$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
In this section, representative outcomes of each major step in the methodology are presented. This is done in order to obtain an idea of what is expected at the end of each step and provide useful tips to ensure a correct application of the method.
The first important step consists in the expression of the pore solution from the fresh paste sample. Figure 2 shows a pore solution that is correctly extracted and sealed in a 5-mL syringe. The pore solution in the figure was expressed from a fresh ordinary Portland cement paste with a water-to-cement ratio of 0.36. The sample was mixed 10 min before the image was taken. The pore solution is expected to be clear; however, the color can vary depending on the type of cementitious materials that were used and the age of the sample at the time of the expression.
Before the XRF measurement of the extracted pore solution, it is necessary to calibrate the instrument. In particular, each element whose ionic concentration will be measured needs to be calibrated. A representative calibration plot of the potassium (K+) ions is shown in Figure 3. The figure shows the fitting performed by the software on the intensities measured by the XRF. Note that the root mean square (RMS) error of the fitting should stay below 5%.
After calibration, it is recommended to test a solution of known ionic concentration to determine the accuracy of the machine. The measured composition of the ions using XRF is compared to the theoretical composition of both solutions. According to our experience, assuming a correct preparation of the ionic solutions, this checking step should yield a percentage of errors lower than ± 5%. Figure 4 shows the composition results for the spot-checking of the solutions. When the spot-checking yields a percentage of errors higher than ± 5%, repeat the calibration of the XRF device.
Table 2 shows a representative set of results for composition and resistivity. While the ionic concentration of the pore solution can vary widely depending on the chemical composition of the cement, the water-to-cement ratio of the system, and the presence of supplementary cementitious materials19, reference values can be obtained from the literature20 for the main ions, as shown in Table 1.
Finally, when calculating the resistivity of a sample, values for early age pore solutions are typically expected to be within 0.05 and 0.25 Ωm14. Now that the resistivity of the pore solution is known, the bulk resistivity can be obtained using other methods, like uniaxial resistivity, in order to, ultimately, calculate the formation factor, which is typically over 2,000 for good quality concrete4,5,18.

Figure 1: Assembly of the pore solution extraction system. The system consists of a main expression device, a nitrogen tank and tube with a safety pressure gauge and regulator, and a collection container. Always refer to the manufacturer's instructions and safety precautions for the specific system used. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Correctly extracted and sealed extracted pore solution in a 5-mL syringe. The extracted pore solution should appear clear (i.e., no visible particles) and should be sealed with no air bubbles within the syringe.

Figure 3: Representative calibration plot of potassium (K+). The x-axis shows the imputed (known) concentrations in ppm, and the y-axis shows the detected (measured) intensities with XRF in cpm. The calibration line calculated from one of the correction models in the software should have the smallest RMS (%), as discussed in section 3 of the protocol. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Sodium ion (Na+) and potassium ion (K+) verification plot. The dashed line represents a 1:1 ratio.The verification plot should show a good correlation (almost a 1:1 relationship with a high R-squared value) between the known concentrations of the sodium and potassium ions and the detected concentrations using XRF. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| Ionic Species (i) | Equivalent conductivity at infinite dilution (λ˚i) | Empirical conductivity coefficient |
| (i) | (zλ°i) | (Gi) |
| (cm2 S/mol) | (mol/L)-1/2 |
| Sodium (Na+) | 50.1 | 0.733 |
| Potassium (K+) | 73.5 | 0.548 |
| Calcium (Ca2+) | 59 | 0.771 |
| Hydroxide (OH-) | 198 | 0.353 |
| Sulfate (SO42-) | 79 | 0.877 |
Table 1: Equivalent conductivity at infinite dilution (
) and empirical conductivity coefficients (
) for each ionic species obtained from the literature11. These values are used in order to calculate the electrical resistivity of the pore solution.
| Ionic Species | Concentration |
| (i) | (mol/L) |
| Sodium (Na+) | 0.16 |
| Potassium (K+) | 0.39 |
| Calcium (Ca2+) | 0.02 |
| Hydroxide (OH-) | 0.18 |
| Sulfate (SO42-) | 0.2 |
| Resistivity (Ωm) | 0.156 |
Table 2: Representative results for the composition and resistivity of a cement paste with a water-to-cement ratio of 0.36 at 10 min. The values in this table are examples of the results obtained using this method.