利用强度和断裂试验确定水泥基底与覆盖层界面粘接的特性

IF 3.4 3区 工程技术 Q2 CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY Materials and Structures Pub Date : 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1617/s11527-024-02391-1
Ayumi Manawadu, Pizhong Qiao, Haifang Wen
{"title":"利用强度和断裂试验确定水泥基底与覆盖层界面粘接的特性","authors":"Ayumi Manawadu,&nbsp;Pizhong Qiao,&nbsp;Haifang Wen","doi":"10.1617/s11527-024-02391-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Adequate development of the substrate-to-overlay bond is crucial in repaired concrete structures. Poorly developed bonds may facilitate crack propagation, a concern evaluated through fracture tests. However, the scarcity of fracture tests, especially for in-plane shear-type cracks (Mode II), coupled with the reliance on strength-based bond characterizations in field tests, emphasizes the need to understand the relationship between fracture and strength behavior. Therefore, this study compares tensile, shear, and Mode I and Mode II fracture tests in characterizing shotcrete-to-concrete interface bonds with different substrate surface preparation techniques (chipped (C), sandblasted (SB), pressure-washed (PW), and as-cast (AC)). Results indicate that all three test methods are sensitive to the substrate surface preparation technique. The shear bond strengths in C, SB, and AC specimens are over two times the corresponding tensile bond strengths. In contrast, the shear bond strength of PW specimens is about 73% of the corresponding tensile strength. It is also evident that the Mode II fracture and shear behavior closely resemble each other and are more sensitive to surface roughness than the tensile bond strength. The comparative tests conducted in this study can assist in screening surface preparation techniques for cementitious overlays.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":691,"journal":{"name":"Materials and Structures","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characterization of cementitious substrate-to-overlay interface bonds using strength and fracture tests\",\"authors\":\"Ayumi Manawadu,&nbsp;Pizhong Qiao,&nbsp;Haifang Wen\",\"doi\":\"10.1617/s11527-024-02391-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Adequate development of the substrate-to-overlay bond is crucial in repaired concrete structures. Poorly developed bonds may facilitate crack propagation, a concern evaluated through fracture tests. However, the scarcity of fracture tests, especially for in-plane shear-type cracks (Mode II), coupled with the reliance on strength-based bond characterizations in field tests, emphasizes the need to understand the relationship between fracture and strength behavior. Therefore, this study compares tensile, shear, and Mode I and Mode II fracture tests in characterizing shotcrete-to-concrete interface bonds with different substrate surface preparation techniques (chipped (C), sandblasted (SB), pressure-washed (PW), and as-cast (AC)). Results indicate that all three test methods are sensitive to the substrate surface preparation technique. The shear bond strengths in C, SB, and AC specimens are over two times the corresponding tensile bond strengths. In contrast, the shear bond strength of PW specimens is about 73% of the corresponding tensile strength. It is also evident that the Mode II fracture and shear behavior closely resemble each other and are more sensitive to surface roughness than the tensile bond strength. The comparative tests conducted in this study can assist in screening surface preparation techniques for cementitious overlays.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":691,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Materials and Structures\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Materials and Structures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1617/s11527-024-02391-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Materials and Structures","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1617/s11527-024-02391-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基底与覆盖层粘结的充分发展对于修补过的混凝土结构至关重要。粘结不牢可能会促进裂缝扩展,这也是通过断裂测试进行评估的一个问题。然而,断裂测试,尤其是平面剪切型裂缝(模式 II)的断裂测试非常少,再加上现场测试中对基于强度的粘结特征的依赖,强调了了解断裂与强度行为之间关系的必要性。因此,本研究比较了拉伸、剪切、模式 I 和模式 II 断裂试验,以确定采用不同基材表面处理技术(崩边 (C)、喷砂 (SB)、压力水洗 (PW) 和现浇 (AC))的喷射混凝土与混凝土界面粘结的特性。结果表明,所有三种测试方法对基材表面处理技术都很敏感。C、SB 和 AC 试样的剪切粘接强度是相应拉伸粘接强度的两倍多。相比之下,PW 试样的剪切粘接强度约为相应拉伸强度的 73%。同样明显的是,模式 II 断裂和剪切行为非常相似,对表面粗糙度的敏感性高于拉伸结合强度。本研究中进行的比较试验有助于筛选水泥基覆盖层的表面处理技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Characterization of cementitious substrate-to-overlay interface bonds using strength and fracture tests

Adequate development of the substrate-to-overlay bond is crucial in repaired concrete structures. Poorly developed bonds may facilitate crack propagation, a concern evaluated through fracture tests. However, the scarcity of fracture tests, especially for in-plane shear-type cracks (Mode II), coupled with the reliance on strength-based bond characterizations in field tests, emphasizes the need to understand the relationship between fracture and strength behavior. Therefore, this study compares tensile, shear, and Mode I and Mode II fracture tests in characterizing shotcrete-to-concrete interface bonds with different substrate surface preparation techniques (chipped (C), sandblasted (SB), pressure-washed (PW), and as-cast (AC)). Results indicate that all three test methods are sensitive to the substrate surface preparation technique. The shear bond strengths in C, SB, and AC specimens are over two times the corresponding tensile bond strengths. In contrast, the shear bond strength of PW specimens is about 73% of the corresponding tensile strength. It is also evident that the Mode II fracture and shear behavior closely resemble each other and are more sensitive to surface roughness than the tensile bond strength. The comparative tests conducted in this study can assist in screening surface preparation techniques for cementitious overlays.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Materials and Structures
Materials and Structures 工程技术-材料科学:综合
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.90%
发文量
222
审稿时长
5.9 months
期刊介绍: Materials and Structures, the flagship publication of the International Union of Laboratories and Experts in Construction Materials, Systems and Structures (RILEM), provides a unique international and interdisciplinary forum for new research findings on the performance of construction materials. A leader in cutting-edge research, the journal is dedicated to the publication of high quality papers examining the fundamental properties of building materials, their characterization and processing techniques, modeling, standardization of test methods, and the application of research results in building and civil engineering. Materials and Structures also publishes comprehensive reports prepared by the RILEM’s technical committees.
期刊最新文献
Effect of activator dosage and mass ratio of GGBFS to FA on 3D printing performance of kenaf geopolymer Investigation into the flexural performance of novel precast sandwich wall panels Inorganic–organic hybrid geopolymers: evolution of molecular and pore structure, and its effect on mechanical and fire-retardant properties Assessment of waste eggshell powder as a limestone alternative in portland cement Autogenous shrinkage and cracking of ultra-high-performance concrete with soda residue as an internal curing agent
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1