<abstract xml:lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Compared to the traditional inorganic binders based on
mortar or plaster, cementing clefts and cracks with polymer
fl exible binders is effective in terms of better adhesion and fl exibility.
Nevertheless, in order to be applicable in restoration
practice they must comply with the condition of a minimum impact
on the substrate, which frequently is a porous material.
Silicon-based binders, synthetic rubber and hybrid binders based
on silicone modifi ed with polyurethane and polyether were
tested in this study. The binders were artifi cially aged under
various conditions. At the same time, the study also focused on
the extent of infl uencing of the porous cement substrate by the
application of binders. The silicone binders showed the best
resistance to artifi cial aging, however, the originally hydrophilic
substrate became hydrophobic. Hybrid binders showed better
resistance to moist rather than dry atmosphere. Testing in
the QUV panel caused cracking and incoherence of all hybrid
bonders. Various categories of binders showed similar properties
in terms of resistance to aging and the extent of infl uencing
of the porous substrate. The porous cement substrate was
reported to be substantially infl uenced by all tested binders.
Therefore, none of the tested binders can be unambiguously
recommended for application in restoration practice.</p></abstract>

Compared to the traditional inorganic binders based on
mortar or plaster, cementing clefts and cracks with polymer
fl exible binders is effective in terms of better adhesion and fl exibility.
Nevertheless, in order to be applicable in restoration
practice they must comply with the condition of a minimum impact
on the substrate, which frequently is a porous material.
Silicon-based binders, synthetic rubber and hybrid binders based
on silicone modifi ed with polyurethane and polyether were
tested in this study. The binders were artifi cially aged under
various conditions. At the same time, the study also focused on
the extent of infl uencing of the porous cement substrate by the
application of binders. The silicone binders showed the best
resistance to artifi cial aging, however, the originally hydrophilic
substrate became hydrophobic. Hybrid binders showed better
resistance to moist rather than dry atmosphere. Testing in
the QUV panel caused cracking and incoherence of all hybrid
bonders. Various categories of binders showed similar properties
in terms of resistance to aging and the extent of infl uencing
of the porous substrate. The porous cement substrate was
reported to be substantially infl uenced by all tested binders.
Therefore, none of the tested binders can be unambiguously
recommended for application in restoration practice.

Flexible binders, their degradation and impact on cement substrate

Ústav chemické technologie restaurování památek, VŠCHT Praha

KOM – Corrosion and Material Protection Journal

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

{"article-title":"Flexible binders, their degradation and impact on cement substrate"}

Compared to the traditional inorganic binders based on
mortar or plaster, cementing clefts and cracks with polymer
fl exible binders is effective in terms of...

Flexible binders, their degradation and impact on cement substrate

Published Online: Apr 22, 2015

Page range: 24 - 29

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/kom-2015-0009

© Knotek V et al.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.