 h 8000
Total installation cost per pile of the Carbon/G-05 aquawrap system.
Includes material: Filler, Carbon/G-05 fabric, BP-4.

Includes labour: Cleaning surface, smoothen surface, wrapping, coating.
Tot installation cost/pile [kr/pile]

Carbon 132567
G-05 105063
The maintenance cost are calculated for different cases in the sensitivity analysis
Maintenance [kr/pile]
Re-wrap 1 layer carbon 84892 Includes: 1 layer Carbon wrap, 2 layers BP-4, cleaning surface, wrapping
Re-wrap 1 layer glas 71140 Includes: 1 layer G-05 wrap, 2 layers BP-4, cleaning surface, wrapping
Re-coarting 1 layer 31589 Includes: 1 layer BP-4 primer, cleaning surface, re-coating
Comparsion between FRP system and pile jacket
The FRP repair is compared with a pile jacket repair with the design life of 40 years. To compare the
costs today with future costs, net present value are used.
NPV=Net present value

L=Service life, 40 years
n=the year the cost develop
Cn=sum of the cost at year n
r=discount rate, assumed 2%
Five different cases with the FRP repair have also been carried out and the cases are as follows:
Case 1: Original repair with service life of 40 years.
Case 2: FRP repair with dubble wrapping time, service life 40 years.
Case 3: Two FRP repairs with a service life of 20 years each.
Case 4: FRP repair with a service life of 30 years, re-wrap 1 layer carbon/G-05 to increase service life with 10 years.
Case 5: FRP repair with re-coating every 10:th year to fufill 40 years of service life
NPV [kr/pile]
Year: 0 10 10 20 20 30 30 40 40
Pile jacket 200000 200000 200000 200000 200000 200000 200000 200000 200000
Carbon 132567 132567 132567 132567 132567 132567 132567 132567 132567 Case 1
148567 148567 148567 148567 148567 148567 148567 148567 148567 Case 2
132567 132567 132567 132567 221781 221781 221781 221781 221781 Case 3
132567 132567 132567 132567 132567 132567 179434 179434 179434 Case 4
132567 132567 158480,9 158480,9 179739 179739 197179 197179 197179 Case 5
G-05 105063 105063 105063 105063 105063 105063 105063 105063 105063 Case 1
121063 121063 121063 121063 121063 121063 121063 121063 121063 Case 2
105063 105063 105063 105063 175768 175768 175768 175768 175768 Case 3
105063 105063 105063 105063 105063 105063 144338 144338 144338 Case 4
105063 105063 130977 130977 152236 152236 169675 169675 169675 Case 5
Carbon
250000
Pile jacket
Case 1
200000
Case 2
Case 3
150000
Case 4
kr
Case 5
100000
50000
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Year
G-05
250000
Pile jacket
Case 1
200000
Case 2
Case 3
150000
Case 4
Kr
Case 5
100000
50000
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Year
Calculate how much cheaper the most and least expensive FRP systems are compared to the pile jacket
Case 1 (Cheapest) Case 3 (most expensive)

Carbon 34% 11%
G-05 47% 12%
The carbon fibre ranges between 11% more expensive to 34% less expensive than the pile jacket.
The glass fibre (G-05) ranges betenn 12% to 47% less expensive.

Repair of Submerged Concrete Piles With FRP Composites

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Repair of Submerged Concrete Piles With FRP Composites

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Repair of Submerged Concrete Piles With FRP Composites

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Repair of submerged concrete piles with

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Repair of submerged concrete piles with FRP composites

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

© JOHAN RÖÖS, AUGUST UDDMYR, 2017

Examensarbete 2017:68/ Institutionen för bygg- och miljöteknik,

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Målet med detta examensarbete är att undersöka genomförbarheten av att reparera

Nyckelord: fiberförstärkt plast, FRP, reparation, , betong, pålar, linda, marin,

2 DEGRADATION CAUSES OF SUBMERGED CONCRETE PILES 3

3 TRADITIONAL REPAIRING OF SUBMERGED PILES 9

4 FRP REPAIR OF SUBMERGED PILES 15

CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 III

5 DURABILITY TEST OF REPAIRING CONCRETE WITH FRP 41

IV CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

7 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES 69

CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 V

Göteborg June 2017

VI CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

A submerged pile is divided into degradation zones dependent on the surrounding

Figure 1: The different degradation zones of a submerged pile

CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 1

● What are the degradation causes of submerged concrete piles?

1.3 Research approach

In the experimental work to investigate the durability of FRP wrapped concrete

2 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

2.1 Chemical causes

Figure 2: Spalled concrete and exposed corroded reinforcement (Robert Klein)

2.1.2 Sulphate attack

CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 3

Figure 3: Vertical crack, ettringite (Robert Klein)

2.2 Mechanical causes

4 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

Figure 4: Abrasion in the splash zone (Robert Klein)

2.2.3 Accidental loads

Figure 5: Collision damage from ship (Robert Klein)

CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 5

2.2.4 Damage during production and installation

Figure 6: Horizontal cracks due to the applied stroke at installation

6 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

2.3 Concluding remarks

Figure 7: Overview of degradation causes

CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 7

Figure 8: Degradation causes at different zones of a submerged pile

8 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 9

3.2.1 Pile replacement

Figure 9: Supplemental pile bents (Browne et al. 2010)

3.2.2 Pile jacket

10 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

The installation of a pile jacket is performed by following the steps:

CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 11

3.3 Common procedures in underwater repair

12 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68

3.3.3 Casting concrete

3.4 Concluding remarks

CHALMERS Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2017:68 13

Figure 13: Map of repair methods and their purpose

Figure 14: Pile jacket, advantages and disadvantages