• J. Silfwerbrand
  • H. Beushausen
  • L. Courard
Part of the RILEM State of the Art Reports book series (RILEM State Art Reports, volume 3)


Good bond is a key factor for providing monolithic action in bonded concrete overlays. This chapter starts with three theoretical sections classifying bond in three groups (complete, uncertain, and poor), defining bond strength, and describing the fundamental bond mechanisms. The main part of this chapter covers a thorough description in chronological order of how the 13 most important factors affect bond. All events from removal of deteriorated concrete to concrete placing and curing and long-term exposure are investigated. There exist a number of different methods to determine bond strength and the most frequent ones are briefly described in a separate section. It is shown that there is an evident relationship between the two most frequently used families of test methods, i.e., between methods determining bond strength in tension and bond strength in shear. Furthermore, it is shown that it is possible to provide durable bond in concrete overlays if all operations for concrete removal, surface cleaning, concrete placing, and curing are conductedmeticulously. The chapter is ended by two sections devoted to design strength values in various international codes and performance requirements that can be used for quality control.


Bond Strength Interface Shear Bridge Deck Shear Bond Strength Torsional Moment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Courard, L., How to analyse thermodynamic properties of solids and liquids in relation with adhesion? In Proceedings 2nd International RILEM Symposium ISAP99, pp. 9–19, 1999.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Silfwerbrand, J., Shear bond strength in repaired concrete structures. Materials & Structures, 36, 419–424, July 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Derjagin, B.V., Krotova, N.A., and Smilga, V.P., Adhesion of Solids. Studies in Soviet Science: Physical Sciences, Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York, 455 pp., 1978.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Courard, L., Parametric study for the creation of the interface between concrete and repair products, Materials and Structures, 33, 65–72, January–February 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fiebrich, M.H., Influence of the surface roughness on the adhesion between concrete and gunite mortars overlays. In Proceedings 2nd Bolomey Workshop, Adherence of Young and Old Concrete, Unterengstringen, Switzerland, F. Wittmann (Ed.), Aedification Verlag, pp. 107-114, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kinloch, A.J., Adhesion and Adhesives: Science and Technology. Chapman and Hall, London, 441 pp., 1987.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Courard, L., Parametric definition of sandblasted and polished concrete surfaces. In Proceedings IX ICPIC 98, Bologna, Italy, September 14–18, pp. 771–778, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fiebrich, M., Grundlagen der Adhäsionskunde, Deutscher Ausschuss für Stahlbeton, 334, 75–90, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pigeon, M. and Saucier, F., Durability of repaired concrete structures. In Proceedings, International Symposium on Advances in Concrete Technology, Athens, 11–12 May, pp. 741–773, 1992.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Delatte, N.J., Williamson, M.S., and Fowler, D.W., Bond strength development of high-early-strength bonded concrete overlays, ACI Materials Journal, 97-M27, 201–207, March–April 2000.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schrader, E.K., Mistakes, misconceptions, and controversial issues concerning concrete and concrete repairs, Parts 1, 2, and 3, Concrete International, September, October, and November 1992.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Atzeni, C., Massidda, L., and Sanna, U., Dimensional variations, capillary absorption and freeze-thaw resistance of repair mortars admixed with polymers, Cement and Concrete Research, 23, 301–308, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Granju, J.L., Thin bonded overlays – About the role of fibre reinforcement on the limitation of their debonding, Advanced Cement Based Materials, 4, 21–27, 1996.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bindiganavile, V. and Banthia, N., Repairing with hybrid-fiber-reinforced concrete, Concrete International, 29–32, June 2001.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Laurence, O., Bissonnette, B., Pigeon, M., and Rossi, P., Effect of steel macro fibres on cracking of thin concrete repairs. In Proceedings, 5th International RILEM Symposium on Fibre-Reinforced Concretes (BEFIB 2000), Lyon, France, pp. 213–222, 2000.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Mier, J.G.M., Fracture Processes of Concrete, CRC Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Misra, A., Cleland, D.J., and Basheer, P.A.M., Effect of different substrate and overlay concretes on bond strength and interfacial permeability, Concrete Science and Engineering, 3(10), 73–77, 2001.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beushausen, H., Long-term performance of bonded concrete overlays subjected to differential shrinkage. Dissertation, University of Cape Town, unpublished, 2005.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Silfwerbrand, J. and Petersson, Ö., Thin concrete inlays on old concrete roads. In Proceedings, 5th International Conference on Concrete Pavement Design & Rehabilitation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA, Vol. 2, pp. 255–260, April 1993.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Talbot, C., Pigeon, M., Beauprè, and Morgan, D.R., Influence of surface preparation on longterm bonding of shotcrete, ACI Materials Journal, 91(6), 560–566, November–December 1994.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carter, P., Gurjar, S., and Wong, J., Debonding of highway bridge deck overlays, Concrete International, 51–58, July 2002.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wells, J.A., Stark, R.D., and Polyzois, D., Getting better bond in concrete overlays, Concrete International, 49–52, March 1999.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Warner, J., Bhuyan, S., Smoak, W.G., Hindo, K.R., and Sprinkel, M.M., Surface preparation for overlays, Concrete International, 43–46, May 1998.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Silfwerbrand, J., Improving concrete bond in repaired bridge decks, Concrete International, 12(9), 61–66, September 1990.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Silfwerbrand, J. and Paulsson, J., The Swedish experience: Better bonding of bridge deck overlays, Concrete International, 20(10), 56–61, 1998.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Swedish National Road Administration, Technical Regulations for Bridges Maintenance, Borlänge, Sweden, 90 pp., 2002 [in Swedish].Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vaysburd, A.M., Sabnis, G.M., and McDonald, J.E., Interfacial bond and surface preparation in concrete repair. ICJ, 75(1), 27–33, 2001.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kaufmann, N., Das Sandflächenverfahren, Strassenbau Technik, 24(3), 31–50, 1971.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Silfwerbrand, J., Effects of differential shrinkage, creep, and properties of the contact surface on the strength of composite slabs of old and new concrete, Bulletin No. 147, Department of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 131 pp., 1987 [in Swedish].Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schäfer, H.G., Block, K., and Drell, R., Oberflächenrauheit und Haftverbund, Deutscher Ausschuss für Stahlbeton DafStb, 456, 75–94, 1996.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Takuwa, I., Shitou, K., Kamihigashi, Y., Nakashima, H., and Yoshida, A., The application of water-jet technology to surface preparation of concrete structures, Journal of Jet Flow Engineering, 17(1), 29–40, 2000.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mainz, J. and Zilch, K., Schubtragfähigkeit von Betonergänzungen an nachträglich aufgerauhten Betonoberflächen bei Sanierungs- und Ertüchtigungsmassnahmen, Research Report, Technical University Munich, Germany, February 1998.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tschegg, E.K., Ingruber, M., Surberg, C.H., and Münger, F., Factors influencing fracture behavior of old-new concrete bonds, ACI Materials Journal, 97(4), 447–453, 2000.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gulyas, R.J., Wirthlin, G.J., and Champa, J.T., Evaluation of keyway grout test methods for precast concrete bridges, PCI Journal, 40(1), 44–57, January–February 1995.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Block, K. and Porth, M., Spritzbeton auf carbonatisiertem Beton – Haftzugfestigkeit bei nachträglichem Aufspritzen, Beton 7, 299–302, 1989.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Delatte, N.J., Wade, D.M., and Fowler, D.W., Laboratory and field testing of concrete bond development for expedited bonded concrete overlays, ACI Materials Journal, 97-M33, 272–280, May–June 2000.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vaysburd, A.M. and McDonald, J.E., An evaluation of equipment and procedures for tensile bond testing of concrete repairs. Technical Report REMR-CS-61, US Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, USA, 75 pp., 1999.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhu, Y., Evaluation of bond strength between new and old concrete by means of fracture mechanics method, Bulletin No. 157, Department of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 102 pp., 1991.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhu, Y., Effect of surface moisture condition on bond strength between new and old concrete, Bulletin No. 159, Department of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 27 pp., 1992.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Li, S.E., Geissert, D.G., Frantz, G.C., and Stephens, J.E., Freeze-thaw bond durability of rapid-setting concrete repair materials, ACI Materials Journal, 96-M31, 241–249, March– April 1999.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Saucier, F. and Pigeon, M., Durability of new-to-old concrete bondings. In Proceedings of ACI International Conference on Evaluation and Rehabilitation of Concrete Structures and Innovations in Design, Hong Kong, December (ACI SP-128), pp. 689–705, 1991.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    ACI Committee 546, Guide for Repair of Concrete Bridge Superstructures (ACI 546.1 R-80), American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 20 pp., 1980.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Silfwerbrand, J., The influence of traffic-induced vibrations on the bond between old and new concrete, Bulletin No. 158, Department of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 78 pp., 1992.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    FIP Federation Internationale de la Précontrainte, Shear at the Interface of Precast and In-Situ Concrete, Technical Report, August 1978.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    de Souza, R.F.F. and da Silva Appleton, J.A., Assessing the structural performance of repaired reinforced concrete members. In Proceedings ICPCM, Cairo, Egypt, February 2003.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Paulsson, J. and Silfwerbrand, J., Durability of repaired bridge deck overlays – Effects of deicing salt and freeze-thaw cycles, Concrete International, 20(2), 76–82, February 1998.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Smithson, L.D. and Whiting, J.E., Rebonding delaminated bridge deck overlays, Concrete Repair Digest, 100–101, June–July 1992.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Manning, D.G., Effects of traffic-induced vibrations on bridge-deck repairs, NCHRP Synthesis No. 86, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC, 40 pp., 1981.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Van Mier, J.G.M., Nooru-Mohammed, M.B., and Timmers, G., Experimental study of shear fracture and aggregate interlock in cement-based composites, Heron, 36(4), 8–30, 1991.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Robins, P.J. and Austin, S.A., A unified failure envelope from the evaluation of concrete repair bond test, Magazine of Concrete Research, 47(170), 57–68, March 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Weber, M., Mechanischer Verbund zwischen Beton verschiedenen Alters mittels Kunststoffen, Dissertation, Fakultät für Bauingenieur- und Vermessungswesen der Universität Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, 1971.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    El-Rakib, T.M., Farahat, A.M., El-Degwy, W.M., and Shaheen, H.H., Shear transfer parameters at the interface between old and new concrete. In Proceedings ICPCM, Cairo, Egypt, February 2003.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Chen, P., Fu, X., and Chung, D.D.L., Improving the bonding between old and new concrete by adding carbon fibres to the new concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, 25(3), 491–496, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Emberson, N.K. and Mays, G.C., Significance of property mismatch in the patch repair of structural concrete. Part 1: Properties of repair systems, Magazine of Concrete Research, 42(152), 147–160, September 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Austin, S., Robins, P., and Pan, Y., Shear bond testing of concrete repairs, Cement and Concrete Research, 29, 1067–1076, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Lacombe, P., Beauprè, D., and Pouliot, N., Rheology and bonding characteristics of self-levelling concrete as a repair material, Materials and Structures, 32, 593–600, October 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Sato, R., Recent technology of concrete pavement in Japan. In Proceedings, S. Nagataki Symposium on Vision of Concrete: 21st Century, Part of the 4th CANMET/ACI/JCI International Symposium on Advances in Concrete Technology, Tokushima, Japan, Vol. 1998.6, pp. 71–85, 1998.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Paulsson, J., Effects of repairs on the remaining life of concrete bridge decks, Bulletin No. 27 (Licentiate Thesis), Department of Structural Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 238 pp., 1997.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Paulsson-Tralla, J., Service life of repaired concrete bridge decks, Bulletin No. 50 (Ph.D. Thesis), Department of Structural Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 244 pp., 1999.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning and AB Svensk Byggtjänst, BBK 94. Concrete Structures, Part 1 – Structural Design, Handbook. Karlskrona and Stockholm, Sweden, 185 pp., 1994 [in Swedish].Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    American Concrete Institute, ACI 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-99) and Commentary (ACI 318R-99). Farmington Hills, Michigan, USA, 391 pp., 1999.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Comité Euro-International du Béton & Federation Internationale de la Precontrainte, CEB-FIP Model Code 1990. Thomas Telford Services, London, 437 pp., 1993.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    European Committee for Standardization, Eurocode 2. Design of Concrete Structures. 2nd draft. Brussels, Belgium, January 2001.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    CEN (Comité Européen de Normalisation), prEN 1504-3, Products and Systems for the Protection and Repair of Concrete Structures – Definitions, Requirements, Quality Control and Evalution of Conformity – Part 3: Structural and Non-Structural Repair, Brussels, Belgium, March 2001.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Swedish National Road Administration, General Technical Regulations for Bridges, Publication No. 2004:56, Borlänge, Sweden, 2004 [in Swedish].Google Scholar

Further Reading

  1. ACI Committee 555, Removal and reuse of hardened concrete (ACI 555 R-01), ACI Materials Journal, 99(3), 300–325, May–June 2002.Google Scholar
  2. Bernard, O., Comportement à long terme des elements de structure formés de bétons d’âges différents. Thesis No. 2283, Department of Civil Engineering, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland, 189 pp., 2000.Google Scholar
  3. British Standards, BS 6319, Part 4, Slant Shear Test Method for Evaluating Bond Strength of Epoxy Systems, British Standard Institution BSI, London, 1984.Google Scholar
  4. Chausson, H., Durabilité des rechargements minces en béton: Relation entre leur décollement, leur fissuration et leur renforcement par des fibres. Ph.D. Thesis, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France, 198 pp., 1997 [in French].Google Scholar
  5. Fédération Internationale de la Précontrainte, Shear at the interface of precast and in-situ concrete. Guide to good practice, Wexham Springs, Slough, 31 pp., 1982.Google Scholar
  6. Ingvarsson, H., and Eriksson, B., Hydrodemolition for bridge repairs, Nordisk Betong (Stockholm), 2–3, 49–54, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. Jonasson, J.-E., Computer programs for non-linear analyses of concrete in the view of shrinkage, creep and temperature. Research Report No. 7:77, Swedish Cement and Concrete Research Institute, Stockholm, Sweden, 161 pp., 1977 [in Swedish].Google Scholar
  8. Julio, E.N.B.S., Branco, F.A.B. Silva, V.D., Concrete-to-concrete bond strength. Influence of the roughness of the substrate surface. Construction and Building Materials, 18, 675–681, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Silfwerbrand, J., Theoretical and experimental study of strength and behaviour of repaired concrete bridge decks summary, Bulletin No. 149, Department of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 16 pp., 1987.Google Scholar
  10. Silfwerbrand, J., Concrete repair with shotcrete. Tests on beams under static and fatigue load, Bulletin No. 153, Department of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 77 pp., 1988 [in Swedish].Google Scholar
  11. Silfwerbrand, J. (1989), Concrete repair with shotcrete. In Proceedings, IABSE Symposium on Durability of Structures, Lisbon, September, pp. 785–790, 1989.Google Scholar
  12. Silfwerbrand, J., Concrete overlays, Report No. 10, 3rd Edition 10, Chair of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Department of Structural Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 65 pp., 1997 [in Swedish].Google Scholar
  13. Silfwerbrand, J., Stresses and strains in composite concrete beams subjected to differential shrinkage, ACI Structural Journal, 94(4), 347–353, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. Silfwerbrand, J. and Sundquist, H., Drift, underhåll och reparation av konstbyggnader. Rapport nr 53, Brobyggnad, institutionen för byggkonstruktion, KTH, Stockholm, 262 pp., 1999.Google Scholar
  15. Strömdahl, C., The history of hydrodemolition, Concrete Engineering International, 4(8), 32–36, 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Silfwerbrand
    • 1
  • H. Beushausen
    • 2
  • L. Courard
    • 3
  1. 1.Swedish Cement and Concrete Research Institute (CBI)StockholmSweden
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of Cape TownCape TownSouth Africa
  3. 3.GeMMe – Building Materials, ArGEnCo DepartmentUniversity of LiègeLiègeBelgium

Personalised recommendations