• Łukasz SadowskiEmail author
Part of the Advanced Structured Materials book series (STRUCTMAT, volume 101)


Cement composite should be understood as a material made up of a minimum of two components: a cement matrix and aggregate, in such a way that it should have properties superior to the components considered separately. The layered systems made of cement composites and that are used in construction typically consist of an overlay with a constant or variable thickness, usually made of cement mortar and a substrate, for which mainly concrete is used for their construction (Fig. 2.1).


  1. 1.
    Czarnecki, L., & Chmielewska, B. (2005). Factors affecting adhesion in building joints. Cement Wapno Beton, 2, 74–85.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    EN 12504-3. (2006). Analysis of concrete in constructions. Part 3: Determination of the pull-off force. Warsaw: PKN.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adams, R., & Drinkwater, B. (1997). Nondestructive testing of adhesively-bonded joints. NDT and E International, 30(2), 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sadowski, Ł. (2017). Multi-scale evaluation of the interphase zone between the overlay and concrete substrate: Methods and descriptors. Applied Sciences, 7(9), art, 893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Felt, E. J. (1956). Resurfacing and patching concrete pavement with bonded concrete. In Proceedings of Highway Research Board (pp. 444–479).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Douglas, H. (2001). Online etymology dictionary. October 20, 2007.
  7. 7.
    Bissonnette, B., Courard, L., & Garbacz, A. (2015). Concrete surface engineering. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kinloch, A. J. (1987). Adhesion and adhesives: Science and technology. London: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weiss, H. (1995). Adhesion of advanced overlay coatings: Mechanisms and quantitative assessment. Surface & Coatings Technology, 71(2), 201–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mathia, T., Louis, F., Maeder, G., & Mairey, D. (1982). Relationships between surface states, finishing processes and engineering properties. Wear, 83(2), 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Petrie, E. M. (2000). Handbook of adhesives and sealants (p. 765). New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Czarnecki, L. (2008, September). Adhesion—A challenge for concrete repair. In Concrete Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting II: 2nd International Conference on Concrete Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting, ICCRRR-2 (p. 343), 24–26 November 2008. Cape Town, South Africa: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kinloch, A. J. (1980). The science of adhesion: Part 1—Surface and interfacial aspects. Journal of Materials Science, 15, 2141–2166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cardon, A. H., & Hiel, C. C. (1986). Durability analysis of adhesive joints. In RILEM Symposium on Resin Adherence to Concrete (pp. 3–7). Paris.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Emmons, P. H., & Vaysburd, A. M. (1993). Factors affecting durability of concrete repair. In Proceedings of Fifth International Conference on Structural Faults and Repair (pp. 253–267). Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pigeon, M., & Saucier, F. (1992). Durability of repaired concrete structures. In Proceedings of International Symposium on Advances in Concrete Technology (pp. 741–773), Athens, October 11–12.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhou, J., Ye, G., & van Breugel, K. (2016). Cement hydration and microstructure in concrete repairs with cementitious repair materials. Construction and Building Materials, 112, 765–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beushausen, H., Höhlig, B., & Talotti, M. (2017). The influence of substrate moisture preparation on bond strength of concrete overlays and the microstructure of the OTZ. Cement and Concrete Research, 92, 84–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Espeche, A. D., & Leon, J. (2009). Estimation of bond strength envelopes for old-to-new concrete interfaces based on a cylinder splitting test. Construction and Building Materials, 25, 1222–1235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    He, Y., Zhang, X., Hooton, R. D., & Zhang, X. (2017). Effects of interface roughness and interface adhesion on new-to-old concrete bonding. Construction and Building Materials, 151, 582–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xie, H., Li, G., Xiong, G. (2006). Microstructure model of the interfacial zone between fresh and old concrete. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology—Mater Science Edition 2002, 17, 64–68; EN 1542. (2006). Products and systems for the protection and repair of concrete structures—Test methods—Measurement of bond strength by pull-off.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Adawi, A., Youssef, M. A., & Meshaly, M. E. (2015). Experimental investigation of the composite action between hollowcore slabs with machine-cast finish and concrete topping. Engineering Structures, 91, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Halicka, A. (2011). Influence new-to-old concrete interface qualities on the behaviour of support zones of composite concrete beams. Construction and Building Materials, 25, 4072–4078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mansour, F. R., Bakar, S. A., Vafaei, M., & Alih, S. C. (2017). Effect of substrate surface roughness on the flexural performance of concrete slabs strengthened with a steel-fiber-reinforced concrete layer. PCI Journal, 62, 78–89.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Niwa, J., Matsumoto, K., Sato, Y., Yamada, M., & Yamauchi, T. (2016). Experimental study on shear behavior of the interface between old and new deck slabs. Engineering Structures, 126, 278–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cavaco, E., & Camara, J. (2017). Experimental research on the behaviour of concrete-to-concrete interfaces subjected to a combination of shear and bending moment. Engineering Structures, 132, 278–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fernandes, H., Lúcio, V., & Ramos, A. (2017). Strengthening of RC slabs with reinforced concrete overlay on the tensile face. Engineering Structures, 132, 540–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mansour, F. R., Bakar, S. A., Ibrahim, I. S., Marsono, A. K., & Marabi, B. (2015). Flexural performance of a precast concrete slab with steel fiber concrete topping. Construction and Building Materials, 75, 112–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Perez, F., Bissonnette, B., & Gagné, R. (2009). Parameters affecting the debonding risk of bonded overlays used on reinforced concrete slab subjected to flexural loading. Materials and Structures, 42, 645–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Garbacz, A. (2015). Application of stress based NDT methods for concrete repair bond quality control. Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences Technical Sciences, 63, s77–s85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sadowski, Ł., & Hoła, J. (2015). artificial neural network modeling of pull-off adhesion of concrete layers. Advanced Engineering Software, 89, 17–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sadowski, Ł. (2015). Non-destructive identification of pull-off adhesion between concrete layers. Automation in Construction, 57, 146–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sadowski, Ł., & Hoła, J. (2014). New nondestructive way of identifying the values of pull-off adhesion between concrete layers in floors. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 20, 561–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mohamad, M. E., Ibrahim, I. S., Abdullah, R., Rahman, A. A., Kueh, A. B. H., & Usman, J. (2015). Friction and cohesion coefficients of composite concrete-to-concrete bond. Cement and Concrete Composites, 56, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tayeh, B. A., Bakar, B. A., Johari, M. M., & Ratnam, M. M. (2013). The relationship between substrate roughness parameters and bond strength of ultra high-performance fiber concrete. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology, 27, 1790–1810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Siewczyńska, M. (2012). Method for determining the parameters of surface roughness by usage of a 3D scanner. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 12, s83–s89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Garbacz, A. (2007). Non-destructive testing of concrete-like polymeric composites using elastic waves—Evaluation of repair efficiency (p. 208). Warsaw, Poland: Publishing House of Warsaw University of Technology.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tsioulou, O., Lampropoulos, A., & Paschalis, S. (2017). Combined Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) method for the evaluation of the mechanical characteristics of Ultra High Performance Fibre Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC). Construction and Building Materials, 131, 66–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Szymanowski, J., & Sadowski, Ł. (2015). Adhesion assessment between concrete layers using the ultrasonic Pulse velocity method. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 797, 145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Prem, P. R., & Murthy, A. R. (2016). Acoustic emission and flexural behaviour of RC beams strengthened with UHPC overlay. Construction and Building Materials, 123, 481–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Iowa Department of Transportation, Donohue & Associates, Inc. Engineers & Architects. (1988). Evaluation of bond retain age in Portland cement concrete overlays by infrared thermography and ground penetrating radar, HR-537. Fort Wayne, IN, USA: Iowa Department of Transportation, Donohue & Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mallat, A., & Alliche, A. (2011). Mechanical investigation of two fiber-reinforced repair mortars and the repaired system. Construction and Building Materials, 25, 1587–1595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tayeh, B. A., Bakar, B. A., Johari, M. M., & Voo, Y. L. (2012). Mechanical and permeability properties of the interface between normal concrete substrate and ultra high performance fiber concrete overlay. Construction and Building Materials, 36, 538–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Beushausen, H., Höhlig, B., & Talotti, M. (2017). The influence of substrate moisture preparation on bond strength of concrete overlays and the microstructure of the OTZ. Cement and Concrete Research, 92, 84–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tayeh, B. A., Abu Bakar, B. H., Megat Johari, M. A., & Zeyad, A. M. (2014). Microstructural analysis of the adhesion mechanism between old concrete substrate and UHPFC. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology, 28, 1846–1864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Satoh, A., & Yamada, K. (2016). FEM simulation of tension struts on adhesion performance of mortar–repair interface. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 167, 84–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lukovic, M., & Ye, G. (2015). Effect of moisture exchange on interface formation in the repair system studied by X-ray absorption. Materials, 9. Scholar
  48. 48.
    Luković, M., Šavija, B., Dong, H., Schlangen, E., & Ye, G. (2014). Micromechanical study of the interface properties in concrete repair systems. Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology, 12, 320–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Czarnecki. L., Garbacz, A. (2007). Adhesion of interfaces of building materials: A multi-scale approach. In Advances in materials science and restoration (p. 260). Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany: Aedificatio Publishers.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Civil EngineeringWrocław University of Science and TechnologyWrocławPoland

Personalised recommendations