www.modiriat-sakht.blogfa.

com
ACI MATERIALS JOURNAL
Title no. 109-M16

TECHNICAL PAPER

Corrosion Prevention of Reinforced Concrete with Microbial Calcite Precipitation

by Varenyam Achal, Abhijit Mukherjee, Shweta Goyal, and M. Sudhakara Reddy
Microbially induced calcite precipitation (MICP) on concrete or mortar is an important area of research to enhance the durability of construction materials. The effectiveness of MICP in reducing reinforcement corrosion is investigated. Reinforced concrete (RC) specimens were treated with the bacterial strain Bacillus sp. CT-5, isolated from the cement sample, and subjected to accelerated corrosion. The results showed that bacterial-treated RC specimens reduced the corrosion rate four times more than the control specimens. A considerable reduction in mass loss and increase in pullout strength is observed with MICP-treated specimens. Corn steep liquor, an industrial pollutant, was used as a nutrient source to grow the bacterial cells for MICP in cementitious structures. This is a step toward the development of microbial concrete that provides a greener and more ecofriendly option.
Keywords: corn steep liquor; corrosion; industrial pollutant; microbially induced calcite precipitation; pullout strength; reinforced concrete.

INTRODUCTION The corrosion of steel and reinforcing bar in concrete structures is one of the most frequent reasons for civil infrastructure failure. It is a predominant factor causing widespread premature deterioration of concrete constructions worldwide, particularly those located in coastal and marine environments.1 Corrosion initiates due to the ingress of moisture, chloride ions, and carbon dioxide through the concrete to the steel surface. After initiation, the corrosion products (iron oxides and hydroxides) develop expansive stresses that crack and spall the concrete cover. This, in turn, exposes the reinforcement to direct environmental attack that results in accelerated deterioration of the structure.2 Thus, by sealing the paths of ingress, the life of the reinforced concrete (RC) structures can be improved dramatically. Microbially induced calcite precipitation (MICP), an environmentally friendly method, has been proposed recently, which has a great potential for reducing the permeability of concrete. MICP is a selective microbial plugging process in which microbial metabolic activities promote precipitation of calcium carbonate in the form of calcite. The precipitation of calcium carbonate relates to the concentration of dissolved inorganic carbon, the pH of the surrounding environment, the concentration of calcium ions, and the presence of nucleation sites leading to crystal nucleation development.3 In addition, several environmental parameters such as the temperature and salinity of the suspension have an inuence on the precipitation process. Microbial mineral precipitation technologies have been successfully demonstrated for the consolidation of sand columns4,5; the repair of limestone monuments6-8; and, to some extent, the remediation of cracks in concrete.9-12 Moreover, microbially induced precipitation has been investigated for its potential to improve the durability of construction materials. The effectiveness of calcite precipitation ACI Materials Journal/March-April 2012

as a protective lm in reducing the corrosion rate of the underlying mild steel immersed in seawater was documented.13 Microbial metabolic activities often contribute to selective cementation by producing relatively insoluble organic and inorganic compounds intra- or extracellularly. Considerable research on carbonate precipitation by bacteria has been done by using ureolytic bacteria such as Sporosarcina pasteurii.5 This bacterium increases the precipitation of calcium carbonate by producing an urease enzyme that can be regarded as a cementing enzyme. This enzyme catalyzes the hydrolysis of urea to CO2 and ammonia, resulting in an increase of pH and carbonate concentration in the bacterial environment.4 MICP is a series of complex biochemical reactions, during which 1 mol of urea is hydrolyzed intracellularly to 1 mol of ammonia and 1 mol of carbonate (Eq. (1)), which spontaneously hydrolyzes to form an additional 1 mol of ammonia and carbonic acid (Eq. (2)), due to urease activity.4 CO(NH2)2 + H2O NH2COOH + NH3 (1) NH2COOH + H2O NH3 + H2CO3 (2) Subsequently, these products equilibrate in water to form bicarbonate, 1 mol of ammonium, and hydroxide ions, which give rise to a pH increase. H2CO3 2H+ + 2CO32 (3) NH3 + H2O NH4 + OH (4) Ca2+ + CO32 CaCO3 (KSP = 3.8 109) (5) where KSP is the solubility product in Eq. (5). The composition of the medium seems to contribute in a variety of ways to calcium carbonate precipitation in a wide range of different environments.14,15 For commercial viability of the cementing enzyme, the quest for cheaper processes is essential. In most processes, the medium ingredients are a major cost factor, which can contribute as much as 60%.16 Costs of MICP treatments are attributable both to the price of the product and the number of applications required. The theoretic price of the product mainly depends on the price of the nutrients. The costs of the commercially available nutrients are estimated to be approximately $180 per kg
ACI Materials Journal, V. 109, No. 2, March-April 2012. MS No. M-2010-124.R4 received June 14, 2011, and reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright 2012, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion including authors closure, if any, will be published in the January-February 2013 ACI Materials Journal if the discussion is received by October 1, 2012.

157

Varenyam Achal is a Senior Research Fellow in the Department of Biotechnology and Environmental Sciences at Thapar University, Patiala, India. He received his PhD in biotechnology from Thapar University. His research interests include microbial remediation of defects in building materials and environmental biotechnology. Abhijit Mukherjee is a Professor and Director at Thapar University. He received his PhD in civil engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur, India. His research interests include life management of structures, structural health assessment, and structural rehabilitation and retrots. Shweta Goyal is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil Engineering at Thapar University. She received her PhD in civil engineering from Thapar University. Her research interests include durability of building structures. M. Sudhakara Reddy is a Professor and Head of the Department of Biotechnology and Environmental Sciences at Thapar University. He received his PhD in microbiology from the University of Madras, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. His research interests include bioremediation, environmental biotechnology, and molecular microbiology.

Table 1Physicochemical properties of cement

Parameter Physical analysis pH Specic gravity, g/cm3 (lb/in.3) Chemical analysis Lime (CaO), % Silica (SiO2), % Alumina (Al2O3), % Iron oxide (Fe2O3), % Magnesia (MgO), % Sulphur trioxide (SO3), % Alkalis (Na2O + K2O), % 63.5 19.1 4 2.9 2.8 2.6 0.8 2.3 Value 12.5 to 12.8 3.15 (0.114)

(lb). The dosage for biodeposition varies between 0.04 and 0.08 kg/m2 (0.0082 and 0.0164 lb/ft2), bringing the cost of the nutrients to $7 to $15 per m2 (ft2).17 Clearly, for a successful commercial process development, this cost of nutrient is very high. By replacing it with cheaper nutrient sources, the cost of the process can be brought down dramatically. There are several industry efuents that meet the nutritional requirements of MICP. These efuents are potential environmental hazards. Recycling them as nutrient sources has the double benet of preventing environmental pollution and reducing the cost of the process. Previously, it has been reported that the use of lactose mother liquor (LML), an industrial waste collected from the dairy industry, was a nutrient source used by Sporosarcina pasteurii toward the enhancement of the compressive strength of mortar cubes.18 However, other such locally available products need to be explored. In this study, a high-protein-containing industrial by-product, corn steep liquor (CSL), was used as a source of nutrient for the microbes in the concrete. The dichotomy of MICP for corrosion resistance is that on one hand the calcite deposition should reduce the moisture and ion ingress; but, on the other hand, the use of chloride salts in the process raises the concern of increased corrosion.19 The corrosion rate in MICP concrete is monitored through measurements of corrosion current density and linear polarization resistance. Destructive tests such as pullout strength and mass loss of the reinforcement were also observed. In the present investigation, an attempt was made to study the role of MICP in reducing the corrosion rate of reinforcement using the bacteria Bacillus sp. CT-5. This Bacillus species was isolated from commercially available cement samples. Thus, it is able to adapt to the highly alkaline environment of concrete. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE Although MICP promises to alleviate permeability and transport of pollutants inside concrete, its efcacy in reducing corrosion in RC has yet to be examined. This paper reports performance of MICP in corrosion reduction. The authors believe that this detailed study dealing with the prevention of corrosion is carried out for the rst time and will be very useful to concrete technology. It also uses an industrial pollutant as a nutrient source. Thus, it should dramatically cut down the cost of the process and facilitate recycling of industrial pollutants. 158

Loss on ignition, %

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE Isolation of bacteria from cement One of the concerns regarding the use of MICP in concrete is that the high alkalinity of cement may not be conducive to the survival of the bacteria. Therefore, in this investigation, the urease-producing bacteria were isolated from commercially available cement samples. The physicochemical parameters, such as pH, specic gravity, silica content, and alumina content of cement, were analyzed using standard methods.20 The results are presented in Table 1. For the enrichment of cement samples for urease-producing bacteria, 1 g (0.35 oz) of cement was inoculated with 50 mL (1.69 oz) of nutrient broth (NB) media (pH 8.0) containing 2% urea and incubated at 37C (310.15 K) for 120 hours under shaking conditions (130 rpm). Bacteria were isolated from enriched samples using a serial dilution technique by the total plate count method on nutrient agar plates. The plates were incubated at 37C (310.15 K) overnight. Subsequently, the colonies were transferred onto a urea agar base, a urease selective medium, to check the production of urease. The most efcient nonpathogenic strain, Bacillus sp. CT-5, was selected for further studies based on its ability to produce urease and calcite precipitation.21,22 Media CSL, an efuent of the corn wet-milling industry, was collected and used as a nutrient source to grow the bacteria. It is an environmental pollutant unless it is treated. It can also act as a constituent of some growth media and an excellent organic source.23 The 1.5% CSL was optimized from concentrated stock, which contained a carbon-nitrogen mass ratio of 6:1. The efciency of this medium was compared with commercially available standard NB to grow the bacterial isolates and also to cure the RC specimens. The media were supplemented with lter-sterilized 2% urea and 25 mM CaCl2 and the nal pH was adjusted to 8.0 using a 0.1 N sodium hydroxide solution. Preparation of test specimens Ordinary portland cement, ne aggregate (medium-sized natural/river sand), and crushed stone coarse aggregate with a maximum size of 20 mm (0.79 in.) were used in the concrete. The ratio of cement:sand:coarse aggregate was 1:1.54:2.86 (by weight). The water-cement ratio (w/c) (in ACI Materials Journal/March-April 2012

Fig. 1Schematic representation of reinforced concrete sample for corrosion analysis test. (Note: 1 mm = 0.0394 in.) control samples) and the bacterial culture cement ratio (in MICP samples) were maintained at 0.47. Concrete specimens with a characteristic strength of 20 MPa (2.9 ksi) conforming to IS 45624 with dimensions of 200 x 200 x 100 mm (7.87 x 7.87 x 3.94 in.) were cast with one 25 mm (0.98 in.) diameter twisted deformed steel reinforcement bar at the center. A standard reinforcing bar with a length of 300 mm (11.81 in.) and a diameter of 25 mm (0.98 in.) of Fe 415 grade conrming to IS 178625 was used. The bar was shot-blasted to Sa 2.5 surface and immediately dipped in oil. The white shining surface was maintained in the laboratory until it was embedded in concrete. A schematic representation of the sample is shown in Fig. 1. A specially fabricated formwork was used to maintain the location and alignment of the bar at the geometric center of the concrete specimen. MICP in RC specimens To determine the effect of biocalcication, the RC specimens were prepared with bacterial cells (Bacillus sp. CT-5) grown in nutrient and CSL media and cured in the corresponding media for 28 days at ambient conditions (~27C [300.15 K]). The media were replenished at an interval of 7 days. All the samples were removed from curing media after 28 days and wiped with a paper towel to remove excess liquid from the surface and left to dry for a week at 37C (310.15 K). The control RC specimens were prepared in a similar manner but without the bacterial cells. Accelerated reinforced corrosion The objective of inducing corrosion to the reinforcing bar is to simulate corrosion-damaged concrete. The corrosion process was initiated by applying a constant anodic potential of 40 V. A similar accelerated corrosion test was also conducted by other researchers.26,27 In this method, a constant positive potential was applied to the steel bar embedded in concrete and the current from the reinforcing steel bar to counter electrode was measured periodically. A sharp increase in current indicates the onset of corrosion. The specimens were kept immersed in 3.5% NaCl solution for 24 hours to ensure full saturation. Cotton gauze was rolled around the concrete specimen to evenly spread the NaCl solution. A stainless steel (SS) mesh was rolled over it, as shown in Fig. 2. The exposed reinforcing bar was then connected to the positive terminal (making the bar as an anode) of a DC power source while the negative terminal was connected to the SS mesh.28 A continuous drip of NaCl solution to the concrete specimen was used to induce chloride ion ingress to the specimens. The constant anodic potential of 40 V was applied to all the specimens for 7 days. Samples were visually inspected for cracks daily while the ACI Materials Journal/March-April 2012

Fig. 2Schematic respresentation of device for accelerated corrosion. current ow was continuously monitored. The crack widths were measured after 2, 4, and 7 days. Corrosion monitoring Nondestructive tests such as linear polarization resistance (LPR) and the Tafel plot (TP) technique were carried out. For LPR measurements, the steel reinforcement in the specimen was polarized to 120 mV from the equilibrium potential at a scan rate of 1 mV/s. For calculating the corrosion current density (Icorr) from LPR, the Stern-Geary equation was used. Icorr = B/Rp (6) where B is the Stern-Geary constant. B = (a c)/2.3 (a + c) (7) where a and c are anodic and cathodic Tafel constants, respectively. The value of B was taken as 26 mV considering steel in the active condition.29,30 The value Rp is the polarization resistance. Furthermore, the corrosion rate (mm/year) was obtained using Faradays law by Eq. (8).29,30 Corrosion rate (mm/year) = 0.00327 a Icorr/n D (8)

where Icorr is the corrosion current density (A/cm2 [A/in.2]); a is the atomic weight of iron (55.84 amu); n is the number of electrons exchanged in the corrosion reaction (that is, two) for iron; and D is the density of steel (7.85 g/cm3 [0.2826 lb/in.3]). Corrosion current density Icorr was determined through a periodic potentio-dynamic scan of the specimens by studying LPR and the Tafel plot using a corrosion analyzer. After accelerated corrosion, pullout tests were carried out on all the specimens after 7 days. This was done by securing the concrete specimen in a universal testing machine (UTM) and attaching the grip to the protruding portion of the reinforcing bar. The bar was pulled out of concrete at a constant rate (0.02 mm/s [0.00078 in./s]) and the maximum resisting force was noted. After completing pullout test, the corroded bars were cleaned off corrosion products, as required by ASTM G1-90, and weighed to determine the mass loss. SEM analysis The scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis was performed to investigate the role of bacteria for the 159

Fig. 3Current-time relationship at constant voltage of reinforcing bar (control and bacterially treated specimens in nutrient [NB] and CSL media).

Fig. 4Visible calcite precipitation on the surface of reinforced concrete specimens: (a) prepared with Bacillus sp. CT-5; and (b) compared to control reinforced concrete specimen. precipitation of calcite in an RC sample. After the pullout test, the broken concrete samples from the area of crack that appeared along the direction of the reinforcement due to corrosion were collected and dried at 60C (333.15 K) for 12 hours. The samples were gold-coated with a sputtercoating machine and examined using an SEM at accelerating voltages ranging from 30 to 35 kV. Statistical analysis All the experiments were repeated three times with ve replicates. The data were analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the means were compared using Tukeys test. All the analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism (5.03) software. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Corrosion current During accelerated corrosion, it is assumed that the electrical potential applied to the reinforcement attracted negatively charged chloride ions from the solution into the concrete and toward the positively charged reinforced bars. As the chloride ions reached the steel-concrete interface above threshold concentration, the steel surface began to corrode. The expansive products of corrosion-imposed tensile stresses on the concrete cover resulted in cracking when the stress exceeded the tensile strength of the cover material. Cracking, especially large cracks, would allow the conductive chloride solution to come into direct contact 160

with the steel surface, thus providing a direct current path between the reinforcement and the electrodes in solution.31 The current response as a function of time under the xed potential is shown in Fig. 3 for control and bacterially treated specimens. The current-time curves were used to determine the time to initiate the reinforcement corrosion by observing any instantaneous rise in the current recorded. The trend in the variation of current can be divided into three stages. The rst stage (0 to 48 hours) was characterized by relatively lower current values (in comparison to second and third stages). This can be attributed to the presence of the iron oxide layer, which temporarily protects steel. The second stage (48 to 120 hours) was characterized by an increase in current due to the initiation of cracks in the concrete, which resulted in increased corrosion rates due to ingress of chlorides through the cracks. In this stage, the resistivity decreased and ions penetrated into the steel. The current variation was relatively small compared to the control sample at the third stage (after 120 hours); however, in the control sample, the current increase was unabated even after 168 hours. As seen in Fig. 3, the rapid increase in current (from 17.5 to 40 mA) was recorded for the control specimens during rst 2 days. At the end of 7 days, a high-current intensity (nearly 180 mA) was detected. The sudden rise of the current intensity coincided with the observation of a wider crack (explained later). The current recorded for the bacterially treated specimens was signicantly lower approximately 55 mA until 4 days in both nutrient and CSL media. At the end of 7 days, an approximately 85 mA current was induced in bacterially treated specimens in both nutrient and CSL media. The lower initial current recorded in those specimens compared with the control may reect the higher electrical resistivity by MICP. Visual observations Visible calcite precipitation was observed on bacterially treated RC specimens (Fig. 4). Due to accelerated corrosion, the control RC specimens were found to develop cracks within 2 days. Corrosion products oozed out of the crack throughout the exposure period. At 4 and 7 days, the crack became wider and corrosion products oozed out in larger volumes. As a result, red and brown stains of rust were observed on the concrete. The cracks initiated at the surface of the specimen and ran along the direction of the reinforcement on the sides of the specimens. They branched at a later stage leading to splitting of the specimens. The number of cracks on the surface of control specimens increased as corrosion progressed.32 After 7 days (168 hours) of accelerated corrosion, numerous (at least seven) cracks with widths nearly 0.2 mm (0.008 in.) were observed on each surface. The maximum corrosion crack width was recorded at the end of the 7 days. In addition to longitudinal cracks, cover spalling was also observed. In contrast to control samples, no profound effect of corrosion induction was observed on bacterial-treated RC specimens. Microcracking on the surface of these specimens was rst noted after 2 days. The fully grown calcite layers with distinct and sharp edges were found all over the surface of the cracked section, thus acting as a corrosion inhibitor. At the end of 7 days (168 hours), in addition to cracks, the accelerated corrosion test revealed one longitudinal localized crack nearly 0.3 mm (0.012 in.) wide. A crack width of 0.3 mm (0.012 in.) is dened as a failure limit for RC specimens ACI Materials Journal/March-April 2012

as, for example, suggested by an earlier version of the ACI Building Code or AASHTO for crack width limit for outdoor exposures. A crack of that width appeared in control samples within 36 hours, whereas in bacterially treated samples, a crack of that width appeared not before 168 hours. Thus, the service life of bacterial specimens is nearly ve times greater than that of the control specimens. This indicates that MICP signicantly extends service life (time to corrosion initiation plus time to corrosion propagation) under accelerated test conditions. Corrosion rate The effectiveness of bacterial cells based on MICP as a protective agent was determined in control and bacterially treated samples by measuring their corrosion rates. The corrosion rates, determined by extrapolating the Tafel lines, are presented in Table 2. The rate of corrosion is considered proportional to the corrosion current density Icorr for the specimen. The control specimens had signicantly higher Icorr (60.83 mA/m2 [39.25 A/in.2]) in comparison to MICP samples (14.78 mA/m2 [9.53 A/in.2]) in nutrient and 20.03 mA/m2 (12.92 A/in.2) in CSL media. An approximate four-fold reduction in Icorr by Bacillus sp. CT-5 suggests that the calcite precipitation has the effect of greatly reducing corrosion. The bacterially treated samples also showed more resistance to current as LPR was found to be 16,102 Ohmcm2 and 11,890 Ohmcm2 in nutrient and CSL media, respectively, and the LPR was 3942 Ohmcm2 in the case of control RC specimens. There was a strong correlation between the amount of visible corrosion and the corrosion rate indicated by the linear polarization. The formation of calcite might facilitate the protective passive lm around the steel and act as a corrosion inhibitor by interrupting the transport process in such samples. Destructive tests After 7 days of accelerated corrosion exposure, pullout tests were carried out on all the samples. This was done by securing the concrete specimen in a universal testing machine (UTM) and attaching the grip to the protruding portion of the reinforcing bar. The bar pulled out, causing splitting of the concrete control specimens. It may be recalled that there was considerable corrosion and subsequent loss of metal in the control specimens. As a result, more visible rust was found after splitting the concrete samples. In comparison, the pullout force was much larger in the case of bacterially treated samples. The reinforcing bars from the bacterial samples had retained their shape better. The rust marks were less spread out in those samples. The highest pullout load was shown by bacterially treated RC samples, grown and cured in nutrient media (35 kN [7.8 kips]); when these cells (Bacillus sp. CT-5) were grown and cured in CSL media, the pullout load was 31 kN (6.9 kips). The control RC specimen showed a pullout load of 26 kN (5.8 kips) (Fig. 5). This may be due to calcite precipitations by bacterial cells contributing to the increase in the strength of the bacterially treated samples. To measure the mass loss of the reinforcing steel, the specimens were broken to retrieve the entire reinforcing bar after the pullout test. The reinforcing bar for each specimen was cleaned with deionized water and scrubbed with a stiff metal brush (as per ASTM G1-90) to ensure that the bar was free from any adhered corrosion products. The reinforcing bars used in these experiments had helical ribs on ACI Materials Journal/March-April 2012

Table 2Corrosion current data (mean standard deviation) from corrosion analyzer
RC treated with Bacillus sp. CT-5 In NB In CSL 14.78 0.001 9.53 0.001 0.017 0.001 0.67 0.002 16,102 68 103,884 441 20.03 0.002 12.92 0.001 0.023 0.001 0.91 0.02 11,890 260 76,710 1678

Parameters Icorr Corrosion rate LPR mA/m

2 2

Control RC 60.83 0.001 39.25 0.001 0.071 0.006 2.78 0.26

2

A/in.

mm/y mils/y Ohmcm Ohmin.

3942 374 25,432 2410

Fig. 5Variation of pullout strength with percent mass loss of control and bacterially treated RC specimens prepared with Bacillus sp. CT-5 in nutrient (NB) and CSL media. (Note: 1 kN = 224.81 lbf.) their surface to increase the bond with the concrete surface. A close examination after splitting the control specimen revealed that the bars exhibited a large amount of corrosion products on their surfaces, and the ribs were almost lost (this may be one of the reasons for the reduced bond strength). The surfaces of some bars were almost completely covered by corrosion products. Immediately after each reinforcing bar was extracted from its concrete casing, corroding bars exhibited a dark green-black crust of corrosion. This indicated that the visible corrosion products were in the form of ferrous hydroxide that is green in color. The color of these corrosion products changed from green to the commonly seen red rust color after being exposed to air. This indicates the change from ferrous hydroxide to ferric hydroxide due to the abundance of oxygen found in air. On the other hand, the surfaces of the protected bars (using Bacillus sp. CT-5) exhibited a very small amount of corrosion products on their surfaces, and the ribs were clearly visible. The percentage of steel mass losses from the control and bacterially treated RC specimens is presented in Fig. 5. Mass loss percentage was signicantly high in case of control RC specimens (5.94%) compared to those prepared with Bacillus sp. CT-5; the mass loss was 2.7% and 3.65% in nutrient and CSL media, respectively. A comparison of percent mass loss due to reinforcement corrosion reveals that the Bacillus sp. CT-5 inducing microbial calcite precipitation effectively reduced the loss of mass by nearly 53%. The reason that the control specimens exhibited a higher mass loss rate than the bacterially treated specimens is because wide longitudinal 161

Fig. 6(a) Presence of calcite crystals formed by Bacillus sp. CT-5 inside bacterially treated RC specimen; and (b) closer view of rod-shaped bacterial cells present in (a). (Note: Cc is calcite crystals.) cracks formed along the complete length of the samples, which led to increased accessibility for water and chloride ions. For the bacterially treated samples, the smaller crack widths inhibited movement of the corrosion products that serve as a shield against chloride-ion migration to the steel bar. Therefore, MICP reduces the corrosion rate of steel reinforcement signicantly when compared with the control specimens under the present accelerated test conditions. As the corrosion increased, the pullout force decreased. Mass loss affects the bond between the reinforcing bar and the concrete and thus adversely affects the pullout strength. When the LPR current reduction and mass loss were compared, it was noted that bacterial treatment reduced the LPR current by a ratio of 4, and the reduction in mass loss was approximately two times. This may be due to two factors. The polarization resistance in treated concrete was signicantly higher. Moreover, approximately one-third of the reinforcement was outside the concrete embedment (Fig. 1) and not exposed to corrosion. Thus, there was no loss of mass in this length. SEM analysis Calcite precipitation by Bacillus sp. CT-5 was visualized by SEM analysis. Samples were collected from the surface of the cracked area after the pullout test. The bacterial treatment resulted in the prominent presence of crystalline deposits on the surface of the RC sample (Fig. 6(a)). On closer observation, many rod-shaped bacteria associated with calcite crystals were found (Fig. 6(b)). It is mainly due to facultative anaerobic bacteria (such as S. pasteurii) that grows at a higher rate in the presence of oxygen and consequently induces active precipitation of calcite around the surface. It is therefore expected to have more calcite precipitation in areas closer to the surface than in the interior portion. The calcite deposition on the concrete surface reduces the permeability as it serves as a barrier to harmful substances to enter. The presence of crystalline calcite associated with bacteria indicates that it served as nucleation sites during the mineralization process.4 Economization of process This study established that economical cementation can be achieved using MICP via urea hydrolysis to the proof-of-concept stage by exploitation of an industrial pollutant, such as CSL. CSL can be used successfully to grow microbes with the ability to produce a cementitious 162 enzyme and also as a curing media for various structures used in civil engineering. The CSL offers a huge economic advantage over the standard nutrient medium and the overall costs reduce dramatically. Although the performance of standard laboratory nutrients was marginally better in Icorr and LPR, the difference was not very signicant. CSL can be available locally at a price of nearly $2 per liter (gal.), which is very economical compared to the standard nutrient medium ($180 per kg [lb]). Thus, the production of microbial concrete using the CSL medium presents an ecological, environmentally friendly alternative. CONCLUSIONS A novel method based on MICP was introduced for the rst time to reduce the corrosion rate of RC specimens. Based on the results of this experimental investigation, the following conclusions are drawn: Corrosion current density measurement showed that MICPs play an important role in reducing the current in RC specimens. LPR measurement illustrated that there was a dramatic change in polar resistance in MICP samples. Pullout strength was enhanced and mass loss of the reinforcing bar was reduced due to MICP. Industrial pollutants such as CSL can be used as a nutrient source to grow bacterial cells and a curing medium. Through recycling of industrial wastes, the cost of MICP can be reduced dramatically.
Financial assistance for this study received from the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, Department of Atomic Energy and Department of Science & Technology, Govt. of India, India, is gratefully acknowledged. The authors thank TIFAC-CORE for the experimental facilities.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

REFERENCES
1. Raupach, M., and Schiebl, P., Macrocell Sensor Systems for Monitoring of the Corrosion Risk of the Reinforcement in Concrete Structures, NDT & E International, V. 34, 2001, pp. 435-442. 2. Neville, A., Chloride Attack of Reinforced Concrete: An Overview, Materials and Structures, V. 28, No. 2, Mar. 1995, pp. 63-70. 3. Hammes, F., and Verstraete, W., Key Roles of pH and Calcium Metabolism in Microbial Carbonate Precipitation, Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology, V. 1, No. 1, 2002, pp. 3-7. 4. Stocks-Fischer, S.; Galinat, J. K.; and Bang, S. S., Microbiological Precipitation of CaCO3, Soil Biology & Biochemistry, V. 31, No. 11, 1999, pp. 1563-1571.

ACI Materials Journal/March-April 2012

5. Achal, V.; Mukherjee, A.; Basu, P. C.; and Reddy, M. S., Strain Improvement of Sporosarcina pasteurii for Enhanced Urease and Calcite Production, Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology, V. 36, No. 7, 2009, pp. 981-988. 6. Tiano, P.; Biagiotti, L.; and Mastromei, G., Bacterial Bio-Mediated Calcite Precipitation for Monumental Stones Conservation: Methods of Evaluation, Journal of Microbiological Methods, V. 36, No. 1-2, 1999, pp. 139-145. 7. Rodriguez-Navarro, C.; Rodriguez-Gallego, M.; Ben Chekroun, K.; and Gonzalez-Munoz, M. T., Conservation of Ornamental Stone by Myxococcus xanthus-Induced Carbonate Biomineralization, Applied and Environmental Microbiology, V. 69, No. 4, 2003, pp. 2182-2193. 8. Dick, J.; De Windt, W.; De Graef, B.; Saveyn, H.; Van der Meeren, P.; De Belie, N.; and Verstraete, W., Bio-Deposition of a Calcium Carbonate Layer on Degraded Limestone by Bacillus Species, Biodegradation, V. 17, No. 4, 2006, pp. 357-367. 9. Bang, S. S.; Galinat, J. K.; and Ramakrishnan, V., Calcite Precipitation Induced by Polyurethane-Immobilized Bacillus pasteurii, Enzyme and Microbial Technology, V. 28, No. 4-5, 2001, pp. 404-409. 10. Ramachandran, S. K.; Ramakrishnan, V.; and Bang, S. S., Remediation of Concrete Using Microorganisms, ACI Materials Journal, V. 98, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 2001, pp. 3-9. 11. Bachmeier, K.; Williams, A. E.; Warmington, J.; and Bang, S. S., Urease Activity in Microbiologically-Induced Calcite Precipitation, Journal of Biotechnology, V. 93, No. 2, 2002, pp. 171-181. 12. De Muynck, W.; Cox, K.; De Belie, N.; and Verstraete, W., Bacterial Carbonate Precipitation as an Alternative Surface Treatment for Concrete, Construction & Building Materials, V. 22, No. 5, 2008, pp. 875-885. 13. Elbeik, S.; Tseung, A. C. C.; and Mackay, A. L., The Formation of Calcareous Deposits during the Corrosion of Mild Steel in Sea Water, Corrosion Science, V. 26, No. 9, 1986, pp. 669-680. 14. Knorre, H., and Krumbein, K. E., Bacterial Calcication, Microbial Sediments, E. E. Riding and S. M. Awramik, eds., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2000, pp. 25-31. 15. Rivadeneyra, M. A.; Parraga, J.; Delgado, R.; Ramos-Cormenzana, A.; and Delgado, G., Biomineralization of Carbonates by Halobacillus trueperi in Solid and Liquid Media with Different Salinities, FEMS Microbiology Ecology, V. 48, No. 1, 2004, pp. 39-46. 16. Kristiansen, B., Process Economics, Basic Biotechnology, second edition, C. Ratledge and B. Kristiansen, eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2001, pp. 239-252. 17. De Muynck, W.; De Belie, N.; and Verstraete, W., Microbial Carbonate Precipitation in Construction Materials: A Review, Ecological Engineering, V. 36, No. 2, 2010, pp. 118-136. 18. Achal, V.; Mukherjee, A.; Basu, P. C.; and Reddy, M. S., Lactose Mother Liquor as an Alternative Nutrient Source for Microbial Concrete Production by Sporosarcina pasteurii, Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology, V. 36, No. 3, 2009, pp. 433-438.

19. ACI 318-89, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-89) and Commentary, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1989, 374 pp. 20. Idris, M. S.; Ismail, K. N.; Jamaludin, S. B.; Ghazali, C. M. R.; and Hussin, K., Comparative Study of Clinkers Transformation at Different Temperature Zone during Cement Production, American Journal of Applied Sciences, V. 4, No. 5, 2007, pp. 328-332. 21. Achal, V.; Mukherjee, A.; and Reddy, M. S., Characterization of Two Urease-Producing and Calcifying Bacillus spp. Isolated from Cement, Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, V. 20, No. 11, 2010, pp. 1571-1576. 22. Achal, V.; Mukherjee, A.; and Reddy, M. S., Microbial Concrete: A Way to Enhance the Durability of Building Structures, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, V. 23, No. 6, 2011, pp. 730-734. 23. Achal, V.; Mukherjee, A.; and Reddy, M. S., Biocalcication by Sporosarcina pasteurii Using Corn Steep Liquor as the Nutrient Source, Industrial Biotechnology, V. 6, No. 3, 2010, pp. 170-174. 24. IS 456:2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete Code of Practice, fourth revision, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India, pp. 1-98. 25. IS 1786:1992. Specication for High Strength Deformed Steel Bars and Wires for Concrete Reinforcement, third revision, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India. 26. Al-Zahani, M. M.; Al-Dulaijan, S. U.; Ibrahim, M.; Saricimen, H.; and Sharif, F. M., Effect of Waterproong Coating on Steel Reinforcement Corrosion and Physical Properties of Concrete, Cement and Concrete Composites, V. 24, No. 1, 2002, pp. 127-137. 27. Sujjavanich, S.; Sida, V.; and Suwanvitaya, P., Chloride Permeability and Corrosion Risk of High-Volume Fly Ash Concrete with Mild-Range Water Reducer, ACI Materials Journal, V. 102, No. 3, May-June 2005, pp. 177-182. 28. Gadve, S.; Mukherjee, A.; and Malhotra, S. N., Corrosion of Steel Reinforcements Embedded in FRP Wrapped Concrete, Construction & Building Materials, V. 23, No. 1, 2009, pp. 153-161. 29. Pradhan, B., and Bhattacharjee, B., Performance Evaluation of Rebar in Chloride Contaminated Concrete by Corrosion Rate, Construction & Building Materials, V. 23, No. 5, 2009, pp. 2346-2356. 30. Dehwah, H. A. F.; Maslehuddin, M.; and Austin, S. A., Long-Term Effect of Sulfate Ions and Associated Cation Type on Chloride-Induced Reinforcement Corrosion in Portland Cement Concretes, Cement and Concrete Composites, V. 24, No. 1, 2002, pp. 17-25. 31. So, H. S., and Millard, S. G., On-Site Measurements on Corrosion Rate of Steel in Reinforced Concrete, ACI Materials Journal, V. 104, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2007, pp. 638-642. 32. Sahmaran, M.; Li, V. C.; and Andrade, C., Corrosion Resistance Performance of Steel-Reinforced Engineered Cementitious Composite Beams, ACI Materials Journal, V. 105, No. 3, May-June 2008, pp. 243-250.

ACI Materials Journal/March-April 2012

163

NOTES:

164

ACI Materials Journal/March-April 2012