International Conference on Sustainable Infrastructure and Built Environment in Developing Countries November, 2-3, 2009, Bandung, West Java,

Indonesia ISBN 978-979-98278-2-1

Mechanical Characteristics of Mortar Containing Low Polymer Proportions as Patch Repair Material
SA Kristiawan1,*, Sunarmasto1 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Sebelas Maret, Jl. Ir Sutami 36A Surakarta 57126, Indonesia *Corresponding author: sa_kristiawan@sipil.uns.ac.id

Abstract Degradation of reinforced concrete is a persistent problem that has been experienced by many countries due to a variety of causes. Many methods of repair have been developed to extend service life of this degraded reinforced concrete. Patch repair, for example, is a simple method that has been applied to recover the size and appearence of spalled or delaminated reinforced concrete. Application of this method requires a material that should be compatible with the existing concrete. This research is an attempt to develop such material using low proportions of polymer to modify mortar. At this stage, the research focus on investigation of their mechanical characteristics: compressive strength, flexural strength and slant shear. These basic parameters determine the minimum requirements of patch repair material performance in its application. The results of investigation show that with minimum proportions of polymer (about 2-4%), the minimum requirements of 28-day compressive strength, flexural strength and slant shear are achievable for patch repairing degraded concrete with strength of 20-30 MPa. Keywords: compressive strength, flexural strength, patch repair, polymer, slant shear.

1. Introduction In the past, strength of concrete was used as the sole parameter to determine the quality of concrete as load bearing structure. However, it has been recognised that performance of concrete structure in service is affected by a variety factors other than load. Large number of various types of concrete structures exhibit degradation due to a variety causes including chemical attacks (corrosion of reinforcement, carbonation, sulfat attack, etc). As a result of this degradation, the performance and service life of concrete structures are shortened. Furthermore, the economic consequences of this problem could be burdensome. The following figures give an ilustration of such economic consequences. According to the National Bridge Inventory Database maintained by Federal Highway Administration (Sohanghpurwala, 2006), in the US it was reported in 2002 that 14% of national bridge was structurally deficient and the primary cause of this deficiency was corrosion of reinforcing steel. The cost to improve and eliminate deficiency during the 20-year period from 1999 to 2019 is estimated to be US$10.6 billion per year. The loss of performance and service life of reinforced concrete could be rectified depending on the extent of degradation. In the case of spalling or delamination of concrete cover due to reinforcement corrosion, a patch repair over area of spalled or delaminated concrete may be applied. This method is especially intended to recover the size and appearence of reinforced concrete and also to protect the exposed reinforcement from continued corrosion for short-term period before long-term measure is taken. Portland cement mortar can be used as a patch repair material. However, it is now recognised that accomplishing succesfull repair mortar to old concrete without the use of a

A : STRUCTURE AND MATERIAL / 123

bonding resin is unlikely or extremely difficult. Evaporative loss of water from the surface of the repair mortar combined with capillary water loss to the old concrete, results in unhydrated or poorly hydrated cement in the mortar. Additionally, repair mortar bond strength development proceeds at slower rate than compressive strength development (Bureau of Reclamation, 1996). Many type of commercial repair mortars are available in market today. These materials have been specially developed for patch repair application. Each manufacturer claims a better performance of their product over the conventional portland cement mortar. However, it should be an independent body who make such claim. For engineer the choice of material would be selected based on such factors as properties of repair material itself, climate condition, repair time frame, expected service life, the repair material application and cost (McDonald et al., 2000; CPWD, 2002; Wipf et al., 2004). The required properties of repair material are listed in ASTM C928-00 and in the Technical Guidelines No. 03733 of International Concrete Repair Institute (1996). These properties may be categorised into the followings: mechanical compatibility, dimensional compatibility and durability. Mechanical properties that are important for consideration in repair application include compressive strength, tensile strength, bond strength, etc. In term of compressive strength, it is desirable to have repair material with comparable strength to that of existing concrete. This will ensure uniform flow of stress and strain in loaded structure. On the other hand, higher tensile strength of repair material is preferable to avoid early cracking due to drying effect. Meanwhile, bond strength is necessary to guarantee the composite (existing concrete and repair material) can work together without debonding. Slant shear could be used as indication of bond between repair material and existing concrete (Rangaraju and Pattnaik, 2008). The development of repair material has come to the use of polymer to modify properties of mortar (Kulhman, 1990; Ohama, 1994). Many type of polymers have been utilised to produce polymer-modified mortar. Ohama (1994) summarised polymers and monomers for cement modifiers as follows: polymer latexes, redispersible polymer powders, water-soluble polymers, liquid resin and monomers. The incorporation of polymer into mortar produces formation of polymer films enclosing hydrated cement. In addition, a large amount of polymer particles occupy the interfacial layer of cement hydrates. It is believed both particle dispersion of polymer and formation of polymer films are necessary for explaining composite mechanism of latex-modified system (Sugita et al., 1993). The inclusion of polymer is also expected to modify flexibility of mortar or concrete. This property is very important to eliminate cracking that may occur in patch repair system due to dimensional compatibility issues. The optimum amount of polymer incorporation into concrete is vary depending on the type of polymer. For liquid resin, it is found to be in the range of 15-20% (ACI 548.1-R97). In general, this type of polymer is supplied as two-part systems which consist of epoxy resin part and hardener part. In the process technology of conventional polymer-modified mortar using liquid resin, the use of hardener has been considered indispensable for the hardening of the epoxy resin. However, Ohama et al. (1993) have noticed that the hardening of epoxy resin occurs in the presence of alkalis in cement. They show that at low proportions of liquid resin (below 10%), the properties of polymer modified mortar without hardener are superior in comparison to that of with hardener. Their finding would be investigated in this research to develop patch repair material containing low proportions of polymer. The low proportion of polymer is desirable from the economic point of view since polymer is the most expensive ingredient to produce polymer-modified mortar. The inclusion of polymer at low content for the development of repair material as in this research is aimed to explore the modification of flexibility that this material is capable of, with the final goal is to obtain repair material that will be resistance to cracking due to dimensional compatibility issues. At this stage of the research, however, basic mechanical properties of the low polymer-modified mortar are observed to determine whether they meet the minimum requirements or not.

124 / A : STRUCTURE AND MATERIAL

2. Materials and Methods The repair material developed in this research was mortar (mix of ordinary Portland cement and sand) containing two admixtures i.e. superplasticizer and accelerator to modify properties of mortar in term of its workability and hardening rate, respectively. Since the repair material should have comparable strength with that of parent concrete, the water/cement ratio has to be kept at a level that will produce mortar having strength in the range of 20-30 MPa. This range of strength is assumed to be that of normal concrete use in common structural concrete. Trial investigation showed that this could be achieved when mortar was proportioned at 1:2.5 by weight of cement:sand with water/cement ratio of 0.50. At this level of water/cement ratio, superplasticizer is needed to maintain workability of fresh mortar so that it is suitable to be mixed, handled and applied manually. Meanwhile, the use of accelerator is necessary to increase hardening rate of repair material since in practice the repair material should adhere to the parent concrete and work as composite as fast as possible. Liquid resin type of polymers were incorporated in the mixing at a variety of proportions (2-6% by weight of cement). This amount of polymer is low in comparison to that recommended by ACI 548.1-R97. Furthermore, no hardener is used. Table 1 summarises the proportions of the materials. In addition to polymer modified-mortar as mentioned above, a commercial concrete repair mortar that has been specially produced by manufacturer for patching application was also used for comparison purpose. Specimen Identification M-S M-SA P-2% P-4% P-6% SK Table 1 Proportions of repair materials used in this research cement/sand water/cement superplasticizer accelerator ratio ratio (by weight of (by weight cement of cement) 1:2.5 0.5 2% 0% 1:2.5 0.5 2% 0.4% 1:2.5 0.5 2% 0.4% 1:2.5 0.5 2% 0.4% 1:2.5 0.5 2% 0.4% Commercial concrete repair mortar polymer (by weight of cement) 0% 0% 2% 4% 6%

Compressive strength of repair materials were determined on cube specimens having size of 50x50x50 mm following ASTM C 579-01. The specimens were tested at age of 1, 3, and 28 days. Tensile strengths (modulus of rupture) were determined according to BS 6319: Part 3 on 100x100x500 mm of prisms at the age of 28 days. In addition, the deflection of prisms during loading up to failure were also monitored. Bond strengths between parent concrete and repair materials were determined by slant shear method i.e. crushing composite prism specimens having size of 55x100x250 mm with compressive loads in accordance with BS 6319: Part 4. The composite prisms were produced with repair materials/substrate bond line at 30o to the vertical. The production of composite prism is as follows: first, concrete is cast to form a half of prism with bond line at 30o to the vertical. After 28 days, repair material is cast on the remaining half of prism to form composite prism (Fig.1). No preparation on the bond plane of concrete was made before casting repair material on top of it. Slant shear was carried out at the age of 28 days after casting of repair material.Three specimens were prepared for each particular mix and they were stored at room temperature and humidity (27-32oC and 67-72 RH) before testing.

A : STRUCTURE AND MATERIAL / 125

Figure 1 Casting of composite prism for slant shear test. 3. Results and Discussion Table 2 summarises the compressive strengths of all repair materials as observed in this study. The inclusion of polymer into mortar seems to retard the strength development as indicated by the fact that at early age (1-day), the compressive strength of the polymer-modified mortars are below those without polymer. This could be attributed to the effect of polymer covering the cement particles, which in turn, reducing the contact between cement and water as suggested by Ohama (1994). However, with the use of accelerator the hydration of cement is accelerated to compensate the retardation effect of polymer. It is notice that the outcome of hydration acceleration surpasses the retardation effect of polymer at no later than 3 day as indicated by the fact that on this day the polymer-modified mortars attain superior strength in comparison to mortar without accelerator. Generally, it can be reckoned that although at early age the strength development of polymer-modified mortar is slower than conventional repair mortar, but it immediately gains strength that is comparable to these materials. The strength development pattern and magnitude of polymer-modified mortar are similar to that observed in commercial concrete repair material. This could justify the use of low polymer content without hardener to produce patch repair materials even though attempt should be further done to improve strength development at early age. Table 2 Compressive strength results Specimen Compressive Strength (MPa) Identification 1-day 3-day 28-day M-S 11.23 15.01 23.52 M-SA 12.6 19.09 26.59 P-2% 9.04 21.57 23.55 P-4% 4.12 18.85 25.07 P-6% 7.81 20.35 26.37 SK 8.85 21.01 27.44 It is also interesting to notice that tensile strength of mortar incorporating low proportions of polymer without hardener is comparable to those of other patch repair materials (see Table 3), even slightly higher than that of commercial concrete repair mortar. This suggests that polymer modified mortar as developed in this research can meet the requirement of tensile strength for application as patch repair material. Tensile strength is useful property for assesing the potential risk of cracking due to dimensional incompatibility between existing concrete and repair material. It has been proposed that minimum 28-day tensile strength is 2.8 MPa for succesfull application of this material, even though McDonald (2000) indicates that there is no correlation between the tensile strength and the field performance. His results do not mean that tensile strength is not relevant issue in the case of patch repair materials, but it is only to show that the potential risk of cracking of patch repair materials can not merely rely on the tensile strength alone. It should be evaluated comprehensively with other parameters.

126 / A : STRUCTURE AND MATERIAL

However, it is still true that having higher tensile strength is desirable for particular patch repair material with regard to its resistance to cracking. Table 3 Tensile strength and momen-deflection ratio of repair materials Specimen Tensile Strength Identification (MPa) 28-day (M/)* M-S 5.06 M-SA 5.45 P-2% 5.43 P-4% 4.66 P-6% 5.45 SK 4.10 *M = momen (103N.mm) = deflection (mm) 12.97 11.96 6.70 8.01 12.28 5.51

Other parameter that may be exploited to minimise the risk of cracking in patch repair is its flexibility. In this research it is indicated by the deflection of the materials under flexural loading. Table 3 shows momen-deflection ratio of all repair materials as observed in this research. The inclusion of low proportions of polymer into mortar causes repair material less stiffness (low momen-deflection ratio) compared to conventional repair mortar with the exception is for 6% polymer content. Low striffness value is desirable in term of its capability to relieve stress that developed due to dimensional incompatibility. This stress could lead to cracking. Hence, low proportions of polymer (less than 4%) will modify mortar so that it tends to reduce the potential risk of cracking. Successful application of repair material requires that this material should develop bond with the existing concrete so any stresses induced in this material will not cause separation or delamination. Bond strength determined by slant shear method represents the stress parallel to bond plane causing separation of repair material from existing concrete (see Fig.2). After separation, the bond plane of concrete should be assesed whether it is free from remaining repair material or not. If there is no such residual repair material attached on bond plane of concrete, the stress causing separation is the actual value of slant shear. On the other hand, any residual repair material on bond plane of concrete could indicate that the repair material may already broken due to compressive stress before separation occurs. In this case, the value of slant shear represents the minimum bond strength. The compressive strength of repair material may be used to judge whether the slant shear represents minimum bond strength or that of actual bond strength. If the vertical load causing failure divided by horizontal area of repair material is still less than the compressive strength of that repair material, it can be concluded that slant shear is the actual bond strength and vice versa (Pattnaik, 2006). The results of slant shear of all repair materials investigated in this research are presented in Table 4. Based on the assesment of compressive strength, these values of slant shear indicate actual bond strengths. It can be pointed out that the bond of repair material containing polymer is comparable to those of other repair materials with the exception is for 6% polymer content.

A : STRUCTURE AND MATERIAL / 127

Figure 2 Typical separation of repair material after slant shear test Table 4 Slant shear results Specimen Slant shear Identification (MPa) 28-day M-S M-SA P-2% P-4% P-6% SK 5.42 7.24 6.69 7.09 3.92 8.61

4. Conclusion Based on measurement of 28-day compressive strength, tensile strength and slant shear it is justified to use low proportion (2-4%) of polymer to modify mortar suitable for patch repairing concrete with strength of about 20-30 MPa. However, further effort is needed to improve the strength development of this material so it could gain high strength at early age. On the basis of flexibility property, the inclusion of polymer seems to produce repair material that will potentially reduce the risk of cracking due to dimensional issues. 5. Acknowledgement The authors would like to express sincerely gratitude to Directorate General of Higher Education for providing financial support through Hibah Bersaing Scheme, that make this research is possible for the year of 2009. 6. References ACI 548.1R-97 (2002). Guide for the use of polymer in concrete. ACI Manual Concrete Practice. ASTM C579-01 (2001). Standard test methods for compressive strength of chemical resistant mortars, grout, monolithic surfacings, and polymer concretes. Annual Book of ASTM Standards Volume 04.02. ASTM C928-00 (2000). Standard specification for package, dry, rapid hardening cementitious materials for concrete repairs. Annual Book of ASTM Standards Volume 04.02. Bureau of Reclamation (1996). Guide to Concrete Repair. United State Department of Interior. BS 6319: Part 3 (1983). Method for measurement of flexural strength. BS 6319: Part 4 (1984). Method for measurement of bond strength (slant shear method). CWPD (2002). Handbook on Repair and Rehabilitation of RCC Buildings. Director General Work, Central Public Work Department, Goverment of India. Kuhlman, LA (1990). Styrene-butadiene latex-modified concrete: the ideal concrete repair?

128 / A : STRUCTURE AND MATERIAL

Concrete International, September. McDonald, JE., Vaysburd, AM., and Poston, RW (2000). Performance criteria for dimensionally compatible repair materials. HMP&S Bulletin 00-1, 1-13. International Concrete Repair Institute (1996). Guide for selecting and specifying materials for repair of concrete surfaces. Technical Guidelines No. 03733. The International Concrete Repair Institute, Virginia, USA Ohama, Y (1994). Handbook of Polymer Modified Mortar and Concrete: Properties and Process Technology. College of Engineering, Nihon University, Koriyama Japan. Pattnaik, RR (2006). Investigation into compatibility between repair materials and substrate concrete using experimental and finite element methods. Dissertation. The Graduate School of Clemson University, South Carolina USA. Rangaraju, PR and Pattnaik, RR (2008). Evaluation of rapid set patching materials for PCC application. Final Report FHWA-SC-07-07. Department of Civil Engineering, Clemson University, South Calorina USA. Sugita, J., Tagaki, S., Mashino, M., and Sakai, E (1993). Extended abstract: The 47th of Annual Meeting of JCA. 74-79. Sohanghpurwala, AA (2006). Manual on service life of corrosion damaged reinforced concrete bridge superstructure elements. NCHRP Report 558. Transportation Research Board. Wipf, TJ., Klaiber, FW., and Raker, EJ (2004). Evaluation of repair materials for use in patching damaged concrete. Effective Structural Concrete Repair. Volume 3 of 3. Department of Civil, Construction and Enviromental Engineering, IOWA State University, USA.

A : STRUCTURE AND MATERIAL / 129