Measuring Resistance: Bridge Deck Steel Bars & Wire

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around measuring the resistance of bridge deck reinforcement steel bars and the wire used in the measurements. Participants explore the variability in resistance readings and the factors affecting measurement accuracy, including contact resistance and potential electrochemical effects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant reports measuring resistance values between 1.9 to 2.8 ohms for steel bars and 2.1 ohms for the wire, expressing confusion over the wire's higher resistance.
  • Another participant suggests that variable contact resistance could lead to measurement uncertainties and recommends using consistent contact methods for more accurate readings.
  • A participant mentions using a vice grip for connections but expresses doubt about contact quality due to corrosion byproducts on the steel bars.
  • There is a question raised about whether cleaning the surface of the bars would improve measurement accuracy, with a participant noting the difficulty of accessing the reinforcement for cleaning.
  • A participant inquires about calculating the DC resistance of 1.5 mm² flexible copper wire, providing a formula for resistance calculation.
  • Another participant argues that the Wavetek HD110T multimeter may not provide accurate measurements under the discussed conditions and suggests using a 4-wire Kelvin ohmmeter instead.
  • One participant discusses the potential for electrochemical effects in the concrete environment, which could introduce additional voltage readings that affect resistance measurements.
  • A practical approach is suggested involving measuring voltage before resistance readings to account for any microbattery effects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the factors affecting resistance measurements, including contact quality and electrochemical influences. There is no consensus on the best approach to improve measurement accuracy or the implications of the observed resistance values.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in measurement accuracy due to environmental conditions, contact methods, and the presence of corrosion. The discussion does not resolve these uncertainties.

BrainOmatic
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I had to measure the resistance between different sets of bridge deck reinforcement steel bars using a Wavetek HD110T multimeter and a wire. The values varied between 1.9 to 2.8 ohms. When I measured the resistance of the wire itself, it came out to be 2.1 ohm.

I could not understand how the resistance of wire itself is more than some of the resistance measurements taken between steel bars. If it is a common issue, can you please explain the justification? I have not much background in electrical engineering.

Thank you.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
BrainOmatic said:
Hello,

I had to measure the resistance between different sets of bridge deck reinforcement steel bars using a Wavetek HD110T multimeter and a wire. The values varied between 1.9 to 2.8 ohms. When I measured the resistance of the wire itself, it came out to be 2.1 ohm.

I could not understand how the resistance of wire itself is more than some of the resistance measurements taken between steel bars. If it is a common issue, can you please explain the justification? I have not much background in electrical engineering.

Thank you.

Welcome to the PF.

The contact resistance was probably variable enough to cause the measurement uncertainties. To get more accurate measurements, you would need to come up with some very consistent way of making the contacts, not just holding them together by hand.

You could use screw contacts with star washers, for example, and use a consistent torque when tightening the nut. If you do something like that, you should get numbers that make more sense.

How accurate do you need the resistance measurements? There are some applications where the accuracy of the measurement is very important (like in detecting poorly-crimpted connectors in cable assemblies...)
 
berkeman said:
Welcome to the PF.

The contact resistance was probably variable enough to cause the measurement uncertainties. To get more accurate measurements, you would need to come up with some very consistent way of making the contacts, not just holding them together by hand.

You could use screw contacts with star washers, for example, and use a consistent torque when tightening the nut. If you do something like that, you should get numbers that make more sense.

How accurate do you need the resistance measurements? There are some applications where the accuracy of the measurement is very important (like in detecting poorly-crimpted connectors in cable assemblies...)

Thank you, Sir, for your timely help. Fortunately, I do not need more accuracy in the measurements. I am putting together a journal article about our field corrosion testing of a bridge deck, so thought of clearing my doubt about this resistance issue.

I used a vice grip to attach the wire to the reinforcement steel bars. But I wouldn't be too confident about the contact, since the bars had some corrosion byproducts on their surfaces.
 
BrainOmatic said:
Thank you, Sir, for your timely help. Fortunately, I do not need more accuracy in the measurements. I am putting together a journal article about our field corrosion testing of a bridge deck, so thought of clearing my doubt about this resistance issue.

I used a vice grip to attach the wire to the reinforcement steel bars. But I wouldn't be too confident about the contact, since the bars had some corrosion byproducts on their surfaces.

Can you clean the surface first, or does that not help the overall measurements?
 
berkeman said:
Can you clean the surface first, or does that not help the overall measurements?

We drill and remove only about 2 in. diameter of concrete cover and the bar is at least 2 in. deep. Since the reinforcement is hard to access, we tap a thin steel bar into the reinforcement for convenient connections. So, cleaning is always not perfect.
 
I have to calculate the dc resistance of 1.5 mm2 flexible copper wire . How i can calculate?
 
jaymin nayak said:
I have to calculate the dc resistance of 1.5 mm2 flexible copper wire . How i can calculate?

R=\frac l {\sigma_{Cu}a}\;\hbox { where } \;a=1.5mm^2, l \;\hbox { in mm and }\;\sigma_{Cu}=5.8\times 10^7
 
The Wavetek HD110T will not make accurate measurements under the conditions described.
A good 4 wire Kelvin ohmmeter is required.
Google" 4 wire resistance measurements" for theory of how 4 wire measurements are made.
 
Ordinary multimeters measure resistance by injecting a small current usually a milliamp or less, reading the voltage and calculating the result by ohm's law. I once had a general purpose industrial meter not unlike yours that injected two milliamps.

IF there is any electrochemical stuff going on, which seems likely in concrete under a bridge where it's apt to be moist , a miniature battery effect - dissimilar metals in presence of electrolyte - can result and that'll make a few millivolts.

The meter has no idea whether the millivolts it finds there belong to a micro-battery effect or to the honest ohms of resistance you're after.

Here's something you might try:

1. after connecting the meter but before taking your reading , switch the meter to lowest DC volt scale (probably 200mv?) and record reading.
If you read a few millivolts you probably have moisture someplace making a microbattery.
That's no big deal, just be aware it'll offset your ohm reading.

2. Then take your reading twice, swapping meter leads between, so as to get readings with meter sending its current in both directions.

Probably the average of the two readings is closer than either one.
That's because the microbattery raised one reading and lowered the other.

and i'd bet lunch the difference in your ohm readings correlates with whatever DC voltage you measured in step 1.

old jim
 

Similar threads

Replies
27
Views
9K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
10K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
12K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
24K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
12K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
8K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K