## 3 Results and Discussion
### Corrosion Potential (E\({}_{corr}\)) Results
This increase marked a clear transition to an active corrosion state, demonstrating the detrimental effect of chlorides on the stability of the passive layer. In concretes with 0.8%, 1.2%, and 1.6% chloride ion, shown in Figure 5c-e, it was observed that the re-bars were clearly in an active corrosion state, maintaining uniform values over time [2,3,55,56]. For concretes with 2.0% chloride ion, shown in Figure 5f, the results indicated that all values remained above 1 uA/cm\({}^{2}\), indicating high corrosion, especially for the sample with 1.6% chlorides. Initial measurements in concretes with 2.0%  
Figure 4: Corrosion potential (E\({}_{corr}\)) in re-bars with inhibitor and in concretes with different percentages of chloride ion. (**a**) 0.0%, (**b**) 0.4%, (**c**) 0.8%, (**d**) 1.2%, (**e**) 1.6%, and (**f**) 2.0%. chloride ion showed very high initial corrosion rate values above 3 \(\mu\)A/cm\({}^{2}\). These values exceeded 30 \(\mu\)A/cm\({}^{2}\) at the end of the experiment. The corrosion rate results for re-bars with inhibitor are shown in Figure 6. For chloride ion percentages of 0.0%, and 0.4%, shown in Figure 6a and b, it is observed that in both cases, the values are approximately 0.1 \(\mu\)A/cm\({}^{2}\), indicating a negligible level of corrosion [57]. For chloride ion percentages of 0.8%, and 1.2%, shown in Figure 6c,d, the values are around the level expected for a passive state. For chloride ion percentages of 1.6%, shown in Figure 6e, it was observed that the corrosion rates increased to values corresponding to a medium level of corrosion, ranging from 0.1 to 1 \(\mu\)A/cm\({}^{2}\). For chloride ion percentages of 2.0%, shown in Figure 6f, the corrosion rates increased over time from initial values between 0.1 and 1 \(\mu\)A/cm\({}^{2}\) to final values between 0.6 and 2 \(\mu\)A/cm\({}^{2}\). The joint analysis of Figure 6a-f revealed that, while in the first five cases the corrosion rates remained constant over time throughout the  
Figure 5: Corrosion rate (Icorr) in re-bars without inhibitor and in concretes with different percentages of chloride ion. (**a**) 0.0%, (**b**) 0.4%, (**c**) 0.8%, (**d**) 1.2%, (**e**) 1.6%, and (**f**) 2.0%. experiment, for chloride ion percentages of 2.0% in the five measured bars, there was a significant and steady increase in the corrosion rate over the course of the experiment. The comparison of results in armored structures without an inhibitor and with an inhibitor allowed us to verify that with 0.4% chloride ion, the effect of the inhibitor was not significant, offering very similar results. However, for the rest of the chloride ion percentages, the differences were very significant, with higher levels of corrosion being reached in structures without the inhibitor. Figure 7 shows the average corrosion rates achieved by the armored structures at the end of experimentation. Again, it can be observed that, at the end of experimentation, in all cases, the corrosion rates in structures without the inhibitor were higher than the corrosion rates with the inhibitor. For structures free of chlorides or embedded in concretes with a percentage of 0.4% chloride ion, the corrosion rates were very low or negligible. With chloride ion percentages of 0.8%, 1.2%, and 1.6%, the armored structures without inhibitor exhibited corrosion rates exceeding 1 \(\mu\)A/cm\({}^{2}\)  
Figure 6: Corrosion rate (i\({}_{\text{corr}}\)) in re-bars with inhibitor and in concretes with different percentages of chloride ion. **(a)** 0.0%, **(b)** 0.4%, **(c)** 0.8%, **(d)** 1.2%, **(e)** 1.6%, and **(f)** 2.0%. as is typical of the active state. For these chloride ion percentages, the presence of the inhibitor was shown to be very effective, as the corrosion rates in armored structures with the inhibitor were significantly reduced, falling to values corresponding to low levels of corrosion.