CORROSION ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2018

VOL. 53, NO. 2, 102–113

https://doi.org/10.1080/1478422X.2017.1402499

Corrosion of aluminium alloy A6061-T6 members embedded in alkaline materials

Emmanuel Mremaa, Yoshito Itoha,b, Akira Kanekoc and Mikihito Hirohataa
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan; bNational Institute of Technology, Gifu College, Motosu, Japan; cNippon Light
Metal Company Ltd, Shizuoka, Japan

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Owing to the corrosive conditions in coastal areas, aluminium alloy railings and similar structures are Received 20 May 2017
normally used on infrastructure works such as bridges and roads located in such areas because Accepted 15 October 2017
aluminium alloys are inherently corrosion resistant. However, to achieve rigid support, aluminium
KEYWORDS
alloy members are often embedded in concrete. Consequently, the embedded parts undergo Aluminium alloy; exposure
corrosion caused by the alkaline content of the cement used in the concrete. This research was test; corrosion; alkaline
carried out to study the corrosion behaviour on both the embedded and unembedded sides of material; surface treatment
aluminium alloy A6061-T6 members embedded in the concrete and also to investigate the ability
of a combined coating of anodic oxide and organic film to inhibit corrosion. Additionally, the
influence of scratch damage on the performance of this coating material was evaluated.

Introduction
Aluminium is known for its abundance and durability. But its
poor mechanical properties have stood in the way of its wide-
scale use in construction. However, newly developed alu-
minium alloys have been attracting an increasing stream of
demand in construction due to their improved mechanical
properties. Despite the generally inert behaviour of alu-
minium alloys, however, they can in fact react with certain
other reactive elements and materials, resulting in a decline
in durability [1]. Aluminium alloys exhibit different cor-
rosion behaviours depending on their surface conditions
and the chemical constituents of their surroundings.
Uncoated aluminium alloys exhibit a pitting type of corrosion
which appears in the form of cavities of irregular shape and
size localised on the metal surface. Pitting corrosion is
found in otherwise neutral environments (sea water, ground
water and air) which contain halogens such as chloride ions
(Cl−) [2–5]. Since the oxide film on an aluminium alloy is
normally not uniform [6], Cl− tends to attack portions with
insufficient oxide film cover causing the pitting to appear in
uneven distributions. However, pitting can also be found con-
centrated in specific areas where galvanic reactions take place.
The potential difference between the aluminium alloy and
some dissimilar metal with which it is in contact has the effect
of concentrating and accelerating Cl− attacks on contact areas
and results in a corrosion type known as galvanic corrosion.
Mrema et al. [7] found that uncoated aluminium alloy mem-
bers exhibit galvanic corrosion when they come in contact
with untreated steel fasteners in an electrolytic environment
and that the pits are concentrated around the contact area.
In a larger scale project in 2013, the Durability Research
Committee (Chairman: Y. Itoh) of Japan Aluminium Associ-
ation carried out a survey of the condition of aluminium alloy
guide rails on 14 bridges in Okinawa, Japan. They found
severe galvanic corrosion with pits concentrated around
stainless steel fasteners. In recent years, however, alternative
coating methods for inhibiting galvanic corrosion have been
studied with some success [8].
Uncoated aluminium alloys exhibit a more uniform type
of corrosion in acidic or alkaline environments with pH levels
below 4 and above 9, respectively. Uniform corrosion can be
described as a uniform thickness reduction (TR) in a metal
due to chemical reactions. Stating this in other words, when
small pits occur packed together with infinitesimal distances
between, the corrosion type is considered as uniform cor-
rosion [9–11]. Uniform corrosion of aluminium alloys in
acidic or alkaline media is mainly influenced by three factors,
i.e. pH level, temperature and concentration of the medium.
An increase in acidity (low pH level) together with an
increase in temperature will accelerate the rate of uniform
corrosion, while an increase in alkalinity (high pH level)
and in temperature will lower it [12,13]. An increase in
alkaline concentration at room temperature at a constant
pH level has been found to accelerate uniform corrosion in
aluminium alloys. Kaneko et al. [14] immersed aluminium
alloy A6061-T6 plates first into a cement extract solution hav-
ing the chemical composition shown in Table 1 and then into
solutions of other substances (NaOH, 31.5 mol m−3; Ca
(OH)2, 17.4 mol m−3; Ca(OH)2, 17.4 mol m−3 + Na2SO4,
12.6 mol m−3), all of the same alkalinity (pH 12.5) and
all at a temperature of 298 K. The amount of weight loss
in the aluminium alloy plate was found to decrease in
the order NaOH > Ca(OH)2 > Ca(OH)2 + Na2SO4 > cement
extract solution. From this, it can be deduced that alkaline
solutions of different concentration produce different levels
of corrosion even at the same pH level and temperature.
Different states and conditions in the alkaline medium also
lead to different rates of uniform corrosion. When alkaline
materials transform from a liquid to a solid state, they have
different corrosion effects on aluminium alloys. Nürnberger
et al. [15] found that fresh cement mortar paste caused a
greater uniform corrosion on an aluminium alloy than har-
dened concrete. He also found that hardened concrete in
wet of moist exposure caused great uniform corrosion to an
aluminium alloy than the one in dry exposure. From his
experiment, it can be deduced, first, that the mobility and

CONTACT Yoshito Itoh itoh@civil.nagoya-u.ac.jp Department of Civil Engineering, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-8603, Japan
© 2017 Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining Published by Taylor & Francis on behalf of the Institute

Table 1. Composition of cement extract (mol m−3) [14].
Na K Li Sr Cr
4.2 13.1 0.06 0.03 0.02
aggressiveness of corrosive ions is higher in a viscous than in
a solid-state alkaline material and, second, that moisture has
catalytic effects on alkaline reactions in hardened concrete, or
else contains reactive elements that independently cause
corrosion.
Coated aluminium alloy members also exhibit another
form of corrosion known as filiform corrosion (FFC). FFC
is a surface corrosion with patterns like filaments which
occurs at the interface between the organic coating and the
metallic substrate. FFC normally originates from defects
such as scratches in the organic coating and propagates per-
pendicularly from the defect line [16]. The factors influencing
FFC are not fully known, but several researchers have
reported that coating defects are the core factor while vari-
ables such as intermetallic particles, oxygen and water per-
meability in the coating/metal interface, casting methods
(rolling or annealing), the adhesion properties of the coating
material, climatic factors (temperature and relative humidity)
and surface pre-treatment methods also play a part [17–23].
Liu [24] found that different pre-treatment methods that
aluminium alloy members are subjected to before their
organic coating result in different resistances to FFC. In his
study, the aluminium alloy AA6016 was pre-treated using
an etching solution, and then, respectively, an aminopropyl
silane (APS) solution, an aminopropyl phosphonate (APP)
solution or a hexamethyldisiloxane (HMDSO) plasma. Com-
paring the influences of these pre-treatments on the sub-
sequent FFC in an epoxy coating, the severity of FFC was
found to follow the order: APP > APS > HMDSO.
One obvious way of inhibiting corrosion in aluminium
and its alloys is by avoiding contact with other corrosive
elements through the use of an appropriate coating system.
Many researchers have studied the ability of different organic
coating materials to inhibit corrosion of aluminium alloys in
different alkaline and chloride aqueous solutions. Many have
reported that the effectiveness of an organic coating depends
on its concentration and on the application method [25].
Within the plentiful research on the corrosion behaviour of
aluminium alloys in alkaline and chloride aqueous solutions,
studies focusing particularly on aluminium alloy members
embedded in unhardened-to-hardened alkaline materials, e.g.
concrete, mortar, exposed to chloride-contaminated environ-
ments, are few. Currently, aluminium alloy guide rails, bollards
Guiderail
Bollards
Cl-
Cl
-
Cl-
Cl-
Cl- Cl-
OH- OH-
OH- OH-
OH- OH- Concrete OH- OH-
Figure 1. Aluminium alloy structures in alkaline and chloride environments.
Table 2. Chemical composition of aluminium alloy A6061-T6 [26].
Alloying elements Si
Composition (Wt-%) 0.40–0.80
CORROSION ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 103
Table 3. Mechanical properties of aluminium alloy A6061-T6 [26].
Ca Cl SO4 Yield strength Ultimate tensile Young’s modulus Elongation
24.8 0.12 12.6 (MPa) strength (MPa) (GPa) (%)
276 310 68.9 12
and lamp supports are a preferred choice in infrastructure
works located in coastal or marine environments. To achieve
rigid support, the members are normally embedded in con-
crete. However, there are concerns about the long-term dura-
bility and structural performance of these embedded members
given the presence of corrosive elements in the concrete (on the
embedded side) and in the surrounding environment (on the
unembedded side) as illustrated in Figure 1.
This research addresses these engineering concerns by
studying the corrosion behaviour of uncoated and coated alu-
minium alloy A6061-T6 members embedded in cement mor-
tar, with or without scratch damage, and exposed to a
chloride-contaminated environment. A high-strength and
long-durability aluminium alloy type, A6061-T6, was used,
with samples prepared through an artificial ageing treatment
(T6). This particular alloy was selected because it is popularly
used in infrastructure applications such as bridge guide rails.
Mortar was used instead of concrete because the concrete/
metal interface is filled wholly with mortar paste, without
the addition of aggregates.
Specimen preparation
The specimens were extracted from a 9-mm-thick plate of
aluminium alloy of the type A6061-T6 with the chemical
composition and mechanical properties shown in Tables 2
and 3, respectively. Dumbbell-shaped specimens were
extracted according to Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS Z
2241:2011, Annex D, section D.2.3.2.5). Dumbbell-shaped
specimens were used because, after the corrosion test, a sub-
sequent tensile test was also performed using the same speci-
mens. The specimens were divided into five (5) groups as
shown in Table 5. Group ① and ④ specimens were not coated.
Group ②, ③ and ⑤ specimens were given a combined coating
of anodic oxide (9 μm) and organic film (12 μm of acrylate
resin) on all sides in accordance with Japanese Industrial
Standard (JIS H 8602:2010). The coating process involved
surface conditioning by etching the specimens in alkaline
and acidic solutions. Then an anodic oxide coating (alumite)
was added using sulphuric acid as an electrolyte and the alu-
minium alloy as the anode. The combined coating was com-
pleted by an electrodeposition process in which an electric
current was applied to the aluminium alloy as the anode to
precipitate the coating resin. The coating film was produced
and densified by baking the specimens afterwards.
Bollards
Unembedded An encasement of cement mortar was cast around the
Cl-
Cl- Cl- parts (neutral
environment)
specimens in groups ①, ② and ③ keeping the cement mortar
Cl- Cl- boundary within the gauge length. The properties and cement
OH-
Embedded
parts (alkaline
contents of the mortar used are summarised in Table 4. The
OH- environment) dimensions and configurations of the specimens are shown in
OH-
Table 5. The surface conditions of the specimens in each
group are described below along with their application
Fe Cu Mn Mg Cr Zn Ti Al
0.70 0.15–0.40 0.15 0.80–1.20 0.04–0.35 0.25 0.15 Remainder
104 E. MREMA ET AL.

Table 4. Cement mortar properties and mix ratio used.

Mortar properties Mortar mix ratio
- 7 days compressive strength = 41.8 N mm−2 - Cement = 12.5 kg
- 28 days compressive strength = 46.1 N mm−2 - Sand = 12.5 kg (maximum grain size = 2.5 mm)
- Curing for 12days at room temperature (25oC) - Water = 4.6 kg
- Fresh mortar pH level = 13.1–13.7 - Water/mortar ratio = 18.4%
- Chemical composition of cement used (mol m−3) - Water/cement ratio = 36.8%
- Consistency of mortar = 8 ± 2 s
Na K Li Sr Cr Ca Cl SO4
4.2 13.1 0.06 0.03 0.02 24.8 0.12 12.6

Table 5. Specimen groups and their compositions (dimensions are in mm).

Group ① Group ② Group ③ Group ④ Group ⑤
AET lots 30, 60, 90,120 days 30, 60, 90,120 days 30, 60, 90,120 days 30, 60, 90,120 days 30, 60, 90,120 days
DET lots 30 days 30 days 0 days 0 days 0 days
Nos. of specimens 3 specimens per lot, 3 specimens per lot, 1 specimen per lot, 3 specimens per lot, 3 specimens per lot,
AET: 3 × 4 = 12 AET: 3 × 4 = 12 AET: 1 × 4 = 4 AET: 3 × 4 = 12 AET: 3 × 4 = 12
DET: 3 × 1 = 3 DET: 3 × 1 = 3 DET: 1 × 1 = 1 DET: 3 × 1 = 3 DET: 3 × 1 = 3
Top halves

Mid-sections

Note: : coated specimens; : uncoated specimens; : specimen cross-section; : cement mortar.

relevance in this research. A further research objective is
to investigate the residual strength of corroded mem-
bers. Several specimens were prepared in each group for
each of four different exposure duration lots as shown in
Tables 6–8 in order to obtain a clear indication of corrosion
tendencies:
(i) Group ①: specimens were left uncoated but embedded
in mortar to investigate the corrosion behaviour of
uncoated aluminium alloy members embedded in alka-
line materials.
(ii) Group ②: specimens were given a combined coating of
anodic oxide and organic film and then embedded in
mortar to investigate the performance of this combined
coating to prevent corrosion of aluminium alloy mem-
bers embedded in alkaline materials.
(iii) Group ③: specimens were given a combined coating of
anodic oxide and organic film, artificially damaged
with a scratch line 220 mm long, at least 1 mm deep
and 1 mm wide, and then embedded in mortar so as
to leave 110 mm of the scratch line on the embedded
side and 110 mm on the unembedded side in order to
investigate the influence of scratch damage on the pro-
tective performance of the combined coating for alu-
minium alloy members embedded in alkaline
materials in an otherwise neutral environment. For
the dry exposure test (DET) (see below), specimens of
this group were not embedded in mortar.
(iv) Group ④: specimens were left uncoated and unem-
bedded in mortar in order to investigate the corrosion
behaviour of uncoated aluminium alloy members in a
neutral environment.
(v) Group ⑤: specimens were coated and not embedded in
mortar to investigate the performance of combined
coating of anodic oxide and organic film method in
the neutral environment.
 CORROSION ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 105

Table 6. Experiment results for group ➀ and ➁ specimens.

Corrosion test results (μm) Tensile test results (N mm−2)
Sp. groups Exposure test Exposure lots (days) Sp. No. TRtop TRbottom TR M S fy M S fu M S
① AET 30 1-1-1 28.1 12.1 40 47.2 12.6 312.6 310 3 325.2 325.2 2.0
1-1-2 14.7 25 40 305.9 323.1
1-1-3 29.8 32 62 310.3 327.1
60 1-2-1 57.4 31.2 89 60.2 24.6 307.4 309 3 323.8 324.7 2.4
1-2-2 10.7 33.4 44 307.7 323.0
1-2-3 19.5 28.5 48 312.5 327.4
90 1-3-1 33.6 40.9 75 86.2 34.9 308.4 307 2 324.4 322.5 2.5
1-3-2 40.3 18.4 59 308.7 323.4
1-3-3 64.7 60.7 125 304.3 319.7
120 1-4-1 32.4 28.6 61 91.0 27.4 306.9 305 2 323.5 321.4 1.9
1-4-2 77.1 37.6 115 302.6 319.8
1-4-3 34.3 63.1 97 306.6 320.9
DET 30 1-0-1 11.1 12.3 23 22.4 1.3 308.5 310 1 325.2 324.9 0.4
1-0-2 10.3 12.7 23 309.9 324.5
1-0-3 8.5 12.4 21 310.9 324.9
② AET 30 2-1-1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 309.2 310 1 321.0 323.2 2.0
2-1-2 0.0 0.0 0.0 309.8 323.9
2-1-3 0.0 0.0 0.0 310.5 324.9
60 2-2-1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 306.8 309 2 321.2 322.9 2.4
2-2-2 0.0 0.0 0.0 310.8 321.9
2-2-3 0.0 0.0 0.0 310.8 325.7
90 2-3-1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 309.6 311 1 324.8 324.4 1.2
2-3-2 0.0 0.0 0.0 312.2 325.3
2-3-3 0.0 0.0 0.0 309.8 323.0
120 2-4-1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 310.0 310 2 324.1 324.3 2.3
2-4-2 0.0 0.0 0.0 308.5 322.1
2-4-3 0.0 0.0 0.0 311.7 326.8
DET 30 2-0-1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 310.1 309 1 324.4 322.4 1.9
2-0-2 0.0 0.0 0.0 309.4 322.1
2-0-3 0.0 0.0 0.0 308.0 320.6
Note: Sp: specimen; TR: thickness reduction (TRtop + TRbottom); M: mean; S: standard deviation; fy: yield strength; fu: ultimate strength.

Table 7. Experiment results for group ③ specimens.

Tensile test results
Corrosion test results (μm) (N mm−2)
Unembedded Embedded side
side scratch line scratch line
Sp. group Exposure test Exposure duration (days) Sp. No. ΔW ΔD ΔW ΔD fy fu
③ AET 30 3-1-1 10.0 20.0 160.0 60.0 309.6 323.3
60 3-2-1 80.0 40.0 260.0 80.0 308.1 324.0
90 3-3-1 80.0 60.0 200.0 100.0 307.7 324.2
120 3-4-1 100.0 60.0 300.0 100.0 308.8 324.2
DET 0 3-0-1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 306.4 323.8
Note: Sp: specimen; ΔW: width increment; ΔD: depth increment; S: standard deviation; fy: yield strength; fu: ultimate strength.

Experiments a comparison basis for the corrosion behaviours and residual

Two types of exposure tests were performed, i.e. an acceler-
ated exposure test (AET) and a DET. The exposure durations
in each case are expressed in the two top entries for each
specimen group in Table 5. The AET was performed using
a combined cyclic corrosion testing machine manufactured
by Suga Test Instruments Co., Ltd as shown in Figure 2.
The specimens were placed inside the machine at an incli-
nation angle of 15° to the vertical with their top sides facing
the spraying towers. The S6-cycle test condition specified in
Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS K 5621) was used. This con-
dition is the one normally used to test the durability of
painted bridge steel members. The S6-cycle test condition is
used because Fujiwara and Tahara [27] found that the results
of S6-cycles test condition for painted steel correlated closely
to those of outdoor exposure tests. The combined S6-cycle
consists of 30 minutes of salt water spraying, 90 minutes of
wetting, 120 minutes of drying by hot air and 120 minutes
of drying by warm air as shown in Figure 3. The DET was
performed in a still air environment at a room temperature
of 25°C. The purpose of performing the DET was to provide
strengths obtained from the AET.
After each AET or DET involving cement mortar, the
mortar was removed by immersing the specimens in a 60%
HNO3 solution at 25°C for 1 hour. Combined coatings and
corrosive products were removed by immersing the speci-
mens in 2% CrO3 + 5% H3PO4 at 95°C for 10 minutes.
Corrosion was measured on the top and bottom portions
of each specimen at a pitch of 200 µm in the x and y direc-
tions on areas of 35 × 200 mm within the gauge length (Lo
= 200 mm) region. The measurement was conducted using
a laser displacement meter (KEYENCE, LE-4010) with a ver-
tical measuring range of ±5 mm, a laser-spot diameter of
30 µm and an accuracy of 0.1 µm as shown in Figure 4. Cor-
rosion data were logged into a computer connected to a laser
displacement meter.
Analysis of corrosion defects and residual strength
Corrosion data obtained from the laser displacement meter
computer were converted to a more useable Excel format
and used to plot corrosion maps for the top and bottom
106 E. MREMA ET AL.

Table 8. Experiment results for group ➃ and ➄ specimens.

Corrosion test results (%) Tensile test results (N mm−2)
Exposure Exposure duration Percentage of area corroded
Sp. groups test (days) Sp. No. (top side only) M S fy M S fu M S
④ AET 30 4-1-1 0.076 0.067 0.015 309.5 308 2 325.1 324.8 0.6
4-1-2 0.050 306.1 324.2
4-1-3 0.076 309.7 325.3
60 4-2-1 0.160 0.110 0.046 309.0 311 1.7 324.8 327.6 2.6
4-2-2 0.100 312.3 329.8
4-2-3 0.070 310.3 328.3
90 4-3-1 0.400 0.350 0.087 309.5 311 1.1 325.8 327.6 1.6
4-3-2 0.250 311.5 328.3
4-3-3 0.400 311.3 328.7
120 4-4-1 0.400 0.500 0.100 309.2 310 0.7 327.6 327.1 0.4
4-4-2 0.600 310.6 327.0
4-4-3 0.500 310.3 326.9
DET 0 4-0-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 307.0 308 1.4 323.9 326.3 2.1
4-0-2 0.000 308.8 327.6
4-0-3 0.000 309.7 327.5
⑤ AET 30 5-1-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 307.9 307 0.5 323.3 322.5 0.7
5-1-2 0.000 307.4 322.1
5-1-3 0.000 306.9 322.1
60 5-2-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 309.0 308 0.6 323.7 323.4 0.3
5-2-2 0.000 307.7 323.1
5-2-3 0.000 308.5 323.5
90 5-3-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 308.2 308 0.4 323.4 323.2 0.6
5-3-2 0.000 308.2 322.5
5-3-3 0.000 308.8 323.8
120 5-4-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 308.9 309 0.4 322.2 322.4 0.2
5-4-2 0.000 308.2 322.4
5-4-3 0.000 308.7 322.6
DET 0 5-0-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 306.3 308 1.3 321.7 322.0 0.5
5-0-2 0.000 307.9 321.7
5-0-3 0.000 308.8 322.6
Note: Sp: specimen; M: mean; S: standard deviation; fy: yield strength; fu: ultimate strength.

Cover

Specimen

Figure 4. Corrosion measurement by laser sensor.

Salt water Distilled water Control panel

Figure 2. Accelerated exposure test instrument. Corrosion maps were studied in conjunction with the
actual specimen surfaces to investigate the types of corrosion
exhibited and the influence of the scratch damage. It was
found that group ① specimens exhibited uniform corrosion
Salt water spray on the embedded half, group ② specimens did not exhibit
(5%NaCl)
Wetting
30±20C, 95% RH
any form of corrosion, group ③ specimens exhibited some
30±20C, 98% RH
1.5hr defects due to the influence of the scratch line, group ④ speci-
0.5hr
mens exhibited initial signs of pitting corrosion and group ⑤
6hr cycle
specimens did not exhibit any form of corrosion.
Multiple section profiles were plotted on each corrosion
Drying
map to locate and trace portions with outstanding corrosion
Drying
(Low temperature) (High temperature) defects so as to determine the extent of the corrosion. Mul-
30±20C, 20% RH 50±20C, 20% RH tiple section profiles were plotted along the gauge length of
2.0hr
2.0hr the specimen at intervals of 200 μm on the group ①, ②, ④
and ⑤ specimens as shown in Figure 5(a), (b) and (d) and
Figure 3. Cycle of accelerated conditions. transversely across the scratch line on the group ③ specimens,
on the unembedded and embedded halves separately as
shown in Figure 5(c).
halves of all specimens except for the ones in group ③ speci-
Uniform corrosion
mens where the maps were plotted only for the half with the
scratch line (the top half). Representative corrosion maps are Group ① and ② specimens, representing the embedded halves
shown in Figure 5. of mortar-embedded members, were inspected for uniform

Figure 5. Corrosion maps of representative specimens: (a) group ① specimens, (b) group ② specimens, (c) group ③ specimens and (d) group ④ and ⑤ specimens.
corrosion. All of the group ① specimens exhibited uniform
corrosion on their embedded halves, but no cases of uneven
or outstanding corrosion were found. Group ② specimens
showed no corrosion. Uniform corrosion was quantified in
terms of TR compared with the un-corroded surface (as pre-
served on the unembedded half). For each of the exposure lots
in the AET and DET test series, the corrosion profiles of all
the specimens were merged into an average corrosion profile
as a base from which to determine the mean uniform cor-
rosion (M ) and the standard deviation (S). The upper and
lower limits of TR are expressed as (M + S) and (M − S),
respectively, as shown in the legends of Figure 6. The
amounts of TR on the top half (TRtop) and bottom half
(TRbottom) of each specimen as determined from individual
CORROSION ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 107
specimen corrosion profiles are indicated in Table 6. Thus
the overall reduction in specimen thickness for each exposure
lot can be found by summing up the mean values of TR for
the top and bottom halves of the specimens represented in
Figure 6(a) and (b):
SPthickness − (TRtop + TRbottom )
%TR = × 100% (1)
SPthickness
where %TR is the percentage thickness reduction, SPthickness is
the original thickness (9 mm), TRtop is the thickness
reduction on the top half and TRbottom is the thickness
reduction on the bottom half.
The percentage thickness reduction for each exposure lot
was calculated using Equation (1) to determine the rate of
108 E. MREMA ET AL.

Figure 6. Average corrosion profiles of group ① and ② specimens within upper (M + S) and lower (M − S) limits of uniform corrosion: (a) top half profiles and (b)
bottom half profiles.
Note: M: mean; S: standard deviation of thickness reduction.

uniform corrosion. The percentage thickness reduction was
plotted against the exposure duration as shown in Figure 7.
It was found that the rate of uniform corrosion after 120
days of AET was limited to around 1% and that the rate of
uniform corrosion after 30 days of AET was greater than
after 30 days of DET.
Since the extent of uniform corrosion was not constant
between specimens, tensile strength also varied between
upper (M + S) and lower (M − S) strength limits, where M
is the mean tensile strength and S is the standard deviation.
The tensile strength of corroded specimens (group ①)
remained constant for up to 60 days of AET and then started
to decline but the decline was still limited to no more than
5 N/mm2 after 120 days. The tensile strength of coated speci-
mens (group ②) remained constant for all AET durations as
shown in Figure 8.
The influence of scratch lines on defects
Group ③ specimens were examined for coating defects along
their scratch lines. Normally scratches on organic-coated alu-
minium alloy members lead to FFC but in this experiment no
FFC was observed. However, after removing the mortar and
coatings, some defects were observed along the scratch lines

Figure 7. Rate of uniform corrosion in group ① and ② specimens. Figure 8. Residual tensile strength of group ① and ② specimens.

1mm 1mm
(a) New specimen (b) Specimen after AET
Figure 9. Influence of scratch line on defects: (a) new specimen and (b) speci-
men after AET.
on both the embedded and unembedded halves. The edges
and bottom of the scratch lines were observed to be rough
and there were increments in the scratch line width as
shown in Figure 9. A more detailed examination of these
defects was carried out by plotting profiles across the scratch
lines on the most affected sections in each exposure lot and
comparing them with the profile of a new specimen as
shown in Figure 10.
The scratch line defects were measured in terms of width
increment (ΔW ) and depth increment (ΔD). Their sizes were
calculated with reference to the scratch line width and depth
of a new specimen (0 days DET). The sizes of scratch line
width and depth increments on the embedded and
Figure 10. Comparison of scratch lines under AET and DET (new) conditions: (a) unembedded parts and (b) embedded parts.
Figure 11. Rate of scratch line width increase.
CORROSION ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 109
unembedded halves are shown in Table 7. These width and
depth increments were then plotted against exposure dur-
ation as shown in Figures 11 and 12. It was found that on
the unembedded halves scratch line width and depth increase
linearly with time at a gentle but steady rate but that on the
embedded halves they increase exponentially at a high initial
rate which eases off later.
Presumably, each ΔW involves some delamination of the
thin coating margin along the scratch line which opens the
way for a subsequent dissolution of the uncoated margin.
Consequently, the damage grows and leads to an overall
width increase. It can also be assumed that this scratch line
width increase is a significant factor for the onset of FFC.
Although no FFC was observed in this experiment, corrosion
features of approximately 1 mm in width and 0.5 mm in
length were observed on the embedded half of a 120-day
AET specimen as shown in Figure 13 and these can be
assumed to have originated from the scratch line.
A further observation was that on the unembedded halves
of specimens ΔD was increasing ahead of ΔW as can be seen
in Figure 10(a) while on the embedded halves ΔD and ΔW
were increasing simultaneously as seen in Figure 10(b). It is
assumed that on the unembedded halves salt water droplets
stay longer at the bottom of the scratch line than along the
sides, causing more dissolution there. On the embedded
halves, salinity and alkalinity are equally distributed at the
bottom and along the sides of the scratch line. The tensile
strength of group ③ specimens was constant as shown in
Figure 12. Rate of scratch line depth increase.
110 E. MREMA ET AL.
Figure 13. Corrosion features on the embedded part of a specimen after 120
days AET.
Figure 14. Residual tensile strength of embedded part of a group ③ specimen
after 120 days AET.
Figure 14. Perhaps the increments ΔW and ΔD are too small
to result in any considerable strength reduction.
Pitting corrosion
Pitting corrosion was investigated on group ④ and ⑤ speci-
mens, representing the unembedded portions of mortar-
Figure 15. Matchings of corroded specimen surface areas with standard drawings: (a) 30 days AET, (b) 60 days AET, (c) 90 days AET and (d) 120 days AET.
embedded members. Only the top halves of group speci-
mens were examined for pitting corrosion because no
signs of it were observed on the bottom (embedded) halves.
No signs of corrosion were observed on group ⑤ speci-
mens. The proposed method of measuring for pitting cor-
rosion on group ④ specimens was by locating and tracing
any spikes on the multiple section profiles plotted in Figure
5(d) but no such spikes were observed. The only signs of
corrosion visible were spots of facial corrosion on the
oxide film of the aluminium alloy with no substantial
depth dimension. These facial spots signify the onset of pit-
ting corrosion. The extent of the facial corrosion was
measured in terms of the percentage of surface area affected
(%A) using the Rating Number (RN) method stipulated in
Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS Z 2371:1994; Annex
Figures 1–7 and Table JC.1) where it is specified that
areas of 5000 mm2 should be selected on the most affected
portions and matched with the standard drawings provided
in Annex Figures 1–7. The RN of the best-matching stan-
dard drawing should then be used with Table CC.1 to select
corresponding values for the percentage of surface area
affected (%A).
Accordingly, 40 × 125 mm areas of surface most affected
on group ④ specimens were selected and matched with the
standard drawings as shown in Figure 15. In the figure, how-
ever, only half of each selected area is displayed for the sake of
clear visibility. The corresponding RNs were used with Table
JC.1, as stipulated, to obtain the percentage ranges for the
area affected (%A) as set out in Figure 16. Since each of the
RNs is further sub-divided into six sub-rating numbers
(SRN), a formula shown in Equation (2) was developed to cal-
culate absolute values of %A from the ranges (%A min to %A
max) through the use of the sub-rating numbers (SRN). The
calculated absolute values of %A for each of the exposure

Figure 16. Rating numbers and corresponding percentage ranges for corroded
areas.
Figure 17. Percentage of area corroded with exposure time.
lots tested are shown in Table 8:


max (A) − min(A)
%A = .(SRN − 1) + min (A)
5
where
. SRN is a subdivision rating number,
. Max (A) and min(A) are the maximum and minimum per-
centage of the corroded area obtained from Table JC.1.
Absolute values of %A were then plotted against exposure
durations as shown in Figure 17. It was found that %A
initially increases slowly but shortly later starts to steepen
with the increase in exposure time. It was further found
that for more extended durations of exposure, the growth
rate for %A obeys the Gompertz curve of degradation gov-
erned by Equation (3). Hence, a Gompertz equation could
be used to predict the AET exposure time required to produce
a 100 percent facial corrosion (100%A). The time required
was found to be 1200 days of AET as shown in Figure 18.
Since no corrosion depth was detected in any of the speci-
mens, the tensile strength of all the specimens in groups ④
CORROSION ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 111
Figure 18. Prediction of 100% corroded area by the Gompertz equation.
Figure 19. Tensile strength of group ④ and ⑤ specimens with exposure
duration.
and ⑤ was constant in all exposure lots as shown in Figure 19:
−ct
f (t) = ae−be (3)
−be−ct
where a is an asymptote, since limt1 ae = ae = a, 0
when t  1, a→100% (at 100%A), b sets the displacement
along the x-axis, c is the corrosion growth rate (%A/day),
e is Euler’s number (e = 2.71828 …)
(2)
Discussion
This section discusses different phenomena observed and the
analysis results obtained for each type of defect investigated.
The technical challenges encountered are also addressed and
possible remedies are proposed.
Uniform corrosion
This study has further clarified that corrosion on the
embedded portions of mortar-embedded aluminium alloy
members is not continuous. The progress of uniform cor-
rosion was observed to be limited to the embedded portions
of specimens. Additionally, in the scope of this study, the
extent of uniform corrosion depended on the exposure
environment and the presence of corrosive elements within
it. This means that mortar-embedded members will show
different levels of uniform corrosion depending on whether
they are submerged in a chloride-contaminated solution
112 E. MREMA ET AL.

as the initial onset of FFC. However, a longer period of AET

testing is necessary to confirm this suspicion. Since the
growth of defects along scratch lines on the unembedded por-
tions of specimens showed a linear relationship with exposure
time and yet no FFC occurred, it is likely that FFC will emerge
under a longer subjection to AET. On the embedded portions
of specimens, there is a great likelihood of FFC not develop-
ing due to the self-healing mechanism discussed earlier on.
But in addition, it can also be assumed that the coating
material has a considerably powerful adhesive capacity
which inhibits the onset of FFC.

Figure 20. Monitored pH levels in mortar.

Pitting corrosion
(salt water or sea water) or in a dry environment. It is also Pitting corrosion did not fully form but the initial signs of pit-
possible that different corrosive contaminants will yield ting corrosion could be observed in the form of facial cor-
different levels of uniform corrosion. This finding correlates rosion on the protective oxide film. From this observation,
with results in Nürnberger et al. [15] indicating that alu- it can be deduced that pitting corrosion starts after facial cor-
minium alloy members suffer more thickness loss when rosion at a particular spot on the oxide film is complete. How-
embedded in fresh-set or still moist concrete than when ever, to discover the lag period between facial corrosion and
embedded in dry concrete. pitting corrosion, a similar experiment running on through
Discontinuity of uniform corrosion can be attributed to a an extended exposure duration is required.
self-healing mechanism. The accumulation of corrosion pro-
ducts on corroded portions hinders the ingress of the electro-
lyte to cause further corrosion. Therefore, for corroded Conclusion
aluminium alloy members that are left unserviced, corrosion
This experiment considered aluminium alloy members of the
is likely to stop before detrimental effects transpire. This is
alloy type A6061-T6 differing in their finishing surface treat-
crucially important for aluminium alloy members embedded
ments and variously embedded or unembedded in concrete
in concrete because once the concrete changes from the aqu-
while exposed to a saline environment. On the basis of obser-
eous to the solid phase, corrosion products can no longer be
vations and through the analysis of experiment results, the
replaced. The pH of mortar was additionally monitored in
following conclusions were reached:
this study and it was found to decline with increasing
exposure time as shown in Figure 20. Since the pH level cor-
(i) Uniform corrosion on uncoated embedded sides of con-
responds to alkalinity, this means that the observed decline in
crete-embedded aluminium alloy members is not con-
alkalinity has the effect of lowering the rate of uniform cor-
tinuous due to the fact that the alkalinity (pH level) of
rosion to a standstill state. Regarding this, Nürnberger et al.
the concrete, the source of corrosive ions (OH−),
[15] found that irrespective of the particular state of the
declines as the concrete solidifies. And due to the
embedding concrete (fresh, hardened-wet, hardened-moist
impossibility of replacing corrosive products from the
and hardened-dry), the rate of thickness loss diminishes in
concrete/aluminium interface, the ingress of corrosive
every case to a standstill state.
elements to cause further corrosion is hindered. There-
Determining the residual strength of corroded specimens
fore, there is no fear of a premature collapse of concrete-
was made difficult by two limitations; the inability to use
embedded aluminium alloy structures due to corrosion
strain gauges on corroded surfaces and the inability to
in the embedded portions.
measure the width reduction in the corroded sections.
(ii) Pitting corrosion was not found fully formed on
Residual strength had to be calculated using load–displace-
uncoated specimens perhaps due to the considerable
ment data through a comparison with un-corroded cross-sec-
corrosion resistance of aluminium alloy type A6061-T6.
tions. Hence, the estimated load carrying capacity also needed
(iii) FFC did not occur in this experiment perhaps due to the
to be reached by conjecture from the calculation result for the
strong adhesive power of the coating material.
residual strength.
(iv) The combined coating of anodic oxide (9 μm thick) and
For a more precise understanding of uniform corrosion in
organic film (12 μm thick, acrylate resin) displays a con-
concrete-embedded aluminium alloy members, there is
siderable durability to inhibit uniform, pitting and fili-
clearly a future need for atmospheric exposure tests in an
form types of corrosion on aluminium alloy members
ocean environment. Also, to arrive at a more precise determi-
in both neutral and alkaline environments.
nation of the residual strength of a corroded section, new
methods are also required within the overall context of cor-
rosion measurement to obtain accurate measures of the
reduction in the section’s width due to the corrosion and of Acknowledgement
the strain that it undergoes during a tensile test. The authors are grateful to the Japan Aluminium Association for its
expertise, support and guidance in all stages of this research.

Influence of scratches
Although FFC was not detected in this study, an increase that Disclosure statement
showed up in the width of scratch lines could well be viewed No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References
[1] Pickling KM. An excellent surface treatment for aluminium.
Vecom Technical Bulletin 2014, No. 2004/17. pp. 1–2.
[2] Tomcsnyi L, Varga K, Bartik I, et al. Electrochemical study of the pit-
ting corrosion of aluminium and its alloys-II. Study of the interaction
of chloride ions with a passive film on aluminium and initiation of
pitting corrosion. Electrochim Acta. 1989;34(6):855–859.
[3] Szklarska-Smialowska Z. Pitting corrosion of aluminium. Corros
Sci. 1999;41:1743–1767.
[4] Ezuber H, El-Houd A, El-Shawesh F. A study on the corrosion
behaviour of aluminium alloys in seawater. Mater Des.
2008;29:801–805.
[5] Son I, Nakano H, Oue S, et al. Pitting corrosion resistance of ano-
dized aluminium alloy processed by severe plastic deformation.
Mater Trans. 2007;48(1):21–28.
[6] Brett C. On the electrochemical behaviour of aluminium in acidic
chloride solution. Corros Sci. 1992;33(2):20–210.
[7] Mrema E, Itoh Y, Kaneko A, et al. Galvanic corrosion study of alu-
minium alloy plates mounted to stainless and mild steel bolts by
accelerated exposure test. J Struct Eng (JSCE). 2016;62A:525–536.
[8] Durability Research Committee. Japan Aluminium Association:
report on field survey of civil engineering aluminium-alloy struc-
tures in Okinawa, Japan, September 2013 (in Japanese).
[9] El-Maghraby A. Corrosion inhibition of aluminium in hydro-
chloric acid solution using potassium iodate inhibitor. Open
Corros J. 2009;2:189–196.
[10] Choudhary G, Apita S, Alka S. Corrosive behaviour of Al, Cu and
MS in different acidic media. Int J Innov Res Sci Eng Technol.
2013;2(10):5467–5479.
[11] Arellanes-Lozada P, Olivares-Xometl O, Guzmán-Lucero D, et al.
The inhibition of aluminium corrosion in sulfuric acid by poly (1-
vinyl-3-alkyl-imidazolium Hexafluorophosphate). Materials
(Basel). 2014;7:5711–5734.
[12] Huang I, Buchheit R. Uniform corrosion dependence on tempera-
ture and pH of aluminum alloys 2024T3. ECS Trans. 2015;66
(17):97–107.
[13] Muslim Z, Jaafer H, Fahem M. The effect of pH level on corrosion
rate of aluminium and copper. Int J Basic Appl Sci. 2014;2(4):89–92.
[14] Kaneko A, Takodo T, Itoh Y. Corrosion behaviour of aluminium
alloy immediately after being embedded in concrete. Annual
CORROSION ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 113
Meeting of JSCE, Sendai, Japan; 2016: 544. p. 1087–1088 (in
Japanese).
[15] Nürnberger U. Corrosion of metals in contact with mineral build-
ing materials. Otto-Graf-J. 2001;12:69–80.
[16] Williams G, McMurray H. Anion-exchange inhibition of filiform
corrosion on organic coated AA2024-T3 aluminum alloy by
hydrotalcite-like pigments. Electrochem Solid-State Lett. 2003;6
(3):B9–B11.
[17] Nazarov A, Romano A, Fedel M, et al. Filiform corrosion of elec-
trocoated aluminium alloy: role of surface pre-treatment. Corros
Sci. 2012;65:187–198.
[18] Afseth A, Nordlien J, Scamans G, et al. Filiform corrosion of
AA3005 aluminium analogue model alloys. Corros Sci.
2002;44:2543–2559.
[19] Thomé T, Martinez S, Czechowski C, et al. Filiform corrosion of
aluminium alloys after a phosphate treatment. Surf Interface
Anal. 2014;46:157–163.
[20] LeBozec N, Persson D, Nazarov A, et al. Investigation of filiform
corrosion on coated aluminium alloys by FTIR microspectroscopy
and scanning Kelvin probe. J Electrochem Soc. 2002;149(9):B403–
B408.
[21] LeBozec N, Persson D, Thierry D. In situ studies of the initiation
and propagation of filiform corrosion on aluminum. J Electrochem
Soc. 2004;151(7):B440–B445.
[22] Steele G. Filiform corrosion on architectural aluminium - a review.
Anti-Corros Methods Mater. 1994;41(1):8–12.
[23] Zhou X, Thompson G, Scamans G. The influence of surface treat-
ment on filiform corrosion resistance of painted aluminium alloy
sheet. Corros Sci. 2003;45:1767–1777.
[24] Liu F. Filiform corrosion attack on pre-treated aluminium alloy
with tailored surface of epoxy coating. Corros Sci. 2007;19:3494–
3513.
[25] Xhanari K, Finšgar M. Organic corrosion inhibitors for aluminium
and its alloys in chloride and alkaline solutions: a review. Arab J
Chem. Forthcoming. DOI:10.1016/j.arabjc.2016.08.009.
[26] World-Class Material Supplier. Aluminium and aluminium alloys:
magazine; 2016. pp. 10–12.
[27] Fujiwara H, Tahara Y. Research on the correlativity of outdoor
exposure test of painting test piece with corrosion test for steel
bridge painting. J Struct Mech Earth Eng. 1997;570(I-40):129–
140.
Copyright of Corrosion Engineering, Science & Technology is the property of Taylor &
Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.