| Literature DB >> 28787851 |
Luiza R Brancher1, Maria Fernanda de O Nunes2, Ana Maria C Grisa3, Daniel T Pagnussat4, Mára Zeni5.
Abstract
This paper aims to contribute to acoustical comfort in buildings by presenting a study about the polymer waste micronized poly (ethylene vinyl acetate) (EVA) to be used in mortars for impact sound insulation in subfloor systems. The evaluation method included physical, mechanical and morphological properties of the mortar developed with three distinct thicknesses designs (3, 5, and 7 cm) with replacement percentage of the natural aggregate by 10%, 25%, and 50% EVA. Microscopy analysis showed the surface deposition of cement on EVA, with preservation of polymer porosity. The compressive creep test estimated long-term deformation, where the 10% EVA sample with a 7 cm thick mortar showed the lowest percentage deformation of its height. The impact noise test was performed with 50% EVA samples, reaching an impact sound insulation of 23 dB when the uncovered slab was compared with the 7 cm thick subfloor mortar. Polymer waste addition decreased the mortar compressive strength, and EVA displayed characteristics of an influential material to intensify other features of the composite.Entities:
Keywords: impact noise; lightweight mortar; poly (ethylene vinyl acetate); recycled aggregates
Year: 2016 PMID: 28787851 PMCID: PMC5456577 DOI: 10.3390/ma9010051
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Proportions employed in the preparation of samples.
| Samples | Proportions (Mass) | Water/Binder Ratio |
|---|---|---|
| Reference Mortar | 1:6.5 | 0.92 |
| Mortar 10% EVA | 1:0.068:5.82 | 0.55 |
| Mortar 25% EVA | 1:0.17:4.85 | 0.97 |
| Mortar 50% EVA | 1:0.34:3.23 | 0.65 |
Figure 1Rooms of the tests and position of the equipment: (a) concrete slab; (b) subfloor samples; (c) experimental setup without samples; and (d) with samples.
Results for water absorption, voids index and actual specific weight.
| Samples | Water Absorption (%) | Voids Index (%) | Actual Specific Weight (kg/m³) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reference | 9.19 ± 0.18 | 17.95 ± 0.19 | 2380 ± 19 |
| 10% EVA | 11.61 ± 0.26 | 20.81 ± 0.30 | 2260 ± 17 |
| 25% EVA | 11.48 ± 0.76 | 19.49 ± 0.99 | 2110 ± 21 |
| 50% EVA | 15.60 ± 1.62 | 22.45 ± 1.70 | 1850 ± 20 |
Figure 2Samples Morphology: (a) reference mortar; (b) mortar 10%; (c) mortar 25%; and (d) mortar 50% EVA wastes.
Data for compressive strength of the mortars prepared in this study.
| Samples | Compressive Strength (MPa) |
|---|---|
| Reference Mortar | 5.44 ± 0.12 |
| Mortar 10% | 4.07 ± 1.45 |
| Mortar 25% | 2.07 ± 0.16 |
| Mortar 50% | 1.44 ± 0.25 |
Figure 3Creep results for subfloor samples.
Results for impact noise level for samples of 50% EVA waste.
| Sample | Sample Thickness (cm) | Impact Noise Level L’nT,w (dB) |
|---|---|---|
| 50% EVA 3 cm | 3 | 51 |
| 50% EVA 5 cm | 5 | 58 |
| 50% EVA 7 cm | 7 | 56 |
| Concrete slab | 13 | 79 |
Figure 4Impact noise level one-third octave band frequency for samples of 50% EVA waste.