The electro-osmotic pulse (EOP) systems are widely used for damp-proofing the basements of buildings. However, the cathode of EOP systems will produce stray current interference, posing risks of electrochemical corrosion to the buried steel pipe. This paper introduces a series of on-site tests and numerical simulations conducted in a townhouse alley equipped with EOP systems. The corrosion risk produced by EOP was evaluated and corrosion mitigation measurements were discussed. The results show that the EOP system produces 1 Hz pulse dynamic direct current in the soil, resulting in the average ground potential of gas pipes and the building steel pipe will rise from -0.7 to +1-4V. The shorter the distance, the stronger the interference. Metal shielding nets and sacrificial anode were simulated and proposed to mitigate pipe corrosion. The findings of this study can serve as a reference for the safe use of EOP systems and gas pipe anti-corrosion protection.
GoelRKSinghBZhaoJ.Underground infrastructures: planning, design, and construction. Waltham: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2012.
2.
WallaceMINgKC.Development and application of underground space use in Hong Kong. Tunn Undergr Space Technol. 2016; 55: 257–279.
3.
GrachevA.Waterproofing methods comparison in Russia and Finland. Hämeenlinna: Hämeenlinna University Centre; 2021.
4.
MuhammadNZKeyvanfarAMajidMZA. Waterproof performance of concrete: a critical review on implemented approaches. Constr Build Mater. 2015; 101: 80–90.
5.
HockVMorefieldSMcinerneyM.Control of water migration through concrete using electro-osmosis. Mater Perform. 2005; 44 (7): 42–47.
6.
XintecG. How to deal with dampness in the basement? What are the inherent advantages of an electrical infiltration waterproofing system?; 2018. Available from: https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/32572454
7.
McinerneyMKMorefieldSCooperS. Electro-osmotic pulse (EOP) technology for control of water seepage in concrete structures. Champaign: US Army Corps of Engineers; 2006.
8.
PatelA.4 – Drainage and dewatering. In: PatelA, editor. Geotechnical investigations and improvement of ground conditions. Duxford: Woodhead; 2019. p. 29–36.
9.
ZhuJMLiZXWangY. Electro-osmotic pulse technology for corrosion prevention and control of water intrusion in below grade concrete structures. Adv Mat Res. 2011; 255-260: 752–756.
10.
WasimMShoaibSMubarakNM. Factors influencing corrosion of metal pipes in soils. Environ Chem Lett. 2018; 16 (3): 861–879.
11.
Arriba-RodriguezL-DVillanueva-BalseraJOrtega-FernandezF. Methods to evaluate corrosion in buried steel structures: a review. Metals (Basel). 2018; 8 (5): 334.
12.
QinGChengYF.A review on defect assessment of pipelines: principles, numerical solutions, and applications. Int J Pressure Vessels Piping. 2021; 191: 104329.
13.
VarelaFYongjun TanMForsythM.An overview of major methods for inspecting and monitoring external corrosion of on-shore transportation pipelines. Corros Eng Sci Technol. 2015; 50 (3): 226–235.
14.
AngstUM.A critical review of the science and engineering of cathodic protection of steel in soil and concrete. Corrosion. 2019; 75 (12): 1420–1433.
15.
VanaeiHREslamiAEgbewandeA.A review on pipeline corrosion, in-line inspection (ILI), and corrosion growth rate models. Int J Press Vessels Pip. 2017; 149: 43–54.
16.
ChenZKolevaDBreugelKv.A review on stray current-induced steel corrosion in infrastructure. Corros Rev. 2017; 35 (6): 397–423.
17.
AllahkaramSRIsakhani-ZakariaMDerakhshaniM. Investigation on corrosion rate and a novel corrosion criterion for gas pipelines affected by dynamic stray current. J Nat Gas Sci Eng. 2015; 26: 453–460.
18.
WangCLiWWangY. Evaluation model for the scope of DC interference generated by stray currents in light rail systems. Energies. 2019; 12 (4): 746.
19.
HongYLiZQiaoG. Numerical simulation and experimental investigation of the stray current corrosion of viaducts in the high-speed rail transit system. Constr Build Mater. 2017; 157: 416–423.
20.
YuZLiuLWangZ. Evaluation of the interference effects of HVDC grounding current on a buried pipeline. IEEE Trans Appl Supercond. 2019; 29 (2): 1–5.
WangXXuCChenY. Effects of stray AC on corrosion of 3-layer polyethylene coated X70 pipeline steel and cathodic delamination of coating with defects in 3.5 wt-% NaCl solution. Corros Eng Sci Technol. 2018; 53 (3): 214–225.
23.
QinHDuYLuM. Accelerated corrosion of pipeline steel under dynamic DC stray current interference. Corros Eng Sci Technol. 2020; 55 (8): 670–680.
24.
WangALinSHuZ. Evaluation model of DC current distribution in AC power systems caused by stray current of DC metro systems. IEEE Trans Power Deliv. 2020; 99: 1–1.
25.
FengJChenZXieY. Influence of urban rail transit on corrosion of buried steel GAS pipeline. Int J Electrochem Sci. 2021; 16 (6): 1–15.
MertenBJE.Embedded reference electrodes for corrosion potential monitoring, electrochemical characterization, and controlled-potential cathodic protection. Ann Arbor (MI): North Dakota State University; 2012. p. 226.
28.
QinGChengYFZhangP.Finite element modeling of corrosion defect growth and failure pressure prediction of pipelines. Int J Press Vessels Pip. 2021; 194: 104509.
29.
Mohamed-SaidMVuilleminBOltraR. Predictive modelling of the corrosion rate of carbon steel focusing on the effect of the precipitation of corrosion products. Corros Eng Sci Technol. 2017; 52 (sup1): 178–185.
30.
EnB.Protection against corrosion by stray current from direct current systems BS EN 50162. London: British Standard; 2004.
