Cathodic Protection for Reinforced Concrete Bridge Deck – Big Spring

Details

• Creators:
  Nash, Phillip T. ; Parker, Harry W. ; Feingold, Robert W.
• Corporate Creators:
  Texas Tech University
• Corporate Contributors:
  Texas Department of Transportation ; United States. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  Anodes Bridge Decks Cathodes Cathodic Protection Concrete Bridges Corrosion Reinforcing Materials
• Publication/ Report Number:
  500-2F
• Resource Type:
  Tech Report
• Geographical Coverage:
  Texas ; United States
• Edition:
  Draft March 1992 - December 1993 (Final)
• Corporate Publisher:
  Texas Transportation Institute. Texas A&M University
• Abstract:
  Five individual cathodic protection systems were installed on the U.S. 87 Missouri-Pacific Railroad overpass structure in Big Spring, Texas. The cathodic protection systems were installed in October 1988 as a demonstration project to compare the various systems. Three distributed anode types were used to protect the bridge deck: (1) titanium mesh; (2) conductive polymer; and (3) carbon strand. A hot-sprayed zinc conductive coating anode was applied to sidewalks and a median on the bridge deck, and a conductive paint anode was applied to a bridge bent. Performance data have been collected for each system since installation. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of the five different cathodic protection systems installed on the Big Spring bridge. The system assessment included determining the effectiveness of each system, performing a cost effectiveness study of the systems used to protect the bridge deck, preparing training aids for TxDOT personnel, and recommending a schedule for future evaluations and data collections. Only the titanium mesh distributed anode system continues to function. The hot-sprayed zinc anode system failed early in the study, and the reason for its failure is probably existing conditions of the sidewalk and median prior to system installation. The conductive paint has failed, and the conductive coating is peeling and flaking extensively. A present value cost analysis is presented that considers bridge decks with and without cathodic protection. New and existing bridge decks were compared in the present value cost analysis.
• Format:
  PDF
• Funding:
  1-10-85-500
• Collection(s):
  US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:3c58f761119b0def2792a6fdc35ce8598d91598588e1e6b083b6a6a2a0695808c8117402a77245a97fabeea3a918f372841578052f60b1b6a46ea17f022095cc
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/85021/dot_85021_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 4.37 MB ]