Buildings 09 00203

buildings
Review
Evaluation of the Adhesion between Overlays and
Substrates in Concrete Floors: Literature Survey,
Recent Non-Destructive and Semi-Destructive Testing
Methods, and Research Gaps
Jacek Szymanowski
Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering Wybrzeże Wyspiańskiego 27,
50-370 Wroclaw, Poland; jacek.szymanowski@pwr.edu.pl

Received: 13 August 2019; Accepted: 4 September 2019; Published: 11 September 2019
Abstract: Non-destructive testing (NDT) and semi-destructive testing (SDT) have recently been more
frequently used for the evaluation and condition assessment of concrete floors in various types of
buildings. The subject of the article is to briefly introduce the reader to the problem of adhesion
between overlays and substrates in concrete floors and to illustrate the current state of knowledge
on the subject. The aim of this paper was to briefly describe the recently used non-destructive and
semi-destructive testing methods and the parameters useful for characterizing the adhesion between
overlays and substrates in concrete floors, as well as the methods useful to characterize the functional
properties of the overlays. A recent literature survey, related to the adhesion between the overlays
and substrates in concrete floors, is thus shown. Special emphasis was placed on the critical review of
the current research results. Based on the analysis of the literature review, research gaps have been
presented in order to highlight future research directions.
Keywords: non-destructive testing; semi-destructive testing; cement mortar; pull-off adhesion;

overlay; substrate; functional properties; abrasion resistance; subsurface tensile strength; hardness
1. Introduction
Non-destructive testing (NDT) and semi-destructive testing (SDT) have recently been more
frequently used for the evaluation and condition assessment of concrete floors in various types of
buildings [1]. Nowadays, concrete floors are commonly used in civil engineering [2–4], and they are
made of overlays that are placed on the substrate [5]. The most important properties of overlays
are associated with their proper adhesion to the substrate, as well as their corresponding functional
properties, such as abrasion resistance, subsurface tensile strength or hardness [6].
A floor is a horizontal interior element in a building, normally consisting of an overlay (flooring)
applied on the substrate. The substrate is placed on the base. The load, which impacts on the overlay,
is transferred to the base. The substrate is the structural support of the floor and transfers the load to
the ground directly or indirectly through other elements of the building (e.g., a slab floor and walls) [7].
It should be added that an overlay has to be adapted to functional requirements, e.g., by applying
a finishing layer on it [8]. Nowadays, floors with concrete layers are generally being used in most
residential building objects. They are used, among others, in residential and public buildings,
warehouses, production buildings, and one and multilevel car parks.
A concrete floor consists of an overlay that is usually made of cement mortar and substrate
(Figure 1). The substrate is usually made of concrete. Between the overlay and the substrate, a bonding
agent can also be applied. The interphase zone between the overlay and substrate can be set apart,
Buildings 2019, 9, 203; doi:10.3390/buildings9090203 www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings

Buildings 2019,
Buildings 2019, 9,
9, 203
x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 24
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 2ofof 24
23
apart, which
apart, which according
according toto literature
literature can
can be
be divided
divided into
into the
the near-surface
near-surface zone
zone of
of the
the overlay
overlay mortar
mortar
which according
(NSZ-OM) and to literature
the near-surfacecan be divided
zone of theinto the near-surface
concrete substrate zone of theOther
(NSZ-CS). overlay mortar
names are(NSZ-OM)
shown in
(NSZ-OM) and the near-surface zone of the concrete substrate (NSZ-CS). Other names are shown in
and the
Figure 1.near-surface
1. zone of the concrete substrate (NSZ-CS). Other names are shown in Figure 1.
Figure
Figure 1. Explanation
Figure 1.
Figure 1. Explanation of
Explanationof basic
ofbasic definitions
basicdefinitions used
definitions used in
used in the
in the article.
the article.
article.
These floors
floors are
are popular
popular in
in residential,
residential, civil,
civil, and
and industrial
industrial buildings, e.g., in
buildings, e.g.,
e.g., in indoor
indoor car
car parks
parks [9].
[9].
These in indoor car parks [9].
As is shown in Figure 2, floors, depending on the used material, can be divided into: mineral mineral floors,
floors,
As is shown in Figure 2, floors, depending on the used material, can be divided into: mineral floors,
floors of epoxy resins, bituminous, artificial paneling, ceramic, stoned, and steel. However, floorings
floors of epoxy resins, bituminous, artificial paneling, ceramic, stoned, and steel. However, floorings
made ofof cement composites and concrete hardening
hardening areare the
the most
are the most often
often used.
used.
made cement composites and concrete hardening most often used.
Figure 2.
Figure 2. Types
Types of
of floorings,
floorings, depending
depending on
on the
the material
material of
of which
which they
they are made
made (based
(based on
on Reference
Reference
Figure 2. Types of floorings, depending on the material of which they are are
made (based on Reference [10]).
[10]).
[10]).
The aim of the article was to introduce non-destructive and semi-destructive testing methods,
The aim of
the parameters
The aim of the
the article
article was
connected was tothe
withto introduce non-destructive
issue ofnon-destructive
introduce adhesion between andoverlays
and semi-destructive testing methods,
and substrates,
semi-destructive testing methods,
and also
the parameters
the parameters
the connected
functional parameters with
connected with the
of the issue
theoverlay of
issue ofin adhesion between
concretebetween
adhesion overlays
floors. overlays and
The literature substrates,
survey and
and substrates, and also the
andreview
also the
of
functional
current parameters
research resultsof the
are overlay
shown. Thein concrete
research floors.
gaps areThe literature
also survey
presented in and
order review
to of
highlight
functional parameters of the overlay in concrete floors. The literature survey and review of current current
future
research results are
research results
research are shown.
directions. shown. The
The research
research gapsgaps are
are also
also presented
presented inin order
order to
to highlight
highlight future
future research
research
directions.
directions.
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 3 of 23
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 24
2. Overview
2. Overview of
of Recent
Recent Non-Destructive
Non-Destructive and
andSemi-Destructive
Semi-DestructiveTesting
Testing Methods
Methods Used
Usedto
toAssess
Assessthe
the Adhesion
Adhesion between
between Overlays
Overlays andand Substrates
Substrates in Concrete
in Concrete Floors
Floors
A proper method should be chosen, depending on the requirements concerning concerning the carried-out
carried-out
repair [11]. The
The methods
methods of of testing
testing the bond between a concrete substrate and an overlay can be
divided,
divided, depending
dependingononthe
thedirection
directionofofload application,
load into
application, three
into groups
three [12].
groups Tests
[12]. to determine
Tests the
to determine
bond between
the bond the concrete
between substrate
the concrete and and
substrate the overlay are shown
the overlay in Figure
are shown 3. 3.
in Figure
Figure 3. Tests to determine the bond between the concrete substrate and the overlay: (a) pull-off,
Figure 3. Tests to determine the bond between the concrete substrate and the overlay: a) pull-off, b)
(b) shear, (c) slant shear, (d) splitting.
shear, c) slant shear, d) splitting
The first group of methods assumes testing under tension stress. They are the pull-off method
The first group of methods assumes testing under tension stress. They are the pull-off method
(Figure 3a) and the splitting prism method (Figure 3d). The splitting method is based on applying a
(Figure 3a) and the splitting prism method (Figure 3d). The splitting method is based on applying a
longitudinal compressive load on the interface of the concrete substrate and the overlay. The second
longitudinal compressive load on the interface of the concrete substrate and the overlay. The second
group of methods assumes testing under shear stress. The direct shear method is shown in Figure 3b.
group of methods assumes testing under shear stress. The direct shear method is shown in Figure 3b.
The third group assumes both compression and shear stress working together. The slant shear method
The third group assumes both compression and shear stress working together. The slant shear
is shown in Figure 3c. In practice, the pull-off method [13], in which adhesion is assessed by measuring
method is shown in Figure 3c. In practice, the pull-off method [13], in which adhesion is assessed by
the strength of pulling off the repaired layer of the substrate, is most often used [14]. The scheme of the
measuring the strength of pulling off the repaired layer of the substrate, is most often used [14]. The
pull-off and the view of the used equipment is shown in Figure 4. In this method, the measurement
scheme of the pull-off and the view of the used equipment is shown in Figure 4. In this method, the
of the pull-off adhesion fb between the repaired layer and the substrate is carried out on the basis of
measurement of the pull-off adhesion fb between the repaired layer and the substrate is carried out
the measurement of the value of the pulling off strength of the steel disk with a digital or indicating
on the basis of the measurement of the value of the pulling off strength of the steel disk with a digital
manometer. Drills in the overlay of a diameter of Df = 50 mm and a depth that is shown in Figure 4
or indicating manometer. Drills in the overlay of a diameter of Df = 50 mm and a depth that is shown
are performed in this method. Then, steel discs are glued to the overlay and pulled off the substrate
in Figure 4 are performed in this method. Then, steel discs are glued to the overlay and pulled off the
surface at an angle of 90 degrees. The increase of the value of pull off stress should be equal to
substrate surface at an angle of 90 degrees. The increase of the value of pull off stress should be equal
0.05 MPa/s. The pull-off method is quantitative because it enables the pull-off value fb to be determined
to 0.05 MPa/s. The pull-off method is quantitative because it enables the pull-off value fb to be
as follows (1):
determined as follows (1): 4Fb
fb = (1)
4𝐹2f
πD
𝑓 (1)
𝜋𝐷
where:
where:
Fb —the failure load (N)
Fb—the failure load (N)
Df —the diameter
Df—the of drilling
diameter corecore
of drilling (m) (m)
Figure 44 shows
Figure shows the
the scheme
scheme ofof the
the pull-off
pull-off method
method and
and the
the view
viewof
ofthe
thetesting
testingdevice.
device.
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 4 of 23
a) b)
Figure
Figure4.
4.The
Thescheme
schemeof
ofthe
thepull-off
pull-offmethod
method (a)
(a) and
and aa view
view of
of the
the testing
testing device
device (b).
(b).
When
When taking
takinginto
intoconsideration
considerationthe thedurability
durabilityof ofthe
theoverlay,
overlay, anan appropriate
appropriate pull-off
pull-off adhesion
adhesion ffbb
between
between thethe overlay
overlay and
and thethe substrate
substrate of of 1.5
1.5 MPa
MPaisisdemanded
demandedfor forrepaired
repaired overlays
overlays and
and 0.5
0.5 MPa
MPaforfor
newly built overlays.
newly built overlays.
The
The durability
durability of ofaa floor,
floor, especially
especially whenwhen itit is
is heavily
heavily loaded
loaded because
because of of driving
driving cars
cars or
or loading
loading
trucks,
trucks,depends
dependssignificantly
significantlyonon thethe
proper
properbonding
bonding between
betweenthe the
overlay and and
overlay the substrate [15]. The
the substrate [15].
technical measure of the bonding is the value of pull-off adhesion f
The technical measure of the bonding is the value of pull-off adhesion fb , which is determined withthe
b, which is determined with the
semi-destructive
semi-destructivepull-off
pull-offmethod.
method.According
Accordingtotorequirements
requirements forfor
floors
floors included
included in in
Reference
Reference [16], it
[16],
is
it demanded
is demanded that thethe
that minimum
minimum value
valueof of
pull-off adhesion
pull-off adhesionfb between
fb between thethe
overlay
overlayand thethe
and substrate
substrateis
equal to to
is equal nono less than
less than0.50.5MPa.
MPa. If If
thethevalue
valueofofadhesion
adhesionisisequal
equaltoto0,0,ititwould
wouldmeanmean that
that so-called
so-called
delamination
delamination has has appeared,
appeared, i.e.,i.e., aa complete
complete lacklack of
of adhesion.
adhesion.
3.
3.Overview
OverviewofofRecent
RecentNon-Destructive
Non-Destructiveand
andSemi-Destructive
Semi-DestructiveTesting
TestingMethods
MethodsUsed
UsedtotoAssess
Assessthe
the Functional
Functional Properties
Properties of Overlays
of Overlays
3.1. Abrasion
3.1. AbrasionResistance—Boehme
Resistance—BoehmeTest Test
The basis
The basis of
of the
themethod
methodisistotosubject
subjectthethe
examined
examinedsample,
sample,with section
with dimensions
section of 71of× 71
dimensions 71 ×mm,
71
to 16tocycles
mm, of abrasion
16 cycles on on
of abrasion a rotating
a rotatingabrasion
abrasionwheel
wheel(Boehme
(Boehmewheel)
wheel)[17].
[17]. Each
Each cycle consists of
cycle consists of
even spilling of 20 g of carborundum abrasive sand on the Boehme wheel, attaching
even spilling of 20 g of carborundum abrasive sand on the Boehme wheel, attaching the sample to the sample to
the handle,
the handle, loading
loading itit with
with aa force
force of 294 ++ −3
of 294 −3NNand
andthen
thensubjecting
subjectingititto
to22
22rotations
rotationsof of the
the disc
disc in
in
each cycle. After each cycle, the sample should be turned at 90 degrees, and after every
each cycle. After each cycle, the sample should be turned at 90 degrees, and after every four cycles, it four cycles,
it should
should be be weighed.
weighed. Then,
Then, abrasion,
abrasion, as the
as the mass
mass decrease
decrease or volume
or volume decrease
decrease of the
of the sample
sample after
after 16
16 cycles, should be calculated as follows
cycles, should be calculated as follows (2): (2):
∆𝑚
∆m
∆V
∆𝑉 = (2)(2)
𝜌ρR
∆𝑉—decrease of volume after 16 cycles (in cubic millimeters)
∆V—decrease of volume after 16 cycles (in cubic millimeters)
∆𝑚—decrease of mass after 16 cycles (in grams)
∆m—decrease of mass after 16 cycles (in grams)
𝜌 —the density of the examined sample, or in the case of multilayer samples, abrasion layer
ρR —the density of the examined sample, or in the case of multilayer samples, abrasion layer density
density (in grams per cubic millimeters)
(in grams per cubic millimeters)
Figure 5 shows the scheme and view of the Boehme test device.
Figure 5 shows the scheme and view of the Boehme test device.
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 5 of 23
a) b)
a) b)
Figure
Figure 5. The
The scheme
scheme (a)
(a) and
and view
view (b)
(b) of
of the
the Boehme
Boehme test
test device.
device.
Figure 5. The scheme (a) and view (b) of the Boehme test device.
3.2. Subsurface
3.2. Subsurface Tensile
Tensile Strength—Pull-Off
Strength—Pull-Off Test Test
3.2. Subsurface Tensile Strength—Pull-Off Test
The pull-off
The pull-off method
method is is also
also used
used toto determine
determine thethe subsurface tensile strength
subsurface tensile strength [18].
[18]. In
In order
order to
to
assessThe pull-off
the strength,method
drillingisinalso
the used
overlayto of
determine
50 mm the subsurface
diameter and to a tensile
depth strength
of around [18].
15 mm In is
order to
carried
assess the strength, drilling in the overlay of 50 mm diameter and to a depth of around 15 mm is
assess the strength,
out. Then, drilling inglued
the overlay of 50 mm diameter and
andtothe
a depth of around 15applied.
mm is
carried out.the steelthe
Then, discs
steelare
discs aretoglued
the surface of the
to the surface overlay
of the overlay pulling
and the off forceoff
pulling is force is
carried out.
The subsurface Then, the steel
tensile strengthdiscs are glued to
can be calculated the surface of the
as below:as below:overlay and the pulling off force is
applied. The subsurface tensile strength can be calculated
applied. The subsurface tensile strength can be calculated as below:
4𝐹
4F
f𝑓hs = 4𝐹b2 (3)
(3)
𝑓 𝜋𝐷
πD (3)
𝜋𝐷 f
where:
where:
where:
Df—the
Fb —the diameter
failure of drilling core (m)
load (N)
Df—the diameter of drilling core (m)
Figure 6 shows the
Df —the diameter of drilling schemecore of
(m)the pull-off method according to subsurface tensile strength
Figure 6 shows the scheme of the pull-off method according to subsurface tensile strength
testing.
testing.
Figure 6 shows the scheme of the pull-off method according to subsurface tensile strength testing.
Figure 6. The scheme of the pull-off method according to subsurface tensile strength testing.
Thescheme
Figure6.6.The
Figure schemeof
ofthe
thepull-off
pull-offmethod
methodaccording
according to
to subsurface
subsurface tensile
tensile strength
strength testing.
testing.
3.3.
3.3. Surface
Surface Hardness—The
Hardness—The Sclerometric
Sclerometric Method
Method
3.3. Surface Hardness—The Sclerometric Method
The
The scheme
scheme ofof the
the sclerometric
sclerometric method,
method, together
together with
with the
the view
view of
of the
the testing
testing device
device and
and the
the
The scheme of the sclerometric method, together with the view of the testing device and the
relation between the compressive strength and rebound number are presented in
relation between the compressive strength and rebound number are presented in Figure 7. Figure 7.
relation between the compressive strength and rebound number are presented in Figure 7.
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 6 of 23
a) b) c)
Figure7.7.The
Figure Thescheme
schemeof
ofthe
thesclerometric
sclerometricmethod
method(a),
(a),the
theview
viewofofthe
thetesting
testingdevice
device(b),
(b),and
andthe
thetypical
typical
relation (c) between the rebound number and compressive strength (based on References [19,20]).
relation (c) between the rebound number and compressive strength (based on References [19,20]).
The relation
The relation between
between the the hardness
hardness of of concrete
concrete and and the
the rebound
rebound number number isis thethe basis
basis ofofthis
this
method[19–22].
method [19-22]. Figure 7 shows the the viewview of of the
the hammer
hammer (also (also named
named Schmidt
Schmidt hammer)
hammer) and andthe the
schemeof
scheme ofthe
thesclerometric
sclerometricmethod.
method. The The main
main parts
parts of
of the
the hammer
hammer are are aa plunger,
plunger, spring,
spring, indicator,
indicator,
latch,and
latch, andbody.
body.Position
Position1 1ininthethescheme
scheme shows
shows thethe hammer
hammer in in
thethe first
first part part of the
of the test.
test. TheThe plunger
plunger is
is applied
applied in thein testing
the testing
placeplace
and theandlatchthe holding
latch holding the hammer
the hammer mass ismasslocked. is locked.
PositionPosition 2 in the
2 in the scheme
scheme
shows theshows
hammer the during
hammer theduring
test when the test whenisthe
the body body against
pushing is pushing against the
the concrete concrete
surface. Thesurface.
spring
The spring
tension tension isand
is increasing, increasing,
the latch and is stillthe latch is
locked. still locked.
Position 3 in the Position
scheme3shows in the the
scheme
moment shows the
in the
moment
test when in thethe testiswhen
latch the latch
released, and the is released,
hammer mass and the hammeragainst
is pushed mass is thepushed
plungeragainst
tip bythe theplunger
spring.
tip by
The lastthe spring.inThe
position thelast position
scheme (numberin the4)scheme
shows(number
the moment 4) shows
whenthe themoment
hammerwhen massthe hammer
moves the
mass moves
indicator afterthe indicatorthe
impacting after impacting
plunger tip andtherebounding.
plunger tip and Then, rebounding.
the rebound Then, the rebound
number is read fromnumberthe
is read
scale. Thefrom the scale.
rebound numberThe rebound
can also be number
used to can also becompressive
estimate used to estimate compressive
strength or flexural strength
strength. or
flexural strength. For this purpose, concrete has to be tested with
For this purpose, concrete has to be tested with the hammer. The compressive strength of control the hammer. The compressive
strengthshould
samples of control
thensamples should (the
be determined thencontrol
be determined
samples (thecan be control
takensamples
from thecan be taken
existing from the
structure or
existing structure or prepared based on the same mix composition).
prepared based on the same mix composition). Next, the relation between the rebound number and Next, the relation between the
rebound number
compressive strengthandis compressive
created (on the strength
right sideis created
in Figure (on
7) the
andright side inanalysis
correlation Figure 7) and correlation
should be carried
analysis
out using should
the leastbe carriedmethod
squares out using (the the least squares
hypothetical method
regression (thebased
curve hypothetical
on previousregression
researchcurve
can
based on previous research can be taken into consideration for some conditions).
be taken into consideration for some conditions). However, it must also be stated that a large number However, it must
also
of be stated
measuring that is
points a necessary
large number to obtainof measuring
statistically points is necessary
reliable to obtain
results. Despite statisticallythat
the possibilities reliable
the
results. Despite
rebound hammerthe possibilities
provides, therethat the rebound
are factors affectinghammer provides,
the results. The there
followingare factors affecting
limitations should the
results. The following limitations should be taken into consideration during
be taken into consideration during the analysis: age of test specimens; surface and internal moisture the analysis: age of test
specimens; the
conditions; surface
size, and
shape,internal moisture
and rigidity conditions;
of the specimens; the smoothness
size, shape, and of testrigidity of type
surface; the specimens;
of coarse
smoothness of test surface; type of coarse aggregate; type of cement;
aggregate; type of cement; and carbonation of the concrete surface [23–27]. The hammer has recentlyand carbonation of the concrete
surface
also been[23 –27].together
used The hammer has recently
with other also been and
non-destructive usedsemi-destructive
together with other non-destructive
testing methods to assessand semi-
the
destructive testing
compressive strengthmethods to assess
of concrete [27–32].the compressive strength of concrete [27–32].
4.4.Overview
Overviewof of Recent
Recent Activities Used to Improve
Improve the
the Pull-Off
Pull-Off Adhesion
Adhesion of
ofOverlay
Overlaywith Substrate
with Substrate
The following activities to improve the pull-off adhesion fb of overlay with substrate are used:
The following activities to improve the pull-off adhesion fb of overlay with substrate are used:
• Mechanical treatment of the surface of the substrate;
• • Surfacetreatment
Mechanical texturing;of the surface of the substrate;
• • Removal
Surface of cement laitance from the concrete substrate surface;
texturing;
• • Surface exposure of thefrom
Removal of cement laitance aggregate;
the concrete substrate surface;
• •
Surface exposure of the aggregate;concrete substrate with bonding agents;
Surface strengthening of the
• Modifications of the material of the overlay.
• Surface strengthening of the concrete substrate with bonding agents;
• Modifications of the material of the overlay.
4.1. Mechanical Treatment of the Surface of Substrate
In recent years, a great deal of research has been carried out according to the influence of the
morphology of a concrete surface to its bonding with the overlay [33–37]. The methods of evaluating
a concrete surface were performed by, among others, Santos and Julio [38], Mathia et al. [39], and
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 7 of 23
4.1. Mechanical Treatment of the Surface of Substrate

In recent years, a great deal of research has been carried out according to the influence of the
morphology of a concrete surface to its bonding with the overlay [33–37]. The methods of evaluating
a concrete surface were performed by, among others, Santos and Julio [38], Mathia et al. [39], and
Garbacz et al. [40]. At present, the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) method is increasingly used
Garbacz et al. [40]. At present, the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) method is increasingly used for
for this purpose [41–43]. The principle of this method is as follows: An electron gun generates the
this purpose [41–43]. The principle of this method is as follows: An electron gun generates the electron
electron beam. When the electrons enter the concrete surface, low energy secondary electrons are
beam. When the electrons enter the concrete surface, low energy secondary electrons are generated.
generated. The intensity of the secondary electrons depends on the concrete surface morphology and,
The intensity of the secondary electrons depends on the concrete surface morphology and, therefore,
therefore, an SEM image of the surface is created as a function between the intensity of secondary
an SEM image of the surface is created as a function between the intensity of secondary electrons
electrons and the position of the scanning electron beam. This method provides many advantages,
and the position of the scanning electron beam. This method provides many advantages, such as
such as high magnification and resolution of obtained images at nanoscale, or the possibility to
high magnification and resolution of obtained images at nanoscale, or the possibility to determine
determine the chemical composition of studied samples. Generally, the available methods of
the chemical composition of studied samples. Generally, the available methods of treatment can be
treatment can be divided into three main groups: cleaning and non-invasive removal methods,
divided into three main groups: cleaning and non-invasive removal methods, coarsening methods,
coarsening methods, and invasive removal methods. Each type of the above-mentioned groups
and invasive removal methods. Each type of the above-mentioned groups contains methods that differ
contains methods that differ with the mechanism of treatment, and this is why it has particular
with the mechanism of treatment, and this is why it has particular applications. The exemplary views
applications. The exemplary views of the concrete substrate surface after treatment are shown in
of the concrete substrate surface after treatment are shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8.
a) b)
Figure 8.
Figure 8. The
The exemplary
exemplary view of the
view of the concrete
concrete substrate
substrate surface
surface after
after shot-blasting
shot-blasting (a)
(a) and
and patch
patch
grabbing (b).
grabbing (b).
Figure 9 shows the division of several concrete treatment methods, depending on their type.
From the methods presented in Figure 9, the cleaning and non-invasive types of methods contain
grinding and low-pressure cleaning. Attrition is the mechanism of grinding. This method reveals
the fine grain aggregate due to the removal of cement laitance, loose fragments, and other impurities.
Water erosion is the mechanism of treatment of low-pressure cleaning. It enables the removal of
water-soluble contamination and brittle cementitious material from the surface. The second group
(coarsening) contains milling, scabbling, and shot-blasting/sand-blasting. Hitting is the method
of treatment for milling. Milling allows for the obtention of a regular profile of parallel grooves
on the surface, the removal of the whole cement laitance, and the levelling of large irregularities
(up to 20 mm). Scabbing is based on using pneumatic devices such as hammers, piston-mounted
bits, etc. It removes the material of the overlay near to its surface (up to 6 mm depending on the
used device). The shot-blasting and the sand-blasting mechanism of treatment is spraying. These
methods remove brittle material, cement laitance, and dirt from the overlay surface, and reveal the
coarse aggregate. The profile of the surface after these treatments depends on the granulation and
abrasiveness of the surface material of the overlay. The invasive removal methods contain flame
treatment and hydrodemolition (also named water jetting or water-blasting). Flame treatment uses
pressure expansion by steam and removes fragments of concrete (a maximum of 6 mm). In turn,
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 8 of 23
hydrodemolition enables the removal of concrete fragments of up to 19 mm, depending on the water
pressure. Recent research has shown that shot-blasting of a concrete substrate surface improves the
level of adhesion of the cement mortar overlay with the substrate [44–48]. Figure 10 shows the relation
between
Figurethe pull-off
9 shows the division fof
adhesion b between the overlay
several concrete and the
treatment existingdepending
methods, concrete substrate and the
on their type.
method of treatment of the concrete substrate surface.
Grinding Attrition
Cleaning and non-
invasive removal
Low pressure
Water erosion
cleaning
Milling (scarifying) Hitting
Method of Use of compressed

mechanical “Coarsening” Scabbling air to hammer
treatment piston-mounted bits
Shot-blasting and
Spraying
sand-blasting
Pressure expansion
Flame treatment
by steam
Invasive removal
Pressure expansion
Hydrodemoliton
with water
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER9.

Figure REVIEW
Division of concrete treatment methods (based on Reference [5]). 9 of 24
Figure 9. Division of concrete treatment methods (based on Reference [5]).
From the methods presented in Figure 9, the cleaning and non-invasive types of methods contain
grinding and low-pressure cleaning. Attrition is the mechanism of grinding. This method reveals the
fine grain aggregate due to the removal of cement laitance, loose fragments, and other impurities.
Water erosion is the mechanism of treatment of low-pressure cleaning. It enables the removal of
water-soluble contamination and brittle cementitious material from the surface. The second group
(coarsening) contains milling, scabbling, and shot-blasting/sand-blasting. Hitting is the method of
treatment for milling. Milling allows for the obtention of a regular profile of parallel grooves on the
surface, the removal of the whole cement laitance, and the levelling of large irregularities (up to 20
mm). Scabbing is based on using pneumatic devices such as hammers, piston-mounted bits, etc. It
removes the material of the overlay near to its surface (up to 6 mm depending on the used device).
The shot-blasting and the sand-blasting mechanism of treatment is spraying. These methods remove
brittle material, cement laitance, and dirt from the overlay surface, and reveal the coarse aggregate.
The profile of the surface after these treatments depends on the granulation and abrasiveness of the
surface material of
testthe overlay. The invasive
adhesionremoval methods contain flame treatment
concrete and
Figure
Figure Thetest
10.The
10. results
results ofthe
of thepull-off
pull-off adhesion ffbbbetween
between theoverlay
the overlay andthe
and the existing
existing concrete
hydrodemolition
substrate using(also namedmethod
the pull-off water(based
jetting
on or
the water-blasting).
results presented in Flame treatment
Reference uses pressure
[44]). Methods of
substrate using the pull-off method (based on the results presented in Reference [44]). Methods of
expansion by steamT1—patch
surface treatment: and removes
grabbedfragments
(raw) surface,ofT2—formed
concrete after
(a maximum
contact with of 6 mm).
formwork In turn,
(as cast)
surface treatment: T1—patch grabbed (raw) surface, T2—formed after contact with formwork (as cast)
hydrodemolition enables the grinded
surface, T3—mechanically removalsurface,
of concrete fragments surface.
T4—shot-blasted of up to 19 mm, depending on the water
surface, T3—mechanically grinded surface, T4—shot-blasted surface.
pressure. Recent research has shown that shot-blasting of a concrete substrate surface improves the
levelFigure
of adhesion
10 showsof the
thatcement mortar
only an overlay
increase with
of the the substrate
effective relative[44 –48]. Figure
surface area (of10the
shows the relation
substrate) does
between the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and the existing concrete substrate and the
not cause the considerable increase of adhesion that is noticeable in the case of the raw surface and
method
as of treatment
cast surface (T1 andofT2). theMoreover,
concrete substrate surface.
only exposure of the aggregate (on substrate surface) does not
cause the visible increase of the level of adhesion that is noticeable in the case of the mechanically
Figure 10. The test results of the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and the existing concrete
substrate using the pull-off method (based on the results presented in Reference [44]). Methods of
surface
Buildings 2019,treatment:
9, 203 T1—patch grabbed (raw) surface, T2—formed after contact with formwork (as cast) 9 of 23
surface, T3—mechanically grinded surface, T4—shot-blasted surface.
Figure10
Figure 10shows
showsthatthatonly
onlyan anincrease
increaseof ofthe
theeffective
effectiverelative
relativesurface
surfaceareaarea(of
(ofthe
thesubstrate)
substrate)doesdoes
not cause the considerable increase of adhesion that is noticeable in the case of
not cause the considerable increase of adhesion that is noticeable in the case of the raw surface and the raw surface and as
cast
as castsurface
surface (T1
(T1andandT2).
T2).Moreover,
Moreover,only onlyexposure
exposureof ofthe
the aggregate
aggregate (on(on substrate surface) does
substrate surface) does not
not
cause the visible increase of the level of adhesion that is noticeable in the case
cause the visible increase of the level of adhesion that is noticeable in the case of the mechanically of the mechanically
grindedsurface
grinded surfaceT3.T3.Only
Onlysimultaneous
simultaneousincreasing
increasingof ofthe
theeffective
effectiverelative
relativesurface
surfacearea
areaandandexposure
exposure
of the
of the aggregate
aggregate considerably
considerably increases
increases the
the level
level of
of adhesion,
adhesion, as as was
was the
the case
case for
for the
the shot-blasted
shot-blasted
surface
surface T4.T4.
However, Franck
However, Franck andand DeDe Belie
Belie [49],
[49], in
in order
order toto determine
determine thethe influence
influence of of the
the way
way of of treating
treating
the concrete surface on the value of Ra and Rq parameters (Figure 11),
the concrete surface on the value of Ra and Rq parameters (Figure 11), subjected the surface of subjected the surface of aa
concrete floor to research with the jointless method laser beam. The figure shows
concrete floor to research with the jointless method laser beam. The figure shows that the values of that the values of
arithmetical mean
arithmetical mean height
height (Ra)
(Ra) and
and root
root mean
meansquare
squaredeviation
deviation(Rq)
(Rq)ofofthe
theconcrete
concretesurface
surface subjected
subjected to
sand-blasting are about eight times higher than for the raw surface, and about
to sand-blasting are about eight times higher than for the raw surface, and about two times higher two times higher than
for the
than forwire brushed
the wire surface.
brushed surface.
(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 11.
11. The
The effect of the
effect of thesurface
surfacetreatment
treatmentmethod
methodonon thethe value
value of: of:
(a)(a) arithmetical
arithmetical mean
mean height
height (Ra)
(Ra) of the concrete surface, (b) root mean square deviation (Rq) of the concrete surface. The surface
of the concrete surface, (b) root mean square deviation (Rq) of the concrete surface. The surface treatment
treatment
methods weremethods were
marked marked I—as
as follows: as follows: I—as cast
cast surface, surface, II—wire-brushed
II—wire-brushed surface, III—sand-
surface, III—sand-blasted surface
blasted
(based onsurface (basedpresented
the results on the results presented
in Reference in Reference [49]).
[49]).
The research shows that together with increasing the fraction of pores Φ and the number of
pores within the interphase zone, the value fb decreases. In the case of substrate, the relation is the
opposite—together with increasing the fraction of pores Φ and the number of pores in the near surface
zone of the concrete substrate (NSZ-CS), the value fb increases [50–54]. The relations between the total
fraction of pores and the pull-off adhesion fb are shown in Figure 12a. In turn, the relations between
the number of pores and the pull-off adhesion fb are shown in Figure 12b.
within the interphase zone, the value fb decreases. In the case of substrate, the relation is the
The research shows that together with increasing the fraction of pores Φ and the number of pores
opposite—together with increasing the fraction of pores Φ and the number of pores in the near
within the interphase zone, the value fb decreases. In the case of substrate, the relation is the
surface zone of the concrete substrate (NSZ-CS), the value fb increases [50–54]. The relations between
opposite—together with increasing the fraction of pores Φ and the number of pores in the near
the total fraction of pores and the pull-off adhesion fb are shown in Figure 12a. In turn, the relations
surface zone of the concrete substrate (NSZ-CS), the value fb increases [50–54]. The relations between
between the number of pores and the pull-off adhesion fb are shown in Figure 12b.
the total2019,
Buildings fraction
9, 203 of pores and the pull-off adhesion fb are shown in Figure 12a. In turn, the relations
10 of 23
between the number of pores and the pull-off adhesion fb are shown in Figure 12b.
a) b)
a) b)
Figure 12. Relation of the pull-off adhesion fb of the overlay with the substrate with regard to fraction of
FigureΦ
pores
Figure 12.(a)
12.
and number
Relation
Relation ofthe
of
of poresadhesion
thepull-off
pull-off (b): IZ—interphase
adhesion fbfbofofthe
zone,
theoverlay
overlay NSZ-CS—the
with
with the
the
near
substrate
substrate
surface
with
with regard
regard
zonefraction
to to
of the
fraction of
concrete
of pores Φ substrate, NSZ-OM—the
(a) and number near
of pores (b):surface zone of the
IZ—interphase zone,mortar overlay (based
NSZ-CS—the on thezone
near surface results
of
pores Φ (a) and number of pores (b): IZ—interphase zone, NSZ-CS—the near surface zone of the
presented in Reference [50]).
the concrete substrate, NSZ-OM—the near surface zone of the mortar overlay (based on the results
concrete substrate, NSZ-OM—the near surface zone of the mortar overlay (based on the results
presented in Reference [50]).
presented in
4.2. Texturing of Reference
the Surface[50]).
of the Concrete Substrate
4.2. Texturing of the Surface of the Concrete Substrate
The second
4.2. Texturing of theway to improve
Surface the pull-off
of the Concrete adhesion fb between the concrete substrate and the
Substrate
The is
overlay second way to improve
by texturing the pull-off
the substrate adhesion
surface. fb between
The division the texturing
of the concrete substrate
method and the overlay
is presented in
is by The second
texturing theway to improve
substrate surface.theThe
pull-off adhesion
division of the fb between
texturing the concrete
method is substrate
presented in and 13.
Figure the
Figure 13.
overlay is by texturing the substrate surface. The division of the texturing method is presented in
Figure 13.
Dragging jute
Dragging jute
Brushing
Brushing
Method of
mechanical Grooving
treatment
Method of
mechanical Grooving
treatment
Leaching of cement
paste
Leaching of cement
paste
Acid etching
Acid etching
Figure 13.
Figure 13. Division of concrete
concrete texturing
texturing methods.
methods.
Figure 13.inDivision
From the methods presented Figureof13,
concrete texturing
dragging the methods.
jute texturing method is based on
mechanical or manual pulling of the jute fabric over the concrete surface. It is a cheap method, but the
texture that is created according to this method is small (around 0.2 to 0.6 mm). The brushing method
consists of brushing the fresh concrete mix using steel brushes. It can be performed at a texture depth
in the range of 2 to 3 mm. The advantage of this method is the fast texturing of the concrete surface.
Nevertheless, attention should be paid to the depth of brushing, because too deep texturing can reveal
the reinforcement and cause its corrosion. The method that assumes leaching of the cement paste from
the cement overlay surface consists of brushing or jetting water that rinses the unbound layer of this
mechanical or manual pulling of the jute fabric over the concrete surface. It is a cheap method, but
the texture that is created according to this method is small (around 0.2 to 0.6 mm). The brushing
method consists of brushing the fresh concrete mix using steel brushes. It can be performed at a
texture depth in the range of 2 to 3 mm. The advantage of this method is the fast texturing of the
concrete surface. Nevertheless, attention should be paid to the depth of brushing, because too11deep
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 of 23
texturing can reveal the reinforcement and cause its corrosion. The method that assumes leaching of
the cement paste from the cement overlay surface consists of brushing or jetting water that rinses the
mortar. Increasing
unbound layer of this themortar.
frictionIncreasing
coefficientthe
of friction
the surface is the advantage
coefficient of this
of the surface method,
is the despite
advantage the
of this
fact that it is expensive. Moreover, after application of this method, the surface
method, despite the fact that it is expensive. Moreover, after application of this method, the surface can have a decorative
function.
can have aThe groovingfunction.
decorative method isThe based on grooving
grooving method theisconcrete
based on surface by using
grooving metal forks
the concrete in order
surface by
to obtain
using metala series
forksofingrooves
order toonobtain
the surface (theofdepth
a series of each
grooves groove
on the is around
surface 6 mm).ofThe
(the depth acid
each etching
groove is
method is based on applying a hydrochloric acid solution on the concrete
around 6 mm). The acid etching method is based on applying a hydrochloric acid solution on the surface by brushing. It is an
effectivesurface
concrete methodby ofbrushing.
removingItthe cement
is an laitance,
effective method but
ofitremoving
is rather the
expensive. Texturing
cement laitance, has
but recently
it is rather
been applied
expensive. to increase
Texturing hasthe pull-offbeen
recently adhesion
appliedfb of
toepoxy
increaseresin
thecoatings
pull-offtoadhesion
the concrete
fb ofsubstrate
epoxy resin [51]
and cement
coatings to themortar overlay
concrete to the[51]
substrate concrete substrate
and cement [52]. overlay to the concrete substrate [52].
mortar
4.3. Removal
4.3. RemovalofofCement
CementLaitance
Laitance from
from the
the Concrete
Concrete Substrate
Substrate Surface
Surface
ItIt isisknown
knownthatthatremoving
removingthe the cement
cement laitance
laitance from
from thethe concrete
concrete substrate
substrate surface
surface improves
improves the
the level
level of the of pull-of
the pull-of adhesion
adhesion fb between
fb between the overlay
the overlay and and the substrate
the substrate [55–[55–57].
57]. FigureFigure 14 shows
14 shows the
the relation
relation between
between the pull-off
the pull-off adhesion
adhesion fb the
fb and andmethods
the methods of substrate
of substrate treatment
treatment (removing
(removing and
and not-
not-removing the cement laitance). It can be seen from the figure that methods
removing the cement laitance). It can be seen from the figure that methods of removing the cementof removing the cement
laitance, for
laitance, for example,
example,grinding
grinding (P3) or shot-blasting
(P3) or shot-blasting (P4),(P4),
can increase the level
can increase theoflevel
the pull-off
of the adhesion
pull-off
fadhesion
b between the overlay and the substrate (compared to methods that do not remove
fb between the overlay and the substrate (compared to methods that do not remove it). it).
Figure 14. Relation of the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and the substrate with regards to the
Figure 14. Relation of the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and the substrate with regards to
method of treatment of the surface (based on the results presented in Reference [44]). Key: P1—patch
the method of treatment of the surface (based on the results presented in Reference [44]). Key: P1—
grabbed (raw) surface, P2—formed after contact with the surface of formwork (as cast); treatment with
patch grabbed (raw) surface, P2—formed after contact with the surface of formwork (as cast);
removing cement laitance: P3—mechanically grinded surface, P4—shot-blasted surface.
treatment with removing cement laitance: P3—mechanically grinded surface, P4—shot-blasted
4.4. Surface
surface. Exposure of the Aggregate
Sadowski et al. [44] used the 3D laser scanning method to correlate the contribution of exposed
4.4. Surface Exposure of the Aggregate
aggregate AA visible on the surface of concrete substrate and being the effect of method of treatment
withSadowski
the value et
of al. [44] used
pull-off the 3D
adhesion fb laser scanning
between method
concrete to correlate
overlay the contribution
and substrate. Four kinds of of exposed
concrete
aggregate AA visible
surfaces: patched on the surface
grabbed of concrete
(raw), formed aftersubstrate and being
contact with the effect of
the framework (asmethod of treatment
cast), grinded, and
with the value
shot-blasted of pull-off
were subjectedadhesion fb between
to the research concrete
using overlay
an optical and substrate.
microscope. In suchFour kinds
a way of concrete
it was possible
surfaces: patched
to state that grabbed
the shape (raw), formed
of aggregate after
AA for thecontact with the
shot-blasted framework
surface in the (as
wholecast), grinded,
surface wasand
the
highest when compared to the surfaces treated in other ways. However, the correlation between
the contribution of exposed aggregate AA that was visible on the concrete surface substrate, and the
pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and this substrate was impossible to obtain. On the other hand,
it was shown that an increase of the contribution of exposed aggregate AA together with increasing the
developed interface area ratio Sdr , causes an increase of the value of pull-off adhesion fb . On this basis,
the following relation was created:
to state that the shape of aggregate AA for the shot-blasted surface in the whole surface was the highest
when compared to the surfaces treated in other ways. However, the correlation between the
contribution of exposed aggregate AA that was visible on the concrete surface substrate, and the pull-
off adhesion fb between the overlay and this substrate was impossible to obtain. On the other hand, it
was shown that an increase of the contribution of exposed aggregate AA together with increasing the
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 12 of 23
developed interface area ratio Sdr, causes an increase of the value of pull-off adhesion fb. On this basis,
the following relation was created:
f (S ; A ) = 0.32 + 0.043 Sdr + 0.0138AA (4)
𝑓b 𝑆dr ; 𝐴A 0.32 0.043 𝑆 0.0138𝐴 (4)
This equation reveals that the methods of treatment that increase only only the
the developed
developed interface
area ratioSSdrdr (patch-grabbed
area ratio (patch-grabbedsurface
surfaceand andsurface
surfaceformed
formedafter contact
after contact with framework)
with framework) dodonotnot
cause an
cause
increase of the
an increase of pull-off adhesion
the pull-off fb . Moreover,
adhesion an increase
fb. Moreover, of just the
an increase of contribution of exposedofaggregate
just the contribution exposed
A A does not
aggregate AAcause an increase
does not cause an of the pull-off
increase of theadhesion fb (ground
pull-off adhesion surface).surface).
fb (ground Only an increase
Only of the
an increase
contribution of exposed
of the contribution of exposed AA , together
aggregateaggregate AA, with the developed
together interface area
with the developed ratio Sdrarea
interface , significantly
ratio Sdr,
increases the increases
significantly pull-off adhesion fb . This
the pull-off can befb.seen
adhesion Thisin thebecase
can seenofinthe
theshot-blasted surface.
case of the shot-blasted surface.
4.5. Strengthening of
4.5. Strengthening of the
the Surface
Surface of
of the
the Concrete
Concrete Substrate
Substrate with
with Bonding
Bonding Agents
Agents
The
The research
research hashas also
also shown
shown that
that using
using aa bonding
bonding agent
agent before
before laying
laying the
the overlay
overlay on
on the
the concrete
concrete
substrate surface improves the level of the pull-off adhesion f of the overlay with the concrete
substrate surface improves the level of the pull-off adhesion fb of theb overlay with the concrete substrate
substrate [58–61].
[58–61]. Figure Figure the
15 shows 15 shows
relationthebetween
relationshear
between
bondshear bondand
strength strength and theofmethod
the method of
substrate
substrate surface treatment.
surface treatment. Moreover, forMoreover, for each
each method methodtreatment,
of surface of surfacethree
treatment,
methodsthree methodsthe
of applying of
applying the added concrete layer are shown: fresh concrete placed against hardened
added concrete layer are shown: fresh concrete placed against hardened concrete without bonding concrete without
bonding agent in
agent applied applied in the interface,
the interface, fresh concrete
fresh concrete placed against
placed against hardenedhardened
concrete concrete with bonding
with bonding agent
agent applied in the interface, hardened concrete placed against hardened concrete
applied in the interface, hardened concrete placed against hardened concrete with bonding agentwith bonding agent
applied in the interface.
applied in the interface.
Figure 15. The relation of shear bond strength with regards to the used bonding agent and the method
Figure 15. The relation of shear bond strength with regards to the used bonding agent and the method
of surface treatment: LAC—the left as cast surface, WB—the wire-brushed surface, DS-SHB—the dry
of surface treatment: LAC—the left as cast surface, WB—the wire-brushed surface, DS-SHB—the dry
shot-blasted substrate, SS-SHB—the saturated shot-blasted substrate (based on the results presented in
shot-blasted substrate, SS-SHB—the saturated shot-blasted substrate (based on the results presented
Reference [58]).
in Reference [58]).
As can be seen from the figure, the use of a bonding agent increased the shear bond between
As can be seen from the figure, the use of a bonding agent increased the shear bond between
layers by almost double for the LAC, WB, and SS-SHB surfaces. The increase of shear bond strength in
layers by almost double for the LAC, WB, and SS-SHB surfaces. The increase of shear bond strength
percentage terms for the DS-SHB surface with a bonding agent was twice as small when compared to
in percentage terms for the DS-SHB surface with a bonding agent was twice as small when compared
the other surfaces (about 25%). When placing hardened concrete against hardened concrete, a bonding
to the other surfaces (about 25%). When placing hardened concrete against hardened concrete, a
agent, in the case of the LAC and WB surfaces, caused a slight increase of shear bond strength when
bonding agent, in the case of the LAC and WB surfaces, caused a slight increase of shear bond
compared to placing fresh concrete against hardened concrete. In turn, this relation was opposite
for the DS-SHB and SS-SHB surfaces. Bonding agents are also popular for increasing the adhesion
between gypsum plasters and different substrates [62].
4.6. Modifications of the Material of the Overlay

Research has shown that using additions in the form of silica fume, metakaolin, short carbon
fibers, polypropylene fiber, styrene/acrylic powder, magnesium phosphate, and fly ash for the cement
was opposite for the DS-SHB and SS-SHB surfaces. Bonding agents are also popular for increasing
the adhesion between gypsum plasters and different substrates [62].
4.6. Modifications of the Material of the Overlay

Research
Buildings has
2019, 9, 203 shown that using additions in the form of silica fume, metakaolin, short carbon 13 of 23
fibers, polypropylene fiber, styrene/acrylic powder, magnesium phosphate, and fly ash for the
cement mortar of the overlay is favorable in terms of the level of pull-off adhesion fb between the
mortar of
overlay thethe
and overlay is favorable
concrete substratein[63terms
–73]).of
Inthe level
turn, of pull-off
using and glassfbpowder
quartz adhesion between asthe
an overlay
additionand to
the concrete substrate [63–73]). In turn, using quartz and glass powder
the cement mortar of the overlay does not have a positive influence on the level of its as an addition to thepull-off
cement
mortar offthe
adhesion b [74 overlay does not
–75]. Figure 16 have a positive
presents influence
the results on the level
of bonding of its pull-off
strength tests withadhesion
regards fb [74,75].
to the
Figure 16 presents the results of bonding strength tests with regards to the polypropylene
polypropylene fiber content in concrete. It can be seen that the addition of PP fiber in amounts of 0.45 fiber content
in concrete. 3 significantly
and 0.9 kg/mIt can be seen that
3 significantly the addition
improved of PP fiber
bond strength in amounts
(about double)of 0.45 compared
when and 0.9 kg/m to the reference
improved
concrete bond
C1. strength
However, the(about
value double)
of bondingwhen compared
strength to the
started referencewith
to decrease concrete C1. However,
an increase in PP fiber the
value of bonding strength started to decrease with an increase in PP fiber content (over 0.9 kg/m 3 ).
content (over 0.9 kg/m ). 3
Figure 16. Results of bonding strength tests with regards to the polypropylene fiber content in concrete.
Figure 16. Results of bonding strength tests with regards to the polypropylene fiber content in concrete.3
C1—concrete without addition, F1—concrete with PP fiber addition in an amount of 0.45 3kg/m ,
C1—concrete without addition, F1—concrete with PP fiber addition in an amount of 0.45 kg/m , F2—
3 , F3—concrete
F2—concrete with PP fiber addition in an amount of 0.9 kg/m with PP fiber addition in
concrete with PP fiber addition
3 in an amount of 0.9 kg/m3, F3—concrete with PP fiber addition in an
an amount of 1.35 kg/m (based on the results presented in Reference [73]).
amount of 1.35 kg/m3 (based on the results presented in Reference [73]).
Figure 17 shows the influence of different amounts of quartz powder for modifying overlay
Figure 17 shows the influence of different amounts of quartz powder for modifying overlay
concrete
Buildings on9,
2019, the pull-off
x FOR REVIEW fb between the overlay and the concrete substrate.
PEER adhesion 14 of 24
concrete on the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and the concrete substrate.
Figure 17. The influence of different amounts of quartz powder for modifying overlay concrete on the
Figure 17. The influence of different amounts of quartz powder for modifying overlay concrete on the pull-
pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and the concrete substrate (based on the results presented in
off adhesion fb between the overlay and the concrete substrate (based on the results presented in Reference
Reference [74]).
[74]).
As can be seen in Figure 17, the addition of 10% and 20% of quartz powder in relation to the
cement mass does not cause an increase or decrease of the value of pull-off adhesion fb between the
overlay and the concrete substrate after 7 and 28 days of testing. In turn, the addition of 30% of the
powder decreased the examined adhesion by around 15% after 7 days and by around 20% after 28
days. Figure 18 shows the influence of different amounts of quartz-feldspar powder for modifying
overlay concrete on the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and concrete substrate.
Figure 17. The influence of different amounts of quartz powder for modifying overlay concrete on the pull-
off adhesion fb between the overlay and the concrete substrate (based on the results presented in Reference
[74]).
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 14 of 23
overlay and
overlay and the
the concrete
concrete substrate
substrate after
after 77 and
and 28
28 days
days of
of testing.
testing. In
In turn,
turn, the
the addition
addition of
of 30%
30% of
of the
the
powder decreased the examined adhesion by around 15% after 7 days and by around
powder decreased the examined adhesion by around 15% after 7 days and by around 20% after 28 20% after 28
days. Figure
days. Figure1818 shows
shows the
the influence
influence of
of different
different amounts
amounts of quartz-feldspar
quartz-feldspar powder
powder for
for modifying
modifying
overlay concrete
overlay concrete on the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and concrete substrate.
Figure 18. Influence of different amounts of quartz-feldspar powder for modifying overlay concrete on
Figure 18. Influence of different amounts of quartz-feldspar powder for modifying overlay concrete
the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and concrete substrate (based on the results presented in
on the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and concrete substrate (based on the results presented
Reference [74]).
in Reference [74]).
It can be seen in Figure 18 that the addition of quartz-feldspar powder to the overlay in each
It can be seen in Figure 18 that the addition of quartz-feldspar powder to the overlay in each
amount caused around a double decrease in the value of pull-off adhesion fb between the concrete
amount caused around a double decrease in the value of pull-off adhesion fb between the concrete
substrate and the overlay.
substrate and the overlay.
In Reference [70], the influence of early water exposure on the modified cementitious coating was
In Reference [70], the influence of early water exposure on the modified cementitious coating
described. The pull-off tests were performed to assess the influence. Figure 19 shows the relation
was described. The pull-off tests were performed to assess the influence. Figure 19 shows the relation
between average tensile strength and time. The red curves are connected with the polymer coating,
between average tensile strength and time. The red curves are connected with the polymer coating,
and the blue curves with the crystalline coating.
and the2019,
Buildings blue9,curves withREVIEW
x FOR PEER the crystalline coating. 15 of 24
(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 19. The relation
19. The relationbetween
betweenthethe average
average tensile
tensile strength
strength (pull-off
(pull-off strength)
strength) andfortime
and time for the
the polymer
polymer and crystalline coating: (a) rough substrate, (b) smooth substrate (based on
and crystalline coating: (a) rough substrate, (b) smooth substrate (based on the results presented the results
in
presented in Reference
Reference [70]). [70]).
ItIt can
can be
be seen
seen from
from Figure
Figure 19a,b
19a,b that
that the
the level
level of
of pull-off
pull-off strength
strength for
for the
the polymer
polymer coating
coating was
was
greater
greater than
thanfor
forthe
thecrystalline
crystallinecoating.
coating.However,
However,both bothcoatings
coatingsresulted
resultedininaapull-off
pull-offstrength
strengthgreater
greater
than
than11 MPa
MPa (after
(after 120
120 hh for
for the
the polymer
polymer coating
coating andand after
after 240
240 hh for
for the
the crystalline
crystalline coating).
coating).
5. Overview of Recent Activities Used to Improve the Functional Properties of the Overlay
Depending on the functional requirements of an object, as well as its durability, overlays should
have proper strength and functional parameters [76, 77]. The chosen parameters are shown in Table 1.
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 15 of 23
5. Overview of Recent Activities Used to Improve the Functional Properties of the Overlay
Depending on the functional requirements of an object, as well as its durability, overlays should
have proper strength and functional parameters [76,77]. The chosen parameters are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. The list of chosen strengths and functional parameters for floors.
Parameter Value
Compressive strength Minimum 20 MPa
Flexural strength Minimum 5 MPa
Subsurface tensile strength Minimum 1.5 MPa
Abrasion resistance Maximum 22 cm3
Hardness Determined individually
In many cases, the failure to comply with technological and technical requirements has a negative
effect on the condition of cement mortar floors [78]. In order to obtain parameters to the required level,
the following additional activities, which are shown in Figure 20, are used:
fibre reinforcement
surface hardening
impregnation
Methods of
improving of the
overlay functional
parameters
curing procedures
casting
additives
Figure 20.Figure 20. of

Methods Methods of improving
improving thefunctional
the overlay overlay functional parameters.
parameters.
DifferentDifferent
types of types
fiber, of fiber,
such as such as polypropylene,
polypropylene, polyethylene,
polyethylene, nylon,nylon,
aramid, aramid, and polyester
and polyester are are also
commonly
also commonly usedused as an
as an additive
additive toto concreteininorder
concrete orderto to improve
improve its mechanical
mechanicaland andfunctional
functional properties
[79 – 84]. However, the most common overlay additives are polypropylene
properties [79–84]. However, the most common overlay additives are polypropylene fibers [85]. fibers [85]. In Reference [73],
it was
In Reference stated
[73], that
it was the addition
stated of polypropylene
that the addition to concrete
of polypropylene improves,
to concrete among others,
improves, among its compressive
others,
and flexural
its compressive strength,
and flexural impactimpact
strength, resistance, and abrasion
resistance, resistance.
and abrasion In turn,
resistance. SongSong
In turn, and and
Hwang [86]
Hwang [86] indicated that adding steel fiber to concrete increases its compressive strength by up to and its
indicated that adding steel fiber to concrete increases its compressive strength by up to 15.3%
15.3% and splitting tensile
its splitting strength
tensile by up
strength bytoup98.3%. In general,
to 98.3%. an increase
In general, in compressive
an increase in compressivestrength can improve
strength
abrasion
can improve abrasion resistance
resistanceandandsubsurface
subsurface tensile strength[87–90].
tensile strength [87–90].Despite
Despite thisthis relation,
relation, the value of
the value
compressive
of compressive strength strength canindiffer
can differ in the middle,
the upper, upper, middle,
and bottomand zone
bottom zone
of the of the [91,92],
overlay overlaywhich
[91,92], which
was proved by the carried out ultrasonic testing of the overlays [93,94]. The tensile strength, drying
shrinkage, elastic modulus, and tensile relaxation of the overlay are affected to a great extent by
curing conditions [57,95–97]. It was also reported that the properties of concrete may be affected by
the manner of casting [98–100]. The next method of improving overlay functional properties is surface
hardening. Many hardeners, such as mineral or metallic aggregate hardeners (iron, quartz, silica,
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 16 of 23
was proved by the carried out ultrasonic testing of the overlays [93,94]. The tensile strength, drying
shrinkage, elastic modulus, and tensile relaxation of the overlay are affected to a great extent by curing
conditions [57,95–97]. It was also reported that the properties of concrete may be affected by the manner
of casting [98–100]. The next method of improving overlay functional properties is surface hardening.
Many hardeners, such as mineral or metallic aggregate hardeners (iron, quartz, silica, corindon,
etc.), polypropylene fibers, and metallic fibers [101–105] have been found to especially increase the
abrasion resistance of the surface of concrete and mortar. The method of finishing and modifying
the overlay material with micro/nano materials not only affects the abrasion resistance [106–114],
but also different special properties such as aging resistance in high temperatures, self-cleaning, air
purification, de-icing salt resistance or freeze/thaw resistance [115–119]. Impregnation of the surface
of the overlay by different coatings (e.g., epoxy, acrylic, polyurethane, cementitious, polymer/clay
nanocomposites) can increase its durability, as well as improve many functional parameters such
as adhesive resistant, chemical resistance, chloride permeability, hardness, impermeability, abrasion
resistance, heat resistance, shrinkage, etc. [120–129].
6. Perspectives and Research Gaps

It is shown in literature that modification of the mortar cement composition of the overlay with
Buildings 2019, 9,ofx FOR
the addition nanoparticles
PEER REVIEWcan increase the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and the concrete 17 of 24
substrate. However, there is a lack of wider research concerning this problem [130,131]. Figure 21
presents
Figure 21 the valuesthe
presents of values
pull-offofadhesion fb with regards
pull-off adhesion fb with to the concrete
regards mixture mixture
to the concrete type. The pull-off
type. The
adhesion
pull-off fb was determined
adhesion before and
fb was determined after
before freezing/thawing
and and wetting/drying
after freezing/thawing cycles. Letters
and wetting/drying cycles.
A and BArefer
Letters and to concrete
B refer with thewith
to concrete addition of 15 (A)ofand
the addition 30%and
15 (A) of fly
30%ashof(B).
fly For
ash the
(B).other symbols,
For the other
the number
symbols, the refers
number to refers
the replacement of fly ash
to the replacement ofby
flythe
ashmass
by theofmass
the binder, N refers
of the binder, Nto normal-setting
refers to normal-
concrete
setting mixture,
concrete and R refers
mixture, and Rtorefers
rapid-setting concreteconcrete
to rapid-setting mixture.mixture.
Each mixture
Each marked
mixture with numbers
marked with
had a 6%had
numbers dosage
a 6%ofdosage
nano silica (by silica
of nano the mass of the
(by the binder).
mass of the binder).
Figure 21. Pull-off adhesion fb of the repair assembly from pull-off test (based on the results presented
Figure 21. Pull-off
in Reference adhesion fb of the repair assembly from pull-off test (based on the results presented in
[131]).
Reference [131]).
It can be seen in Figure 21 that the values of pull-off adhesion fb for the A (1.3 MPa) and B (1.6 MPa)
It were
series can be seen
the in Figure
lowest, 21 that
and after F/Tthe
andvalues of pull-off
W/D cycle adhesion
exposure fb for fell
the values the approximately
A (1.3 MPa) and
byB30
(1.6
to
MPa) series were the lowest, and after F/T and W/D cycle exposure the values fell approximately by
30 to 50%. For the N and R series, the pull-off adhesion fb values were in the range of 1.9 to 3.3 MPa,
and after the F/T and W/D cycles the values increased approximately by 23 to 43%.
In Table 2, the so far studied features of concrete and mortars modified with the addition of
nanoparticles are shown. The type of examined nanoparticles is shown in the upper part of the table,
and the examined features are shown on the left. However, attention should be paid to the fact that
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 17 of 23
50%. For the N and R series, the pull-off adhesion fb values were in the range of 1.9 to 3.3 MPa, and
after the F/T and W/D cycles the values increased approximately by 23 to 43%.
In Table 2, the so far studied features of concrete and mortars modified with the addition of
nanoparticles are shown. The type of examined nanoparticles is shown in the upper part of the table,
and the examined features are shown on the left. However, attention should be paid to the fact that
there is a lack of research concerning the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and concrete substrate
and subsurface tensile strength.
Table 2. Selectively examined features of cement mortar and concrete with the addition of nanoparticles.
(+ examined, - no data)
The Kind of Nanoparticle

Examined Feature
SiO2 Al2 O3 CuO TiO2 ZnO2 Fe2 O3 Cr2 O3
Porosity + + + + + - +
Absorptiveness - - - - - + +
Water resistance - - - + - - -
Freeze-thaw durability + + - + - - -
Compressive strength + + + + - + +
Tensile strength + - - - - + +
Flexural strength + + - - + + +
Abrasion resistance + + + + - - -
Hardness + - - - - - +
Subsurface tensile strength - - - - - - -
Pull-off adhesion between overlay
- - - - - - -
and concrete substrate
To sum up, there is a lack of research results concerning the influence of nanoparticles included in
the cement mortar of the overlay in concrete floors on the level of its pull-off adhesion fb between the
overlay and concrete substrate, as well as on its functional parameters.
7. Conclusions
The aim of this article was to briefly introduce readers to the problem of the adhesion between
overlays and substrates in concrete floors and to illustrate the current state of knowledge on the subject.
The recently used non-destructive and semi-destructive testing methods and the parameters useful for
characterizing the adhesion between overlays and substrates in concrete floors, as well as methods
useful for characterizing the functional properties of the overlays were presented. The literature
survey, with special emphasis on the critical review of the current research results and research gaps,
was presented. On this basis, future research directions were highlighted. Specific conclusions and
research gaps are listed as follows:
1. Additional research should be carried out in order to assess the influence of modifying a mortar
overlay using other nanoparticles on the pull-off adhesion fb between the overlay and the
concrete substrate. The functional and mechanical properties (such as abrasion resistance, flexural
strength, compressive strength, subsurface tensile strength) of the overlay should be taken into
consideration together with the values of pull-off adhesion fb . Julio et al. [130] and Ghazy and
Bassuoni [131] used SiO2 and Al2 O3 nanoparticles to increase the shear bond strength between
concrete layers. However, there is still a lack of wider research in this field.
2. Additional research should be carried out in order to better understand the mechanism of
adhesion between an overlay modified with different types of nanoparticles and the concrete
substrate on a micro- and nanoscale of observation. The samples taken from the interphase zone
between the overlay and the substrate, together with the sample from the subsurface zone of the
overlay, should be examined in order to understand and confirm the influence of the addition of
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 18 of 23
nanoparticles on the adhesion and functional and mechanical parameters. The scanning electron
microscopy (SEM) method can be especially suitable for this purpose.
3. Nanoparticles could be successfully used to reduce the porosity of the cementitious material of
the overlay in the near surface zone of the mortar overlay, together with proper treatment of
the surface of the concrete substrate, to increase the pull-off adhesion fb between these layers.
The studies carried out by Sadowski and Stefaniuk [50,53] reported that while decreasing the
fraction and number of pores in the near surface zone of the overlay mortar, and increasing these
values in the near surface zone of the concrete substrate, the pull-off adhesion fb between these
layers increases.
Funding: This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Hoła, J.; Bień, J.; Sadowski, Ł.; Schabowicz, K. Non-destructive and semi-destructive diagnostics of concrete
structures in assessment of their durability. Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Tech. Sci. 2015, 63, 87–96. [CrossRef]
2. Garber, G. Design and Construction of Concrete Floors; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2006.
3. Tejchman, J.; Małaśkiewicz, A. Industrial Floors; Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej: Gdańsk, Poland, 2006;
Volume 181, ISBN 83-7348-166-4. (In Polish)
4. Jasiczak, J.; Szymański, P. Technologia i Wykonanie Posadzek Betonowych w Aspekcie Skurczu i Piel˛egnacji
Betonu. Mater. Bud. 2006, 9, 16–19.
5. Sadowski, Ł. Adhesion in Layered Cement Composites; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland,
2019; ISBN 978-3-030-03782-6. [CrossRef]
6. Zybura, A.; Jaśniok, M.; Jaśniok, T. Diagnostics of Concrete Structures; Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN:
Warszawa, Poland, 2017. (In Polish)
7. Bissonnette, B.; Courard, L.; Garbacz, A. Concrete Surface Engineering; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2015.
8. Czarnecki, L.; Van Gemert, D. Scientific basis and rules of thumb in civil engineering: conflict or harmony?
Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Tech. Sci. 2016, 64, 665–673. [CrossRef]
9. Hola, J.; Sadowski, L.; Schabowicz, K. Nondestructive identification of delaminations in concrete floor
toppings with acoustic methods. Autom. Constr. 2011, 20, 799–807. [CrossRef]
10. Sadowski, Ł. Non-destructive Evaluation of the Adhesion between Concrete Layers in Concrete Floors with
Using the Artificial Neural Networks. Ph.D. Thesis, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Wrocław,
Poland, 2012.
11. Sadowski, Ł. Multi-Scale Evaluation of the Interphase Zone between the Overlay and Concrete Substrate:
Methods and Descriptors. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 893. [CrossRef]
12. Momayez, A.; Ehsani, M.; Ramezanianpour, A.; Rajaie, H. Comparison of methods for evaluating bond
strength between concrete substrate and repair materials. Cem. Concr. Res. 2005, 35, 748–757. [CrossRef]
13. British Standards Institution. EN 1542:2000. Products and Systems for the Protection and Repair of Concrete
Structures. Test Methods. Measurement of Bond Strength by Pull-Off ; British Standards Institution: London,
UK, 1999.
14. Cleland, D.; Long, A. The pull-off test for concrete patch repairs. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers—Structures Buildings, London, UK, November 1997; Volume 122, pp. 451–460.
15. Czarnecki, L.; Chmielewska, B. Factors Affecting Adhesion in Building Joints; Cement. Lime. Concrete 2;
Cement Lime Concrete Fundation: Cracow, Poland, 2005; pp. 74–85.
16. British Standards Institution. EN 1504-3. Products and Systems for the Protection and Repair of Concrete
Structures—Definitions, Requirements, Quality Control and Evaluation of Conformity; Part 3: Structural and
Non-Structural Repair; British Standards Institution: London, UK, 2004.
17. British Standards Institution. EN 13892-3. Methods of Test for Screed Materials. Determination of Wear
Resistance-Böhme; British Standards Institution: London, UK, 2014.
18. British Standards Institution. EN 1504-10. Products and Systems for the Protection and Repair of Concrete
Structures—Definitions, Requirements, Quality Control and Evaluation of Conformity; Part 10: Site Application of
Products and Systems and Quality Control of the Works; British Standards Institution: London, UK, 2017.
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 19 of 23
19. Malhotra, M.V.; Carino, N.J. Handbook on Nondestructive Testing of Concrete; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL,
USA, 2003.
20. Brunarski, L.; Runkiewicz, L. ITB Instruction No 210. Non-Destructive Methods for Testing Concrete Strength,
Sclerometric Methods, Experimental Instruction; Building Technique Institute: Warsaw, Poland. (In Polish)
21. Lataste, J.; Krause, M.; Moczko, A.; Breysse, D.; Maierhofer, C. Nondestructive Evaluation of Delaminations
and Interfaces in Concrete Structures. RILEM Publications SARL, 2008. Available online: https://www.rilem.
net/publication/publication/63 (accessed on 15 June 2019).
22. British Standards Institution. EN 12504-2. Testing Concrete in Structures. Non-destructive Testing—Determination
of Rebound Number; British Standards Institution: London, UK, 2012.
23. Drobiec, Ł. Non-destructive Tests Used in Civil Engineering; Badania Nieniszczace ˛ i Diagnostyka: Kołobrzeg,
Poland, 2018; Volume 3, pp. 76–80. (In Polish)
24. Chady, T.; Sikora, R. Non-Destructive Testing: History, Current State and Perspectives; Przeglad ˛ Spawalnictwa:
Warsaw, Poland, 2013; pp. 13–15. (In Polish)
25. Runkiewicz, L. Testing of Concrete Structures; Biuro Gamma: Warszawa, Poland, 2002. (In Polish)
26. Bień, J. Uszkodzenia i Diagnostyka Obiektów Mostowych; Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i Łaczności:˛ Warszawa,
Poland, 2010.
27. Hoła, J.; Schabowicz, K. State-of-the-art non-destructive methods for diagnostic testing of building
structures–anticipated development trends. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2010, 10, 5–18. [CrossRef]
28. Schabowicz, K. Neural networks in the NDT identification of the strength of concrete. Arch. Civ. Eng. 2005,
51, 371–382.
29. Ongpeng, J.M.C.; Oreta, A.W.C.; Hirose, S. Investigation on the Sensitivity of Ultrasonic Test Applied to
Reinforced Concrete Beams Using Neural Network. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 405. [CrossRef]
30. Ongpeng, J.; Soberano, M.; Oreta, A.; Hirose, S. Artificial neural network model using ultrasonic test results
to predict compressive stress in concrete. Comput. Concr. 2017, 19, 59–68. [CrossRef]
31. Hoła, J.; Schabowicz, K. New technique of nondestructive assessment of concrete strength using artificial
intelligence. NDT E Int. 2005, 38, 251–259. [CrossRef]
32. Hola, J.; Schabowicz, K. Methodology of neural identification of strength of concrete. ACI Mater. J. 2005,
102, 459.
33. Sadowski, Ł.; Czarnecki, S.; Hoła, J. Evaluation of the height 3D roughness parameters of concrete substrate
and the adhesion to epoxy resin. Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 2016, 67, 3–13. [CrossRef]
34. Abu-Tair, A.; Lavery, D.; Nadjai, A.; Rigden, S.; Ahmed, T. A new method for evaluating the surface roughness
of concrete cut for repair or strengthening. Constr. Build. Mater. 2000, 14, 171–176. [CrossRef]
35. Branco, F.A.B.; Silva, V.D.; Júlio, E.N.B.S. Concrete-to-concrete bond strength: influence of an epoxy-based
bonding agent on a roughened substrate surface. Mag. Concr. Res. 2005, 57, 463–468.
36. Garbacz, A.; Górka, M.; Courard, L. Effect of concrete surface treatment on adhesion in repair systems.
Mag. Concr. Res. 2005, 57, 49–60. [CrossRef]
37. Courard, L. Adhesion of repair systems to concrete: influence of interfacial topography and transport
phenomena. Mag. Concr. Res. 2005, 57, 273–282. [CrossRef]
38. Santos, P.M.D.; Júlio, E.N.B.S. Comparison of Methods for Texture Assessment of Concrete Surfaces.
ACI Mater. J. 2010, 107, 433–440.
39. Mathia, T.G.; Pawlus, P.; Wieczorowski, M. Recent trends in surface metrology. Wear 2011, 271, 494–508.
[CrossRef]
40. Garbacz, A.; Courard, L.; Bissonnette, B. A surface engineering approach applicable to concrete repair
engineering. Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Tech. Sci. 2013, 61, 73–84. [CrossRef]
41. Al-Kheetan, M.J.; Rahman, M.M.; Chamberlain, D.A. A novel approach of introducing crystalline protection
material and curing agent in fresh concrete for enhancing hydrophobicity. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018,
160, 644–652. [CrossRef]
42. Scarfato, P.; Maio, L.D.; Fariello, M.L.; Russo, P.; Incarnato, L. Preparation and evaluation of polymer/clay
nanocomposite surface treatments for concrete durability enhancement. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2012, 34, 297–305.
[CrossRef]
43. Hassan, M.M.; Dylla, H.; Mohammad, L.N.; Rupnow, T. Evaluation of the durability of titanium dioxide
photocatalyst coating for concrete pavement. Constr. Build. Mater. 2010, 24, 1456–1461. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 20 of 23
44. Sadowski, Ł.; Żak, A.; Hoła, J. Multi-sensor evaluation of the concrete within the interlayer bond with regard
to pull-off adhesion. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2018, 18, 573–582. [CrossRef]
45. Santos, P.M.; Júlio, E.N.; Silva, V.D. Correlation between concrete-to-concrete bond strength and the roughness
of the substrate surface. Constr. Build. Mater. 2007, 21, 1688–1695. [CrossRef]
46. Garbacz, A.; Courard, L.; Kostana, K. Characterization of concrete surface roughness and its relation to
adhesion in repair systems. Mater. Charact. 2006, 56, 281–289. [CrossRef]
47. Courard, L.; Piotrowski, T.; Garbacz, A. Near-to-surface properties affecting bond strength in concrete repair.
Cem. Concr. Compos. 2014, 46, 73–80. [CrossRef]
48. Tayeh, B.B.; Bakar, B.H.A.; Johari, M.A.M.; Ratnam, M.M. The relationship between substrate roughness
parameters and bond strength of ultra high-performance fiber concrete. J. Adhes. Sci. Technol. 2013, 27, 21.
[CrossRef]
49. Franck, A.; De Belie, N. Concrete Floor–Bovine Claw Contact Pressures Related to Floor Roughness and
Deformation of the Claw. J. Dairy Sci. 2006, 89, 2952–2964. [CrossRef]
50. Sadowski, Ł.; Stefaniuk, D.; Hoła, J. The effect of the porosity within the interfacial zone between layers on
pull-off adhesion. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 152, 887–897. [CrossRef]
51. Krzywiński, K.; Sadowski, Ł. The Effect of Texturing of the Surface of Concrete Substrate on the Pull-Off
Strength of Epoxy Resin Coating. Coatings 2019, 9, 143. [CrossRef]
52. Sadowski, Ł.; Krzywiński, K.; Michoń, M. The influence of texturing of the surface of concrete substrate on
its adhesion to cement mortar overlay. J. Adhes. 2019. [CrossRef]
53. Sadowski, Ł.; Stefaniuk, D. Microstructural Evolution within the Interphase between Hardening Overlay
and Existing Concrete Substrates. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 123. [CrossRef]
54. Misra, A.; Cleland, D.J.; Basheer, P.A.M. Effect of different substrate and overlay concretes on bond strength
and interfacial permeability. Concr. Sci. Eng. 2001, 3, 73–77.
55. Silfwerbrand, J.; Beushausen, H. Bonded concrete overlays—Bond strength issues. In Concrete Repair,
Rehabilitaion and Retrofitting; Alexander, M., Beushausen, H.-D., Dehn, F., Moyo, P., Eds.; Taylor Francis
Group: London, UK, 2006.
56. Silfwerbrand, J.; Beushausen, H.; Courard, L. Bonded Cement-Based Material Overlays for the Repair,
the Lining or the Strengthening of Slabs or Pavements. In RILEM State of the Art Reports; Bissonnette, B.,
Courard, L., Fowler, D., Granju, J.L., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2011; Volume 3.
57. Kosmatka, S.H.; Kerkhoff, B.; Panarese, W.C. Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures; Portland Cement
Association: Skokie, IL, USA, 2002; Volume 5420.
58. Santos, D.S.; Santos, P.M.; Dias-Da-Costa, D. Effect of surface preparation and bonding agent on the
concrete-to-concrete interface strength. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 37, 102–110. [CrossRef]
59. Xiong, G.; Liu, J.; Li, G.; Xie, H. A way for improving interfacial transition zone between concrete substrate
and repair materials. Cem. Concr. Res. 2002, 32, 1877–1881. [CrossRef]
60. Xiong, G.; Luo, B.; Wu, X.; Li, G.; Chen, L. Influence of silane coupling agent on quality of interfacial transition
zone between concrete substrate and repair materials. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2006, 28, 97–101. [CrossRef]
61. Błaszczyński, T.; Jasiczak, J.; Ksit, B.; Siewczyńska, M. Aspects of bond layer role in concrete repairs. Arch. Civ.
Mech. Eng. 2006, 6, 75–87. [CrossRef]
62. Krzywiński, K.; Sadowski, Ł.; Łaszczak, M. The effect of the type of substrate and its surface treatment on
the pull-off strength of gypsum plasters. J. Adhes. 2019. [CrossRef]
63. Mohammadi, M.; Moghtadaei, R.M.; Samani, N.A. Influence of silica fume and metakaolin with two different
types of interfacial adhesives on the bond strength of repaired concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 51, 141–150.
[CrossRef]
64. Mirmoghtadaei, R.; Mohammadi, M.; Samani, N.A.; Mousavi, S. The impact of surface preparation on the
bond strength of repaired concrete by metakaolin containing concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 80, 76–83.
[CrossRef]
65. Sadowski, Ł.; Piechówka-Mielnik, M.; Widziszowski, T.; Gardynik, A.; Mackiewicz, S. Hybrid
ultrasonic-neural prediction of the compressive strength of environmentally friendly concrete screeds
with high volume of waste quartz mineral dust. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 212, 727–740. [CrossRef]
66. El-Rakib, T.M.; Farahat, A.M.; El-Degwy, W.M.; Shaheen, H.H. Shear transfer parameters at the interface
between old and new concrete. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Performance of Construction
Materials in the New Millennium, Cairo, Egypt, 18–20 February 2003.
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 21 of 23
67. Qin, J.; Qian, J.; You, C.; Fan, Y.; Li, Z.; Wang, H. Bond behavior and interfacial micro-characteristics
of magnesium phosphate cement onto old concrete substrate. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 167, 166–176.
[CrossRef]
68. Li, B.; Lam, E.S.S. Influence of interfacial characteristics on the shear bond behaviour between concrete and
ferrocement. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 176, 462–469. [CrossRef]
69. Gengying, L. A new way to increase the long-term bond strength of new-to-old concrete by the use of fly ash.
Cem. Concr. Res. 2003, 33, 799–806.
70. Al-Kheetan, M.J.; Rahman, M.M.; Chamberlain, D.A. Influence of early water exposure on modified
cementitious coating. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 141, 64–71. [CrossRef]
71. Tayeh, B.A.; Bakar, B.A.; Johari, M.M.; Voo, Y.L. Evaluation of bond strength between normal concrete
substrate and ultra high performance fiber concrete as a repair material. Procedia Eng. 2013, 54, 554–563.
[CrossRef]
72. Schulze, J. Influence of water-cement ratio and cement content on the properties of polymer-modified
mortars. Cem. Concr. Res. 1999, 29, 909–915. [CrossRef]
73. Sun, Z.; Xu, Q. Microscopic, physical and mechanical analysis of polypropylene fiber reinforced concrete.
Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2009, 527, 198–204. [CrossRef]
74. Sadowski, Ł.; Hoła, J. Wpływ wybranych kwarcowych dodatków mineralnych modyfikujacych ˛ beton
warstwy wierzchniej na jego zespolenie z podkładem betonowym. Budownictwo o Zoptymalizowanym
Potencjale Energetycznym 2017, 1, 21–26. [CrossRef]
75. Sadowski, Ł. Towards the utilization of waste glass powder in sustainable cement based overlays. In MATEC
Web of Conferences; EDP Sciences: Julius, France, 2018; Volume 163, p. 03001.
76. Śliwiński, J. Podstawowe właściwości betonu i jego trwałość. Cem. Wapno Beton 2009, 5, 245–254.
77. Jamroży, Z. Beton i jego technologie; Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe: Warszawa/Kraków, Poland, 2005.
78. Hoła, J.; Sadowski, Ł.; Hoła, A. The effect of failure to comply with technological and technical requirements
on the condition of newly built cement mortar floors. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part L J. Mater. Des. Appl. 2019,
233, 268–275. [CrossRef]
79. Banthia, N.; Sheng, J. Fracture toughness of micro-fiber reinforced cement composites. Cem. Concr. Compos.
1996, 18, 251–269. [CrossRef]
80. Chajec, A.; Krzywiński, K.; Sadowski, Ł.; Ostrowski, K. The influence of polypropylene fibres on the
properties of fresh and hardened concrete. Czas. Tech. 2019, 5, 71–82. [CrossRef]
81. Krzywiński, K.; Chajec, A.; Sadowski, Ł. The effect of the concentration of steel fibres on the properties of
industrial floors. Czas. Tech. 2019, 4, 115–132. [CrossRef]
82. Mu, B.; Li, Z.; Peng, J. Short fiber-reinforced cementitious extruded plates with high percentage of slag and
different fibers. Cem. Concr. Res. 2000, 30, 1277–1282. [CrossRef]
83. Bayasi, M.Z.; Zeng, J. Composite slab construction utilizing carbon fiber reinforced mortar. Struct. J. 1997,
94, 442–446.
84. Banthia, N.; Gupta, R. Influence of polypropylene fiber geometry on plastic shrinkage cracking in concrete.
Cem. Concr. Res. 2006, 36, 1263–1267. [CrossRef]
85. Kim, S.B.; Yi, N.H.; Kim, H.Y.; Kim, J.-H.J.; Song, Y.-C. Material and structural performance evaluation of
recycled PET fiber reinforced concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2010, 32, 232–240. [CrossRef]
86. Song, P.; Hwang, S. Mechanical properties of high-strength steel fiber-reinforced concrete. Constr. Build.
Mater. 2004, 18, 669–673. [CrossRef]
87. Atiş, C.D. High Volume Fly Ash Abrasion Resistant Concrete. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2002, 14, 274–277. [CrossRef]
88. Kılıç, A.; Atiş, C.; Teymen, A.; Karahan, O.; Özcan, F.; Bilim, C.; Ozdemir, M.; Kilic, A. The influence of
aggregate type on the strength and abrasion resistance of high strength concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2008,
30, 290–296. [CrossRef]
89. Siewczyńska, M.; Jasiczak, J. Wpływ wybranych parametrów betonu na przyczepność powłok naprawczych.
Mater. Bud. 2009, 2, 10–11.
90. Siewczyńska, M. Wpływ Wybranych Parametrów Betonu na Przyczepność Powłok Ochronnych; Rozprawa
Doktorska: Poznań, Poland, 2008.
91. Canbaz, M.; Topçu, I.B.; Ateşin, Ö. Effect of admixture ratio and aggregate type on self-leveling screed
properties. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 116, 321–325. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 22 of 23
92. Khatib, J.; Mangat, P.; Khatib, J. Porosity of cement paste cured at 45 ◦ C as a function of location relative to
casting position. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2003, 25, 97–108. [CrossRef]
93. Stawiski, B. The heterogeneity of mechanical properties of concrete in formed constructions horizontally.
Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2012, 12, 90–94. [CrossRef]
94. Stawiski, B.; Radzik, Ł. Need to Identify Parameters of Concrete in the Weakest Zone of the Industrial Floor.
IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2017, 245, 22063. [CrossRef]
95. Beushausen, H.; Bester, N. The influence of curing on restrained shrinkage cracking of bonded concrete
overlays. Cem. Concr. Res. 2016, 87, 87–96. [CrossRef]
96. Neville Adam, M. Properties of Concrete; Longman: London, UK, 1995; Volume 4.
97. Parghi, A.; Alam, M.S.; Parghi, P.A. Effects of curing regimes on the mechanical properties and durability of
polymer-modified mortars—An experimental investigation. J. Sustain. Cem. Mater. 2016, 5, 24. [CrossRef]
98. Dybeł, P.; Furtak, K. Assessment of the Casting Position Factor in Reinforced Concrete Elements in View of
Experimental Studies. Arch. Civ. Eng. 2014, 60, 209–222. [CrossRef]
99. Lameiras, R.; Barros, J.A.; Azenha, M. Influence of casting condition on the anisotropy of the fracture
properties of Steel Fibre Reinforced Self-Compacting Concrete (SFRSCC). Cem. Concr. Compos. 2015, 59, 60–76.
[CrossRef]
100. Chin, M.S.; Mansur, M.A.; Wee, T.H. Effects of shape, size, and casting direction of specimens on stress-strain
curves of high-strength concrete. Mater. J. 1997, 94, 209–219.
101. Grdic, Z.J.; Curcic, G.A.T.; Ristic, N.S.; Despotovic, I.M. Abrasion resistance of concrete micro-reinforced
with polypropylene fibers. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 27, 305–312. [CrossRef]
102. Gencel, O.; Gok, M.S.; Brostow, W. Effect of metallic aggregate and cement content on abrasion resistance
behaviour of concrete. Mater. Res. Innov. 2011, 15, 116–123. [CrossRef]
103. Liu, Y.-W. Improving the abrasion resistance of hydraulic-concrete containing surface crack by adding silica
fume. Constr. Build. Mater. 2007, 21, 972–977. [CrossRef]
104. Felekoğlu, B.; Türkel, S.; Altuntaş, Y. Effects of steel fiber reinforcement on surface wear resistance of
self-compacting repair mortars. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2007, 29, 391–396. [CrossRef]
105. Onuaguluchi, O.; Eren, Ö. Recycling of copper tailings as an additive in cement mortars. Constr. Build. Mater.
2012, 37, 723–727. [CrossRef]
106. García, A.; Castro-Fresno, D.; Polanco, J.A.; Thomas, C. Abrasive wear evolution in concrete pavements.
Road Mater. Pavement Des. 2012, 13, 534–548. [CrossRef]
107. García, Á.; Fresno, D.C.; Polanco, J.A. Effect of dry-shaking treatment on concrete pavement properties.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2008, 22, 2202–2211. [CrossRef]
108. He, Z.; Chen, X.; Cai, X. Influence and mechanism of micro/nano-mineral admixtures on the abrasion
resistance of concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 197, 91–98. [CrossRef]
109. Haruehansapong, S.; Pulngern, T.; Chucheepsakul, S. Effect of Nanosilica Particle Size on the Water
Permeability, Abrasion Resistance, Drying Shrinkage, and Repair Work Properties of Cement Mortar
Containing Nano-SiO. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2017, 2017, 1–11. [CrossRef]
110. Siddique, R. Effect of fine aggregate replacement with Class F fly ash on the abrasion resistance of concrete.
Cem. Concr. Res. 2003, 33, 1877–1881. [CrossRef]
111. Silva, C.V.; Zorzi, J.E.; Cruz, R.C.; Molin, D.C.D. Experimental evidence that micro and macrostructural
surface properties markedly influence on abrasion resistance of concretes. Wear 2019, 422, 191–200. [CrossRef]
112. Al-Kheetan, M.J.; Rahman, M.M. Integration of Anhydrous Sodium Acetate (ASAc) into Concrete Pavement
for Protection against Harmful Impact of Deicing Salt. JOM 2019, 1–11. [CrossRef]
113. Popek, M.; Sadowski, Ł.; Szymanowski, J. Abrasion Resistance of Concrete Containing Selected Mineral
Powders. Procedia Eng. 2016, 153, 617–622. [CrossRef]
114. Niewiadomski, P.; Stefaniuk, D. The Effect of Adding Selected Nanoparticles on the Mechanical Properties of
the Cement Matrix of Self-Compacting Concrete. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2015, 797, 158–165. [CrossRef]
115. Krakowiak, K.J.; Thomas, J.J.; James, S.; Abuhaikal, M.; Ulm, F.-J. Development of silica-enriched cement-based
materials with improved aging resistance for application in high-temperature environments. Cem. Concr. Res.
2018, 105, 91–110. [CrossRef]
116. Diamanti, M.V.; Paolini, R.; Rossini, M.; Aslan, A.B.; Zinzi, M.; Poli, T.; Pedeferri, M.P. Long term self-cleaning
and photocatalytic performance of anatase added mortars exposed to the urban environment. Constr. Build.
Mater. 2015, 96, 270–278. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2019, 9, 203 23 of 23
117. Mohammed, A.; Sanjayan, J.G.; Duan, W.H.; Nazari, A. Graphene Oxide Impact on Hardened Cement
Expressed in Enhanced Freeze–Thaw Resistance. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2016, 28, 4016072. [CrossRef]
118. Behfarnia, K.; Salemi, N. The effects of nano-silica and nano-alumina on frost resistance of normal concrete.
119. Beeldens, A. An environmental friendly solution for air purification and self-cleaning effect: the application
of TiO2 as photocatalyst in concrete. In Proceedings of the Transport Research Arena Europe–TRA, Göteborg,
Sweden, 12–15 June 2006; pp. 12–16.
120. Sebök, T.; Stráněl, O. Wear resistance of polymer-impregnated mortars and concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 2004,
34, 1853–1858. [CrossRef]
121. Christodoulou, C.; Goodier, C.; Austin, S.; Webb, J.; Glass, G.; Goodier, C. Long-term performance of surface
impregnation of reinforced concrete structures with silane. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 48, 708–716. [CrossRef]
122. Pigino, B.; Leemann, A.; Franzoni, E.; Lura, P. Ethyl silicate for surface treatment of concrete—Part II:
Characteristics and performance. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2012, 34, 313–321. [CrossRef]
123. Franzoni, E.; Varum, H.; Natali, M.E.; Bignozzi, M.C.; Melo, J.; Rocha, L.; Pereira, E. Improvement of historic
reinforced concrete/mortars by impregnation and electrochemical methods. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2014,
49, 50–58. [CrossRef]
124. Almusallam, A.; Khan, F.; Dulaijan, S.; Al-Amoudi, O. Effectiveness of surface coatings in improving concrete
durability. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2003, 25, 473–481. [CrossRef]
125. Delucchi, M.; Barbucci, A.; Cerisola, G. Study of the physico-chemical properties oforganic coatings for
concrete degradation control. Constr. Build. Mater. 1997, 11, 365–371. [CrossRef]
126. Diamanti, M.V.; Brenna, A.; Bolzoni, F.M.; Berra, M.; Pastore, T.; Ormellese, M. Effect of polymer modified
cementitious coatings on water and chloride permeability in concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 49, 720–728.
[CrossRef]
127. Choudalakis, G.; Gotsis, A. Permeability of polymer/clay nanocomposites: A review. Eur. Polym. J. 2009,
45, 967–984. [CrossRef]
128. Moon, H.Y.; Shin, D.G.; Choi, D.S. Evaluation of the durability of mortar and concrete applied with inorganic
coating material and surface treatment system. Constr. Build. Mater. 2007, 21, 362–369. [CrossRef]
129. Pan, X.; Shi, Z.; Shi, C.; Ling, T.-C.; Li, N. A review on concrete surface treatment Part I: Types and mechanisms.
130. Silva, J.J.; Ismael, R.; Carmo, R.N.F.; Lourenço, C.; Soldado, E.; Costa, H.; Júlio, E. Influence of nano-SiO2 and
nano-Al2 O3 additions on the shear strength and the bending moment capacity of RC beams. Constr. Build.
Mater. 2016, 123, 35–46. [CrossRef]
131. Ghazy, A.; Bassuoni, M.T. Shrinkage of Nano-modified Fly Ash Concrete as a Repair Material. ACI Mater. J.
2017, 114, 877–888. [CrossRef]
© 2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Buildings 09 00203

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Buildings 09 00203

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

buildings

Keywords: non-destructive testing; semi-destructive testing; cement mortar; pull-off adhesion;

Buildings 2019, 9, 203; doi:10.3390/buildings9090203 www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings

Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 24

Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 24

4.1. Mechanical Treatment of the Surface of Substrate

Milling (scarifying) Hitting

Method of Use of compressed

Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER9.

Figure 9. Division of concrete treatment methods (based on Reference [5]).

4.6. Modifications of the Material of the Overlay

4.6. Modifications of the Material of the Overlay

Figure 20.Figure 20. of

6. Perspectives and Research Gaps

The Kind of Nanoparticle

Funding: This research received no external funding.

You might also like