::

: : -

.....

Soils
Edward Escalante 1

i;4
S P E C I M E N A N D SITE ACCOUNT
Maintaining

INTRODUCTION
MUCH OF THE u n d e r g r o u n d infrastructure in the United States was constructed after World W a r II in the 1950s and '60s, and m a n y of these structures, such as pipelines, utilities, and storage tanks, are approaching the end of their useful life. Thus, there is an increased need for data on the underground corrosion performance of materials used in these structures. The ideal m e a s u r e m e n t would nondestructively provide information on how much a structure has deteriorated and how rapidly this deterioration is occurring. With this information, engineers can predict the expected lifetime of a structure. With present day techniques, we can measure the rate of corrosion of an underground structure, but we lack a nonintrusive method that provides information on the extent of accumulated damage. Controlled tests are one way that data on accumulated damage can be obtained, and it is for this reason that this type of test is useful. This section on field measurements will concentrate on the types of u n d e r g r o u n d corrosion measurements that can be made in controlled and uncontrolled conditions, with an emphasis on controlled site testing. At a controlled exposure site, metal samples are intentionally exposed so that control of variables such as specimen surface area and size, depth of burial, m i n i m u m electrical and mechanical interference, and site accessibility are maximized. The design of this type of site allows retrieval of specimens from the ground without interrupting services as m a y be the case with a real structure. In an uncontrolled exposure site, the above variables m a y be in question, and this situation usually applies to any real u n d e r g r o u n d structure. F o r example, the surface area of an u n d e r g r o u n d pipeline is difficult to determine because from the standpoint of electrochemical polarization measurements, the pipeline is of infinite length. In addition, electrical isolation from other structures or services may not be possible with an underground system in use. In general, techniques for measuring corrosion are the same for controlled and uncontrolled sites, but some precautions and limitations m u s t be kept in m i n d when these techniques are applied to real structures, and these will be discussed where appropriate. Assessing the corrosion of buried steel tanks is complicated by the presence of internal corrosion as well as external wall deterioration. This special case is addressed in ASTM G 158 []. 1Corrosion Consultant, formerly with Corrosion Group, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.

Records

Determining corrosion performance of metals in underground environments generally requires long-term testing, sometimes exposures of several years. Such long-term studies m a k e it imperative that i n f o r m a t i o n be m a i n t a i n e d in a readable, accessible, p e r m a n e n t system. Experience has shown that a b o u n d notebook with n u m b e r e d pages is one format that has proven successful for keeping these records. Today, computerized media such as CD ROMs provide other useful storage options. These data must include the exact location of the test site and its configuration. Identifying the location of the site with reference to survey markers or other reliable, long-term features m a y be warranted, and becomes more important as the length of exposure is increased. Using global positioning satellite (GPS) technology, a point on the surface of the earth can be identified with an error of less than _+1 m, making it a very attractive means of identifying the location of buried specimens. One test site out of the direct control of this author was paved over for parking motorized equipment, and survey information allowed successful retrieval of the specimens. Specimen surface treatment, heat treatment, and identification m a r k s must be carefully described in these records. Photographic records during all phases of preparation and burial are useful for future site and specimen evaluation. Finally, computer files on hard or floppy disks are invaluable for organizing and examining data, but they are a poor format for long-term storage of data. Changes in computer equipment or damage to magnetic disks may make it difficult or impossible to access old data files. CD ROMs, however, are not affected by magnetic fields, making t h e m a good alternative storage m e d i a for data. The importance of maintaining good records cannot be overemphasized.

Specimen Design
The design of specimens is determined by several factors, such as the form of corrosion expected (uniform corrosion, pitting, etc.), the type of structure in question (pipe, tank, etc.), and the measurements necessary for obtaining the data. Measurement requirements for determining the loss in cross section of a structural H-pile are different from measurements designed to examine pitting of a pipeline material. In general, the larger the sample exposed, the better the data,

181

182

C O R R O S I O N TESTS AND S T A N D A R D S M A N U A L
in question. Such a site has the added advantage that measurements can be made on the real structure, which can then be compared to data obtained from controlled specimens nearby. Where a variety of soils are encountered, several soil sites may be needed. If only one site is chosen, then the site with the "worst case" conditions will provide the most conservative data. Where anaerobic bacterial corrosion is of concern, redox potential measurements of the soil can identify the sites where these bacteria are most likely to be present [2]. Soil characterization is discussed in another section of this manual, but it is worth mentioning that the ASTM GO 1 committee o n Corrosion of Metals has published useful techniques for measuring soil resistivity and soil pH [3,4].

but there may be a size limitation imposed by the measurements. Weight loss data requires weighing a specimen before and after exposure, and for this type of data, the size and weight of a sample is limited by the capabilities of the weighing equipment. Surface preparation of a sample must be considered. If the sample is a simulation of a real structure, then care should be taken to ensure that the specimen surface is representative of that structure. Thus, chemical cleaning, abrading, and polishing of the specimen surface may be undesirable if the real structure is not subjected to the same surface treatment. For evaluation of pipeline materials, a segment of the pipe with endcaps to protect the interior may be the most suitable design for a test specimen. It is also c o m m o n practice to use sheet material for specimens, where sheet metal is used for producing containers such as holding tanks. Where welds are encountered, it is valuable to include specimens with welded sections in the burial test. Coated panels and coated panels with intentional breaks in the coating may be desirable. Galvanic coupling of specimens is also a consideration, where two unlike metals are expected to be in contact. Stressed U-bend or C-ring type specimens are used for studies of stress corrosion failures. Specimen identification marks stamped or scribed must be easy to read, and in the case of large specimens, such as H-piles, identification marks can be applied with a welding torch. Thus, the design of the specimen is tailored to meet the needs of the study.

Specimen Emplacement
The m a n n e r in which a sample is buried is influenced by the configuration of the specimens. For example, steel piling specimens are driven into the ground with pile drivers, while small specimens will most likely be buried in trenches dug with a back hoe. A typical steel pile test site involves the placement of five pilings in a 2 m radius circle around a sixth centrally located pile, as illustrated in Fig. 1 [5]. The central pile was used as a counter electrode during electrochemical polarization measurements of the other piles as will be explained later. The top of each pile was 0.6 m below ground level, and to the top of each pile was welded a steel rod that extended to just below the surface of the ground. A removable concrete marker, extending above ground, was placed over the rod to help locate the steel rod. Since the study included examining the effect of disturbed soil, a seventh pile was buried horizontally in a nearby trench. Small specimens can be buried in a long, narrow excavation made by a backhoe. Such a trench is typically 1 m deep, 0.6 m wide, and as long as necessary to accommodate all specimens, which are generally placed about 30 cm apart along the length of the trench. Where electrical wires from specimens extend above ground, wood posts are commonly used to serve as markers and hold the wires. Untreated wood is recommended, because leaching of chemicals from treated wood will modify the surrounding soil and possibly affect the results of the corrosion test. It is especially important to avoid placing wood treated with copper salts near a l u m i n u m specimens, since it is k n o w n that copper ions

Considerations for Physical Measurements

Weight loss, pit depth, or wall thickness determinations are physical measurements used as a reference to nondestructive electrochemical techniques. Physical measurements are considered destructive because, generally, the specimen must be removed from the site and cleaned. The process of extraction and preparation for examination changes the surface condition of the specimen, effectively destroying the possibility of continuing the exposure test with that particular specimen. Nevertheless, to rely solely on electrochemical measurements can result in misleading information, and it is strongly recommended that the test design include some form of physical verification of nondestructive measurements. To obtain corrosion data from physical measurements during long-term exposures, it is c o m m o n practice to place enough samples in the ground to allow removals at intervals of time. The most meaningful data are obtained when duplicate samples are used for each removal, allowing averaging of data and providing a better representation of material performance.

CE

WE

Burial Site
Choosing the correct burial site is important, since the environment will have a direct effect on the performance of buried materials. This choice must take into account more than just characteristics of a soil, and must include consideration of local conditions of temperature, rainfall, and location. For example, a soil located in a valley near a stream provides a different environment to the same soil on a nearby hill. In general, the best test site is near the structure

REF

FIG. 1--Typical view of steel pile placement at an underground test site,

CHAPTER 14
accelerate the corrosion of aluminum. Retrieval of specimens is simplified by tying specimens together with a small diameter plastic cord and attaching the cord to wood posts. In this way, finding the cord or one specimen allows retrieval of all other specimens in a group. Where several retrievals are to be made over a period of time, specimens for a given removal can be grouped together in one section of the trench, so that when a group is retrieved, those remaining are not disturbed during digging. Wooden posts can be used as trench markers to delineate groups of specimens, or metal markers located just below the ground surface will serve the same purpose and can later be found using a metal detector. More than one system of specimen identification must be incorporated in the test. F o r example, stamping identification characters on the specimen and on an attached plastic label reduces problems of identification in the future. In addition, specimens can be buried in a known sequence for further verification of identity.

SOILS

183

Always be aware that local, small soil sample readings can change dramatically from place to place in the same trench, and these readings must not be assumed as representative of the soil as a whole. Other techniques for measuring large soil samples must be used and are described in the ASTM Annual Book of Standards [4].

Cleaning and Examination of Specimens

Examination of specimens at the time of excavation is a critical step in the process of obtaining information from u n d e r g r o u n d exposure studies. As has already been suggested, it is instructive to examine and characterize the condition of specimens before the final cleaning process. The presence or absence of an oxide on a corroded surface, the color of an oxide, and its location on the metal surface provide clues to the mechanism of attack. This initial examination is followed by removal of all corrosion products from the specimen. Fortunately, information on this difficult process, removal of oxide layers with m i n i m u m substrate attack, has been published by the ASTM GO 1 Committee on Corrosion of Metals [6]. This publication describes reagents and detailed chemical and electrochemical methods for cleaning ferrous and nonferrous metallic specimens.

Specimen Retrieval
Immediately after excavation, a r a p i d superficial cleaning of specimens with a scrubbing brush and water allows easy removal of oxides and soil/oxide conglomerates that harden as they dry, making later cleaning difficult. An immediate cursory examination of specimens on initial removal, coupled with photographic documentation, has several advantages. This examination can become important in those unfortunate cases where specimens are lost or d a m a g e d in transit. Furthermore, although identification of a specimen m a y be obvious on removal, later it may be difficult where tags are separated or lost, and documentation with photographs or notes becomes crucial for identification. Where specimens have corroded to the point of separation, it is important to tag the parts for later identification, and this may include placing specimens in envelopes or bags. In some cases metal specimens undergo surface changes after retrieval, especially if there is a long period of time between removal and final examination, and photographs help identify those instances where this happens, allowing the examiner to differentiate between burial damage and damage from subsequent handling. This can be especially important in cases where coatings are involved in the test. Thus, the employment of some precautions and documentation on initial removal of specimens will save time and effort in subsequent examination procedures. Some information can be obtained from the soil at the time of sample extraction. For example, soil conditions m a y vary along the length of a trench, resulting in a variation in the corrosion performance of similar samples, and these soil differences should be noted. In some cases, where warranted, local measurements of soil pH or soil resistivity at the depth of the specimens, can provide insight to material performance. The use of pH paper is an excellent method of obtaining a r a p i d reading on a soil. Unusual conditions of pH found with pH p a p e r can be verified with more traditional pH electrodes. The resistivity of small samples of soil can be measured using a soil cup or soil box. The use of these techniques is an excellent way of getting information on localized soil conditions in the vicinity of the specimens.

PHYSICAL M E A S U R E M E N T S

Weight Loss
Determining weight loss resulting from exposure to soil is a c o m m o n technique used to measure corrosion rate. This type of data is most meaningful when corrosion is uniform over the surface of the specimen, since normally the entire exposed surface area of the specimen is used for calculating corrosion rate. If corrosion attack is localized and the total exposed surface area is used for the corrosion rate calculation, then the result will underestimate penetration. One possible way a r o u n d this problem is to measure the area where the localized attack has occurred and use this corrected area in the calculation of corrosion rate. Possible sources of error in weight loss determinations are a) excessive removal of metal during cleaning, b) inadequate cleaning of specimen, and c) using the total surface area for calculating corrosion rate when the attack is localized. A typical approach that has been used to determine weight loss of specimens through physical measurements is as follows. Small steel coupons, weighing approximately 200 g, were exposed to a soil environment. The samples were weighed before and after exposure. Prior to the "after exposure" weighing, the samples were cleaned using the ASTM solution designation C.3.1, which is an inhibited hydrochloric acid solution described in detail in the ASTM G 1 Standard Practice [6]. To determine the immersion time necessary for removal of the oxide, the specimens were cleaned and weighed repeatedly, until weight loss stabilized, indicating that the cleaning reaction had gone to completion. Figure 2 is an example of these data. Note that specimen 9 required immersion of only 30 s to remove the oxide, while specimen 7 took approximately 2.5 rain to clean. This cleaning and weighing procedure allows monitoring of the chemical cleaning

184

CORROSION TESTS AND STANDARDS MANUAL

0.3'

O~

d
0 ..J

0.2'

7:

03

0.1' ~ ~ , 0.0 60 ecime 8 I 120

Time,
, .

180
s

This approach provides information on whether or not a specimen failed, but will not reveal when, during the exposure period, the failure occurred. One novel method for application of stress allows monitoring the condition of the specimen from the surface, using a steel ring located above ground level to apply the stress to a tubular tensile specimen in the soil via a steel rod [9]. By monitoring the load on the steel ring, the failure of the tensile specimen is detected. Another technique that provides a remote indication of failure is the above ground monitoring of gas pressure used to apply a hoop stress to small containers buried in the ground. The ASTM committee on the corrosion of metals has developed and published standard methods for the use of U-bend and C-ring specimens for the application of stress [1 O,11 ].
24o 300

ELECTROCHEMICAL M E A S U R E M E N T S
Polarization
The technique of electrochemical polarization is a useful tool for obtaining corrosion rate data nondestrucfively during exposure, with a m i n i m u m of disruption to the test. The polarization resistance measurement is especially attractive because its use is well documented, and it requires a minimal a m o u n t of equipment, some of which is commercially available. The measurement involves applying current to a specimen from a second electrode, changing the potential of the specimen by approximately 10 mV versus a reference electrode, and noting the a m o u n t of current needed to make that change. The slope of the change in potential versus the applied current is inversely related to the corrosion current of the specimen [12]. With information on the Tafel slope of the material in that environment, the corrosion current can be determined. This approach uses: 1) a specimen as the working electrode (WE), 2) a reference potential electrode (REF), and a counter electrode (CE) used to apply the polarizing current. Additional information is available in ASTM Standard Practice G 59 [13]. Corrosion current density, and corrosion rate, can be calculated when the entire specimen is polarized and its surface area is known. This is the case for finite area specimens, as illustrated in Fig. 1 for steel piling. The reference electrode is located at the soil surface approximately 30 m from the WE. For these measurements, each of the seven piles was polarized using the centrally located pile as the CE with the REF at a fixed location. In this way, measurements could be duplicated from year to year and the results compared [5]. From this corrosion current measured over a period of time, in this case 14 years, an estimate of weight loss can be calculated. There are situations where the polarized area of the specim e n is not known, as is the case where the WE is a long structure such as a pipeline or electric power utility. In this situation, the WE is essentially infinitely long and the CE can only supply current to a portion of the structure. An estimate of how much of the structure is polarized when current is applied can be made by measuring the potential of the structure in the vicinity of the CE, as illustrated in Fig. 3 [14]. In this example, polarization region extends from the 4 m mark to the 18 m mark. From this information, the approximate polarized area can be calculated.

FIG. 2 - - A plot of weight loss versus time for three steel coupons in inhibited hydrochloric acid, showing the initial rapid oxide removal and the slower dissolution of metal as a function of time.

process, and reduces the likelihood of error from removing too much base metal. The ASTM publication also provides information on the mathematical procedure for calculating corrosion rate from weight loss in terms of a variety of units, both English and Metric.

Pit Depth
Obtaining information of the degree of pitting involves some form of visual inspection, so that the shape, depth, and density of pitting can be determined. Large shallow pits are relatively easy to evaluate, compared to small, narrow, deep pits. The degree of pit penetration of wide pits can be measured with a pit depth micrometer or by the use of a microscope that allows measuring the change in movement of the stage when focusing between the bottom of the pit and the surface of the metal. Determining the shape and depth of a narrow, deep pit is more challenging and may involve a metallographic cross-sectional examination of the pitted area. This same metallographic technique may be the most effective way of examining pits that get wider with depth. A crude but effective way of measuring the depth of relatively straight line pits is to insert a small diameter wire into the pit and measuring the length of penetration by the wire. In some cases, the rate of wall penetration is critical, as for pipeline material, and identifying and measuring the deepest pit is important, along with information on the average penetration of the ten deepest pits. Density of pitting can be obtained by counting pits in a k n o w n area or by comparing the pitted surface to standard charts as described in the ASTM G 46 Standard Practice for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting Corrosion [7].

Stress Induced Failure

Determining susceptibility of a material to stress corrosion cracking or hydrogen embrittlement in a soil environment has been studied using buried U-bend specimens [8].

CHAPTER 14
0 "100 1 -200 -10
> E

SOILS

185

8 ----o---

OverP~o

7.6 m(25R)Ftom Pipe

> E

._=
.D

-300 -400 -

E
o. t.
O
-20

E =.
o rt

-~o!

-30

-700 [ -800 :

-40 10 15 20

-900 ' 50 100 150 200

Distance

Along

Cable,

Distance

Along

Pipeline,

FIG. 3 - - A plot of overpotential versus distance, illustrating the distribution of current on an underground cable when 1.5 mA is applied from a rod placed 1 m to the side of the cable.

FIG. 4 - - A plot of potential over a pipeline and to the side of the pipeline versus distance, illustrating the presence of cathodic regions where "over the pipe" potentials are more positive than "beside the pipe" potentials.

Special probes with associated measuring e q u i p m e n t that provide a means of determining the corrosion rate of a material in soil are commercially available. Generally, the probe a n d a specimen, built into the probe, are bought as a unit. An attractive feature of this e q u i p m e n t is that the data reads out directly in terms of corrosion rate. The biggest concern is that the specimen in the probe may not be representative of the structure of interest because of the small size of the probe specimen or its isolation from the structure. One type of probe system uses the change in electrical resistance of the coupon in the probe as an indicator of reduction in cross section due to corrosion attack. This reading is then converted to corrosion rate. Other types of probes use electrochemical polarization techniques and two or three electrodes to measure the corrosion rate of the WE in the probe [15,16]. Details on calculating corrosion rate from electrochemical data are discussed in ASTM G 102 [17]. In the laboratory, the technique of ac impedance is superseding polarization resistance, because it provides additional information on mechanisms of the processes involved. Guidance on performing corrosion tests in the laboratory in liquids or in soils is provided in ASTM G 31 and ASTM G 162 [18,19]. Ac impedance systems are now commercially available, but these units are limited to low polarization currents of 1 A or less, making them u n s u i t a b l e for most field applications where larger current capabilities (> 1 A) are needed.

of the less noble steel. Burial of galvanically coupled metals in soil provides information on the degree of corrosion and the possibility of hydrogen embrittlement. The effect of relative surface area of the coupled metals a n d the spacing between them are important [20]. Measuring the galvanic current of the coupled metals during the exposure period allows monitoring of changes in the magnitude of the current and direction of current flow. This can be accomplished by attaching insulated wire conductors that extend above the surface of the soil where they are connected together. Periodically, an ammeter is inserted in the circuit and the current is measured. To reduce the possibility of affecting the current during the measurement, which may involve currents in the milliamp range or less, the use of a zero-resistance ammeter is recommended [8].

Potential Mapping
Measured potentials at the soil surface above a utility, such as a pipeline, are often used to evaluate the effectiveness of cathodic protection systems and coatings. One technique that has been applied for m a n y years uses two sets of measurements where one of the electrodes is positioned over the pipeline and the second electrode is placed several meters to the side. The data from this approach provide a comparison of the local potential to the more distant potential made to the side of the pipeline, as illustrated in Fig. 4. Regions where the "Over Pipe" potential are more positive than the "25 ft From Pipe" potential are cathodic to other sections of the pipe line. Potential effects of stray currents, galvanic currents, and cathodic protection interference are identified from this information [21]. A more recent technique relies on a set of potential measurements between the pipeline and a reference electrode, where the electrode is positioned directly over the pipeline, and measurements are made along its length at intervals. Computerized data logging permits a detailed analysis of

Galvanic Corrosion
The galvanic coupling of unlike metals in soil is an all too c o m m o n occurrence, and the need to obtain information on the consequences of this condition is recognized. Copper ground rods and copper mesh ground beds are typically connected to steel piling supported structures and underground telephone, water, and fuel utilities to the detriment

186

C O R R O S I O N T E S T S AND S T A N D A R D S MANUAL
Galvanic and Pitting Corrosion - Field and Laboratory Studies, R. Baboian, et al., Ed., ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1976, pp. 81-93. [9] Escalante, E., "Corrosion Testing In Soil," Corrosion, J. R. Davis, Ed., ASM International: Materials Park, OH, 1987, pp. 208-211. [10] ASTM G 38: Standard Practice for Making and Using C-Ring Stress-Corrosion Test Specimens, Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1993. [11] ASTM G 30: Standard Practice for Making and Using U-Bend Stress-Corrosion Test Specimens, Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1993. [12] Mansfeld, F., "The Polarization Resistance Technique For Measuring Corrosion Currents," Advances in Corrosion Science and Technology, M. G. Fontana and R. W. Staehle, Ed., Plenum Press, NY, 1976, pp. 163-262. [13] ASTM G 59: Standard Practice for Conducting Potentiodynamic Polarization Resistance Measurements, Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1993. [14] Escalante, E., "Measuring the Corrosion of Metals in Soil," Corrosion Testing and Evaluation, R. Baboian and S. W. Dean, Ed., ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1990. [15] Kilpatrick, J. M., "Measuring Corrosion Rate--Now," Oil & Gas Journal, March 1964, pp. 155-157. [16] Marsh, G. A., "The Measurement of Instantaneous Corrosion Rates," 2nd International Congress on Metallic Corrosion, NACE, Houston, TX, 1963, pp. 936-941. [17] ASTM G 102: Standard Practice for Conducting Potentiodynamic Polarization Resistance Measurements, Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1993. [18] ASTM G 31: Standard Practice for Laboratory Immersion Corrosion Testing of Metals, Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1993. [19] ASTM G 162: Standard Practice for Conducting and Evaluating Laboratory Corrosion Tests in Soils, Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1999. [20] Fontana, M. G. and Greene, N. D., Corrosion Engineering, McGraw-Hill, NY, 1978, p. 35. [21] Husock, B., "Use of Pipe-to-Soil Potential In Analyzing Underground Corrosion Problems," Corrosion, Vol. 17, No. 8, 1961, pp. 97-101. [22] Kroon, D. and Nicholas, K. W., "Computerized Potential Logging: Results On Transmission Pipelines" NACE Corrosion~82, NACE, Houston, TX, 1982. [23] Kroon, D., Private Communication, 1993.

discontinuities in potentials that reveal areas of active c o r r o s i o n [22]. R e c e n t i m p r o v e m e n t s in p r o g r a m m i n g and e q u i p m e n t p e r m i t e l i m i n a t i o n of iR e r r o r f r o m c a t h o d i c p r o t e c t i o n potential m e a s u r e m e n t s and also i n c o r p o r a t e use of "over the pipe" and "beside the pipe" potential data [23].

SUMMARY
Underground corrosion is particularly insidious in that, generally, we are not aware of its progress until a failure occurs. However, there are physical and electrochemical techniques available that will provide information on corrosion processes. Physical measurements furnish cumulative corrosion information obtained at the final removal stage, while electrochemical measurements supply data during the period of exposttre to soft.

REFERENCES
[1] ASTM G 158: Standard Guide for Three Methods of Assessing Buried Steel Tanks, Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1998. [2] Booth, G. H., Cooper, A. W., and Cooper, P. M., "Criteria of Soil Aggressiveness Towards Buried Metals, I. Experimental Methods," British Corrosion Journal, Vol. 2, 1967, pp. 104-108. [3] ASTM G 51: Standard Test Method for pH of Soil For Use In Corrosion Testing, Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1993. [4] ASTM G 57: Standard Method for Field Measurement of Soil Resistivity Using the Wenner Four-Electrode Method, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1993. [5] Escalante, E., "Measuring the Underground Corrosion of Steel Piling at Turcot Yard, Montreal, Canada - A 14 Year Study," Corrosion Forms and Control for Infrastructure, ASTM STP 1137, V. Chaker, Ed., ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1992, pp. 339-355. [6] ASTM G 1: Standard Practice for Preparing, Cleaning, and Evaluating Corrosion Test Specimens, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1990. [7] ASTM G 46: Standard Practice for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting Corrosion, Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.02, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1993. [8] Escalante, E. and Gerhold, W. F., "Galvanic Coupling of Some Stressed Stainless Steels to Dissimilar Metals Underground,"