Advertisement

Study on Degradation in Axial Bearing Capacity of a Cast-in-Situ Pile Caused by Sulfate Attack in Saline Area

  • Gaowen Zhao
  • Jingpei Li
Conference paper

Abstract

Sulfate ions attack cast-in-situ piles of bridges and roads and hence deteriorate their bearing capacities. A theoretical model is proposed for evaluating the bearing capacity of a cast-in-situ pile under sulfate corrosive condition. Evolution rules of the side resistance, the end resistance, the bearing capacity, the strength of pile body, as well as the compressive rigidity and the flexural rigidity are studied systematically. The effects of pile diameter and length on the bearing capacities are analyzed and compared in detail. Studies show that the side resistance of pile is influenced by both radial compressive stress redistribution and concrete deterioration caused by accumulating of sulfate corrosion products. And it is also influenced by length and diameter of the pile. The end resistance and the effective area decrease with the increase of sulfate corrosion depth. The strength of pile body decreases rapidly during sulfate corrosion process. Both the compressive and flexural rigidities show remarkable drops with the increase of corrosion depth. The results show that increasing the pile diameter can enhance the pile’s resistance against corrosion and slow the decline in its bearing capacity.

Keywords

Sulfate saline soil Cast-in-situ pile Corrosion mechanism Bearing properties Evolution rules 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported financially by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41772290) and the Project of Shaanxi Province (No. 20170522).

References

  1. 1.
    Al-Amoudi, O.S.B.: Attack on plain and blended cements exposed to aggressive sulfate environments. Cement Concr. Compos. 24(3), 305–316 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tixier, R., Mobasher, B.: Modeling of damage in cement-based materials subjected to external sulfate attack. I: formulation. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 15(4), 305–313 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Al-Amoudi, O.S.B.: Sulfate attack and reinforcement corrosion in plain and blended cements exposed to sulfate environments. Build. Environ. 33(1), 53–61 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tixier, R., Mobasher, B.: Modeling of damage in cement-based materials subjected to external sulfate attack. II: comparison with experiments. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 15(4), 314–322 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Oliveira, I., Cavalaro, S.H.P., Aguado, A.: New unreacted-core model to predict pyrrhotite oxidation in concrete dams. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 25(3), 372–381 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chinchón-Payá, S., Aguado, A., Chinchón, S.: A comparative investigation of the degradation of pyrite and pyrrhotite under simulated laboratory conditions. Eng. Geol. 127, 75–80 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sun, C., Chen, J., Zhu, J., et al.: A new diffusion model of sulfate ions in concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 39, 39–45 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Idiart, A.E., López, C.M., Carol, I.: Chemo-mechanical analysis of concrete cracking and degradation due to external sulfate attack: a meso-scale model. Cement Concr. Compos. 33(3), 411–423 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bary, B.: Simplified coupled chemo-mechanical modeling of cement pastes behavior subjected to combined leaching and external sulfate attack. Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech. 32(14), 1791–1816 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Santhanam, M., Cohen, M.D., Olek, J.: Mechanism of sulfate attack: a fresh look: part 1: summary of experimental results. Cem. Concr. Res. 32(6), 915–921 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Skaropoulou, A., Kakali, G., Tsivilis, S.: Thaumasite form of sulfate attack in limestone cement concrete: the effect of cement composition, sand type and exposure temperature. Constr. Build. Mater. 36(36), 527–533 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ma, H., Li, Z.: Multi-aggregate approach for modeling interfacial transition zone in concrete. ACI Mater. J. 111(2), 189–199 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Santhanam, M., Cohen, M.D., Olek, J.: Sulfate attack research-whither now? Cem. Concr. Res. 31(6), 845–851 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Taylor, H.F.W., Famy, C., Scrivener, K.L.: Delayed ettringite formation. Cem. Concr. Res. 31(5), 683–693 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gao, R., Li, X., Xu, Q., et al.: Concrete deterioration under alternate action of chemical attack environments. In: International Conference on Multimedia Technology (ICMT), pp. 1008–1012. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Whittaker, M., Black, L.: Current knowledge of external sulfate attack. Adv. Cem. Res. 27(9), 532–545 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Campos, A., López, C.M., Aguado, A.: Diffusion-reaction model for the internal sulfate attack in concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 102, 531–540 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Du, J., Liang, Y., Zhang, F.: Mechanism and Performance Degradation of Underground Structure Attacked by Sulfate. China Railway Press, Beijing (2011). (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    JGJ 94-2008: Technical Code Building Pile Foundations (2008). (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tumidajski, P.J., Chan, G.W., Philipose, K.E.: An effective diffusivity for sulfate transport into concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 25(6), 1159–1163 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Geotechnical and Underground Engineering of Ministry of EducationTongji UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations