Abstract:
The sequencer system for corrosion data collection of specimens includes a container for holding a plurality of specimens to be tested. During testing, the container holds a solution bath. A reference electrode and a counter electrode are coupled to a potentiostat, both electrodes being operationally disposed inside the container. A sequencer is connected to each specimen via a working electrode line. The sequencer operates in concert with the potentiostat to switch between a tested specimen and a subsequent specimen to be tested during a pause phase between each polarization cycle of the potentiostat. A computer is coupled to the potentiostat and the sequencer, and a program controls synchronized operations between the potentiostat and the sequencer. The program also permits automatic data collection for each of the specimens.

Description:
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS 
       [0001]    This application claims priority to a U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 
         [0002]    61/984,863, filed on Apr. 28, 2014. 
     
    
     BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
       [0003]    1. FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
         [0004]    The present invention relates to monitoring and testing systems, and particularly to a sequencer system for data collection of corrosion specimens that provides serial testing of a plurality of specimens in a single session. 
         [0005]    2. DESCRIPTION OF THE RELATED ART 
         [0006]    Metallic corrosion is an electro-chemical process in which a metal loses mass at its surface due to formation of oxides. The time rate of the metal per unit of surface area defines the metallic corrosion rate. Given the economic and social importance of corrosion of reinforced concrete (R-C) structures, and since predictions of their residual service life and monitoring and control of the effectiveness of a chosen corrosion protective measures generally require a method for measuring the rate of corrosion, reliable and fast detection of corrosion and the evaluation of its rate have attracted the interest of researchers. Gravimetric weight loss technique is a simple but the most reliable method established for the study of metallic corrosion. However, due to its time consuming and destructive nature, it is not applicable for the assessment of real R-C structures. Nevertheless, it remains a reliable reference method for verification of the validity of other techniques, such as electrochemical methods. 
         [0007]    Non-destructive but indirect methods, such as the measurement of corrosion potential (E corr ) and concrete resistivity, have been developed for the detection of corrosion in steel reinforcement bars or rebars. These methods, however, provide only qualitative, or at best, semi-quantitative information. Electrochemical methods, which offer non-destructive detection and quantitative measurement of corrosion rate in steel-concrete systems, are the most widely applied methods for the study of rebar corrosion in recent times. Some popular electrochemical methods include linear polarization or polarization resistance (R p ), coulostatic, electrochemical noise, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) or A.C. impedance methods. Out of these techniques, the most widely used method for quantitatively assessing the corrosion kinetics of metallic materials, both on-site and in the laboratory, is the polarization resistance (R p ) method. 
         [0008]    Many testing devices have been developed employing the polarization resistance method. These devices automate potential sweep and data gathering processes in order to obtain the corrosion rate of a rebar embedded in concrete with minimal effort. This has made in-situ assessment and lab studies on rebar corrosion rates very easy. However, these devices tend to be very expensive, and they are typically designed for testing a single specimen at a time. In laboratories where hundreds of specimens must be tested for research, development, and performance verification works, the prospect can be daunting, repetitious, and overly time-consuming. Consider for example that a typical testing interval lasts for about ten minutes per specimen, in which a lab technician prepares the specimen to be tested, runs the test, and manually notes the results thereof. It can be seen that this process increases the potential for human error. Thus, many reported inconsistencies applying the same electrochemical technique in varying conditions, particularly in passive systems, may result from incorrect application of the particular electrochemical technique in question, rather than the technique itself being unable to capture the behavior of the steel-concrete system. 
         [0009]    Thus, a sequencer system for data collection of a plurality of corrosion specimens solving the aforementioned problems is desired. 
       SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
       [0010]    The sequencer system for data collection of corrosion specimens includes a container for holding a plurality of specimens to be tested, and during testing, the container holds a solution bath. A reference electrode and a counter electrode are coupled to a potentiostat, both electrodes being operationally disposed inside the container. A sequencer is connected to each specimen via a working electrode line. The sequencer operates in concert with the potentiostat to switch between a tested specimen and a subsequent specimen to be tested during a pause phase between each polarization cycle of the potentiostat. A computer is coupled to the potentiostat and the sequencer, and a program controls synchronized operations between the potentiostat and the sequencer. The program also permits automatic data collection for each specimen. 
         [0011]    These and other features of the present invention will become readily apparent upon further review of the following specification and drawings. 
     
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
         [0012]      FIG. 1  is a schematic diagram of a sequencer system for data collection of corrosion specimens according to the present invention. 
           [0013]      FIG. 2  is a schematic diagram of a container in the sequencer system for data collection of corrosion specimens of  FIG. 1 , showing connections between the potentiostat and the specimens. 
           [0014]      FIG. 3  is a timing diagram showing the interaction between the operating cycles of a potentiostat and a sequencer in the sequencer system for data collection of corrosion specimens shown in  FIG. 1 . 
           [0015]      FIG. 4  is an operational flowchart of the sequencer system for data collection of corrosion specimens shown in  FIG. 1  and a program therefore. 
           [0016]      FIG. 5  is a graph of data results comparing data between a conventional data collection system and the sequencer system for data collection of corrosion specimens shown in  FIG. 1 . 
           [0017]      FIG. 6  is a schematic diagram of a prior art data collection system. 
           [0018]      FIG. 7  is a circuit diagram of a prior art data collection system. 
       
    
    
       [0019]    Similar reference characters denote corresponding features consistently throughout the attached drawings. 
       DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS 
       [0020]    The sequencer system for data collection of corrosion specimens, generally referred to by the reference number  100  in the drawings, provides a relatively inexpensive testing setup that facilitates serial testing of a plurality or multiple specimens in a single session. For comparison, a conventional linear polarization resistance (LPR) testing system PRT is shown in  FIG. 6  in which a single sample or specimen S is prepared to undergo the testing process. 
         [0021]    The conventional testing system PRT includes a container H filled with a bath solution B. The solution B preferably contains about 5% NaCl or any other electrolyte of any concentration. The specimen S is a “lollipop” configuration in which a rebar section R protrudes out of a concrete cylinder C forming a general lollipop or ice cream stick shape. The specimen S is placed between a counter electrode CE and a reference electrode RE. A working electrode WE is selectively coupled to the rebar section R to obtain current (potentiostatic mode) or potential (galvanostatic mode) readings from the rebar section R. The counter electrode CE, the reference electrode RE, and the working electrode WE are all coupled to a potentiostat P, which controls the electroanalytical functions for the testing process. In a traditional testing procedure, the single working electrode WE is sequentially coupled to each subsequent specimen to be tested after the prior specimen has been tested. Once a specimen has been tested, the working electrode WE is decoupled from the tested specimen, and the tested specimen removed from bath B. Then the working electrode WE is coupled to the subsequent specimen to be tested and placed into bath B. The order of couplings and specimens can be facilitated in any manner. However, the preparation and testing of the specimen is performed on a one by one basis, rather than in a batch. It can be readily seen from the above that many manual and time-consuming steps are involved in testing a plurality of specimens one at a time. 
         [0022]    The measurement procedure for obtaining corrosion current density, I corr , is best seen with reference to  FIG. 7 . Keeping K 1  and K 2  open, the stable corrosion potential (E corr ) can be measured and recorded with the aid of a voltmeter VM, after allowing a sufficient response time of 30-60 seconds. Keeping K 2  closed, a cathodic polarizing current, I 2 , can be applied in steps (ΔI) while the system potential response (ΔE) is read and recorded (galvanostatic mode), or vice-versa (potentiostatic mode), the recording being usually performed manually. It is customary to apply the potential sweep over a range of 20 mV, from −10 mV to +10 mV of E corr . The corrosion current density, I corr , can be evaluated using a 
         [0023]    Stern-Geary relationship: 
         [0000]    
       
         
           
             
               I 
               corr 
             
             = 
             
               B 
               
                 R 
                 p 
               
             
           
         
       
     
         [0000]    where: 
         [0024]    I corr =Corrosion current density, μA/cm 2 ; 
         [0025]    R p =Resistance to polarization, ΔE/ΔI, Ω·cm 2 ; 
         [0000]    
       
         
           
             
               B 
               = 
               
                 
                   
                     β 
                     a 
                   
                   × 
                   
                     β 
                     c 
                   
                 
                 
                   2.3 
                    
                   
                     ( 
                     
                       
                         β 
                         a 
                       
                       + 
                       
                         β 
                         c 
                       
                     
                     ) 
                   
                 
               
             
             ; 
           
         
       
     
         [0000]    and 
         [0026]    β a  and β c  are the anodic and cathodic Tafel constants, mV/decade, respectively. 
         [0027]    The Tafel constants are normally obtained by polarizing the steel in the rebar section R to ±250 mV of the corrosion potential (Tafel plot). However, in the absence of sufficient data on β a  and β c , a value of B equal to 26 mV for steel in active condition and 52 mV for steel in passive condition is often used. 
         [0028]    In contrast to the conventional setup, the present sequencer system  100  for data collection of corrosion specimens, as best seen in the diagrammatic view shown in  FIG. 1 , includes a specimen container or tank  110  configured to simultaneously hold a plurality of specimens S 1 , S 2 , S 3  therein; a reference electrode  111 ; a counter electrode  112 ; a sequencer  120 ; a potentiostat  130 ; and a computer  140 . Each specimen S 1 , S 2 , S 3  is preferably of conventional construction of a cylindrical concrete block C 1 , C 2 , C 3  having a respective, embedded rebar section R 1 , R 2 , R 3  protruding out of the corresponding concrete block C 1 , C 2 , C 3 . It is to be noted that although the drawings show a specific number of specimens, the actual number can be varied. 
         [0029]    The container  110  is normally filled with the bath solution B mentioned above during testing. It is to be noted that the container  110  does not need to be a discrete constructed or manufactured container. The container  110  can be any type of structure or environment that can hold a bath B with one or more specimens exposed for testing. For example, the container  110  can be an in-situ exposure site, such as in the middle of an ocean, in which case the seawater can serve as the bath solution B or the reference electrode  111  and the counter electrode  112  can be placed on the surface of a structure with suitable connection to the reinforcement cage in a reinforced concrete structure. Referring back to  FIG. 1 , the reference electrode  111  and the counter electrode  112  are selectively placed near opposite ends of the specimen container  110  during setup, and the specimens S 1 , S 2 , S 3  are placed between the reference electrode  111  and the counter electrode  112 . Other arrangements of the reference electrode  111 , the counter electrode  112 , and the specimens S 1 , S 2 , S 3  within the container  110  are also possible during setup. A reference electrode line  111   a  extends from the reference electrode  111  and is selectively coupled to the potentiostat  130 . Similarly, the counter electrode  112  includes a counter electrode line  112   a  extending therefrom, which is selectively coupled to the potentiostat  130 . 
         [0030]    Each rebar section R 1 , R 2 , R 3  acts as an individual working electrode and includes respective working electrode lines  113   a,    113   b,    113   c  extending from a corresponding rebar section R 1 , R 2 , R 3 . Since each rebar section R 1 , R 2 , R 3  acts as an individual working electrode, there can be more than one rebar section embedded in each specimen S 1 , S 2 , S 3 . The working electrode lines  113   a,    113   b,    113   c  are individually coupled to the sequencer  120  in parallel. As best seen in  FIG. 2 , the sequencer  120  functions as a switchboard that closes the circuit to each working electrode line  113   a,    113   b,    113   c  in a preprogrammed, sequential manner. 
         [0031]    A computer  140  is operatively coupled to the sequencer  120  and the potentiostat  130  to control the respective operations thereof. A program  150  has been developed to synchronize the operational cycles of the potentiostat  130  with the electrode switching sequence of the sequencer  120 . The program  150  utilizes the preprogrammed operational characteristics of the potentiostat  130  to facilitate the electrode switching. In one respect, the program  150  acts as a driver that controls the electrode switching process of the sequencer  120 , which enables coupling or closing of the circuit from one specimen to another. The program  150  is installed and configured in the computer  140  and facilitates automated detection of the completion of the polarization run of the previously coupled specimen by the potentiostat  130 . To increase smooth transition to the next specimen, the potentiostat  130  can be configured to impose an additional pause for about 2-4 seconds as needed before each polarization run to create what is later referred to as the idle phase. 
         [0032]    To illustrate, the potentiostat  130  undergoes repetitive polarization cycles during testing as best seen in  FIG. 3 . Each cycle includes an idle phase and an active phase. The idle phase is composed of a pre-polarization pause and a post-polarization pause, each of which can be about 0-4 seconds with an insured minimum of about 2-4 seconds by the imposition of an additional pause through a configuration of the potentiostat  130  as noted above, and the program  150  utilizes the time period of the idle phase pauses to switch from one working electrode or test specimen to another vis-à-vis the sequencer  120 . 
         [0033]    The steps involved in the system are shown in the flow diagram of  FIG. 4 , which represents a single testing session of multiple specimens. After start  151 , a software interface of the potentiostat  130  which has been installed in the computer  140  is initialized or input with the various parameters of a polarization schedule of the testing to be performed, such as the number of specimens, the voltage ranges, the data file name, and the like, as seen by step  152 . This input step is the same as in a single specimen setup with repeated runs. However, the data file name entered on the software interface of the potentiostat  130  can be copied to or synchronized with the user interface of the program  150 , so that the program  150  can detect or monitor completion of a polarization run per each specimen in a batch. This is indicated by the appearance of a new data item in a data file in a storage memory of the computer  140 . The initial delay step  153  provides time for the system to warm up and be prepared for subsequent polarization steps. The initial delay step  153  (which may be omitted without any negative consequence) provides time for the system to warm up and be prepared for subsequent polarization steps. 
         [0034]    Steps  154 ,  155 , and  156  follow the polarization cycle shown in  FIG. 3 , where for a given specimen being tested, the potentiostat  130  performs a cycle of pre-polarization pause at step  154 , polarization run at step  155 , and finishes with a post-polarization pause at step  156 . If only a single specimen is being tested, then the process would stop here. However, if multiple specimens are being tested, then the process follows the interrogatory at step  157  which determines if the desired or designated number of specimens has been tested. If “Yes,” then the process stops at step  158 . If “No,” then steps  154 ,  155 , and  156  repeat until all the specimens have been tested. During the transition between the pre-polarization step  154  and post-polarization step  156 , the program  150  commands the sequencer  120  to open the circuit to the tested working electrode, e.g., working electrode  113   a,  and close the circuit to the subsequent working electrode, e.g., working electrode  113   b,  connected to the next specimen to be tested. 
         [0035]    Since the computer  140  is connected to the sequencer  120  and the potentiostat  130  and control operations thereof, the program  150  can include an additional step  159  in which data from the steps  154 ,  155 , and  156  can be recorded and/or processed for each specimen. The recorded data can then be compiled into one or more databases, spreadsheets, or other formats that facilitate easy and accessible corrosion analysis of the tested specimens. Additionally, the sequencer  120  and the potentiostat  130  need not be in communication with each other. They can operate independently without such communication. As long as the data file name entered on the software interface of the potentiostat  130  is copied to the user interface of the program  150 , the program  150  can seamlessly synchronize operations between the potentiostat  130  and the sequencer  120 . The order of specimens being tested can also be set by the program  150 . 
         [0036]    Data degradation, integrity, or accuracy may be a concern by the above setup in which multiple specimens S 1 , S 2 , S 3  are placed and tested in the same container  110 . In other words, a question can arise as to whether the presence of a specimen in a cell can affect the polarization process of a neighboring specimen. Simple technical reasoning would lead one to believe there would not be any interaction among the specimens S 1 , S 2 , S 3 , as long as all others are on open circuit, except the one that is currently being polarized. Another reason is that it is a normal practice to test an individual specimen to measure the corrosion potential in the presence of others, except that only a single specimen is tested at a time, and this measurement is facilitated by physical attachment of a single working electrode line to the specimen to be tested. 
         [0037]    In order to test whether any interaction occurs between adjacent specimens during a polarization run, an experiment was conducted with nine specimens, first in the conventional single specimen setup and then in sequencer system  100 . The results are shown in  FIG. 5 . The graph therein shows the plot of the single specimen system results, the linear or straight line I corr , against that of the sequencer system  100 , the plot points I corr . It can be seen from the graph that there is no practical difference between the two sets of results. The data spread of I corr  values can be attributed to slight noise from successive runs of the same specimen. They are, however, within acceptable levels of deviation. 
         [0038]    Thus, it can be seen that the sequencer system  100  for data collection of corrosion specimens provides a relatively easy and inexpensive solution to testing and obtaining data compared to conventional setups. The sequencer system  100  can facilitate testing of a batch of 16 specimens as an example of the actual number of specimens processed by the sequencer  120 . The sequencer  120  can handle more, depending on the hardware architecture therein. This setup is far less expensive compared to polypotentiostats that can be used to test more than one specimen, but polypotentiostats are also generally limited in the actual number of specimens that can be processed, this number being typically less than the capacity of the sequencer  120 . 
         [0039]    It is to be understood that the present invention is not limited to the embodiments described above, but encompasses any and all embodiments within the scope of the following claims.