| Literature DB >> 35955340 |
Dominika Dudek1, Magdalena Janus1.
Abstract
This article presents a short overview of modified cements with photocatalytic activity. First, the types and three main methods of obtaining photoactive cements are presented. The most frequently used modification method is the incorporation of a photocatalyst into the total mass of the cement. The second group analyzed is cements obtained by applying a thin layer of photoactive materials, e.g., paints, enamels, or TiO2 suspensions, using various techniques. The third group is cement mortars with a thick layer of photoactive concrete on the top. In addition, methods for determining the photoactivity of cement composites, mechanical properties, and physicochemical parameters of such materials are briefly presented. Finally, examples of investments with the use of photoactive cements and development prospects are shown.Entities:
Keywords: cement; cementitious composites; mechanical properties; photocatalytic activity
Year: 2022 PMID: 35955340 PMCID: PMC9369819 DOI: 10.3390/ma15155407
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.748
Methods of obtaining photoactive cements.
| Type of Method | Short Description |
|---|---|
| (A) Incorporation method. | Adding a photocatalyst during the manufacture of cement; cement replacement by mass with photocatalytic TiO2 particles (micro- or nanosized). |
| (B) Photocatalyst coating technology—cement coating with a thin layer of TiO2 materials with (I) or without (II) a separation layer. | Creating coatings (generally 200 nm thick) by sprinkling with powder, applying paints, enamels, TiO2 suspensions, or special composites, e.g., TiO2/ZnAl. The coatings are applied by techniques such as direct painting on the surface of the cement matrix—by wet coating method; by immersion, spraying, spray pyrolysis, electrodeposition, or chemical vapor deposition (CVD). |
| (C) Addition of the photocatalyst only to the top of the cement mortar layer. | Addition of TiO2 or modified TiO2 to the surface layer; lower layer is unmodified concrete; the top part of concrete consists of cement with photocatalyst. |
Figure 1Scheme of possible methods of cement modification by photocatalysis: (A) incorporation method, (B) surface treatment method: with (I) and without (II) a separation layer, (C) surface coating with a composite cement surface layer containing the photocatalyst.
Figure 2Schematic diagram of multi-functional photoactive cements (based on [49]).
Parameters of the photocatalytic efficiency test according to ISO 22197-1.
| Gas concentration [ppm] | 1.0 |
| Gas flow rate [dm3/min] | 3.0 |
| Duration of the test | 5 h |
| Radiation intensity [mV/cm2] | 1 |
| Sample surface [cm2] | 50 |
| Pretreatment of the sample | 16–24 h of UV irradiation with a power of ≥1.5 mW/cm2 without gas flow |
| Temperature | 25 °C |
| Analytical method | NOx chemiluminescence analyzer |
Figure 3SEM photos of samples after 7 days of curing—(A) control sample, (B) cement sample with 2% nano-TiO2, (C) cement sample with 2% nano-ZnO [105] (RightsLink for Elsevier).
Flexural strength of different types of building materials.
| Author and Used Photocatalytic Material | Building Material | Age (Days) | Exemplary Dose | Flexural Strength (MPa) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Photocatalytic Sample—Description of the Change or Value of the Bending Strength Respective Dose | Reference Sample | ||||
| Wang et al. [ | Cement mortar | 56 | 1, 2, 3 | 12.3, 13.8, 13.6 | 10.7 |
| Meng et al. [ | Cement paste, cement + fly ash 20 wt.% | 30 min during | 1 | increasing bending strength by 37.74% | 9.99 |
| Han et al. [ | Reactive concrete powder, w/c = 0.3 | 28 | 1, 3, 5 | 9.60, 12.45, 14.38 | 6.69 |
| Hernandez [ | White and grey cement mortar | 28 | 5, 10 | G-8.21 (5%) 8.29 (10%) | G = 9.05 |
| 365 | G-11.20 (5%) 10.91 (10%) | G = 12.26 | |||
| Yang et al. [ | slag paste activated with alkali | 3 | 0.5 | 7.71 | 6.17 |
| 7 | 12.46 | 10 | |||
| 28 | 17.32 | 12.58 | |||
| Zhang et al. [ | Concrete | 28 | 1 | n-TiO2: 6.02 n-SiO2: 5.69 | 5.46 |
| Nazari i Riahi [ | Cement mortar, 1 wt.% superplasticizer, w/c = 0.4 | 28 | 1–5 | increase in bending strength to 4 wt.%, the highest value after 28 days | 4.2 |
| Nazari i Riahi [ | Concrete with 15, 30.45.60 wt.% replacement with blast furnace slag | 28 | 1–4 | up to 3 wt.% TiO2 and 45 wt.% slag bending strength increased | 4.2 |
| 90 | 5.6 | ||||
| Feng et al. [ | Cement paste, w/c = 0.4 | 28 | 0.1 | 12.05 | 11.53 |
| 0.5 | 12.45 | ||||
| 1 | 12.48 | ||||
| 5 | 12.30 | ||||
| Lucas et al. [ | Cement, cement-lime, gypsum, or gypsum-lime mortar | 28 | 0.5–5 | Cement and lime-cement mortars show a loss of bending strength in addition to more than 1 wt.%; the gypsum plaster showed a 60% reduction in strength at 0.5% wt., which indicates a greater difficulty for incorporation of nanoparticles | 8.0 |
| Guo et al. [ | Cement mortar modified with epoxy resin TiO2 | 7, 28 | 0, 1, 3 or 5 wt.%. in admixture with pure epoxy resin | increase with increasing dose and curing period | 8.8 |
| Ma et al. [ | Cement mortar and concrete | 3 | 1–5 | increase with increasing dose up to 4 wt.% and curing period | 2.82 |
| Rahim and Nair [ | Cement mortar partially replaced by fly ash and blast furnace slag | 28 | 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 | After 28 days of hardening to 4 wt.%. nano-TiO2, 3 wt.% Al2O3, and nano-SiO2, an increase in flexural strength was observed | 9.0 |
| Sikora et al. [ | Cement mortar | 28 | 3 | TiO2 P25: 7.0 | 7.1 |
| Ng et al. [ | Cement mortar with an admixture of 30 wt.% fly ash w/b = 0.485 | 28 | 1,3,5 | The increase is 19%, 11%, and 10%, respectively, in the NS, NT, and NF samples compared to the control sample. The optimal dose is 3 wt.% for each additive in terms of mechanical properties | NS- circa 4.8 |
| Cerro-Prada et al. [ | Cement mortar | 1, 7, 28, 90 | 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1—without and with replacement of cement | For samples with cement replacement, in the early and middle age of the mortar (2, 7, and 28), slightly reduced strength is obtained for the substitute content of nano-TiO2 of 0.1%, 0.5%, and 1%. By replacing TiO2 in cement with 0.2%, however, a slight improvement in bending strength (13.7%) is achieved in the long term. In the case of the mortar prepared with the addition of TiO2 without cement replacement, no improvement can be clearly observed for the TiO2 content of 0.2%, 0.5%, and 1% | [ |
Figure 4(a) Compressive and (b) flexural strength of cement mortar with the addition of 1, 3,, and 5 wt.% of photocatalyst TiO2/N. In the red line, the compressive strength (53 MPa) and flexural strength (6.92 MPa) of control sample are presented [23].
Examples of research on the effect of carbonation of photocatalytic cement mortars.
| Author | Material | Conditions | Photocatalyst Dose (wt.%) | Time of Exposure to Conditions in the Chamber | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rao et al. [ | Mortars with the addition of 30 wt.% fly ash, binder: sand ratio 1:1 and 1:2 | 5 ± 1% CO2, RH = 60 ± 5% T = 23 ± 3 °C | 0.5; 0.75, 1% nano-TiO2 (NT) or 0.75%, 1.5%, 3% nano-SiO2 (NS) | At 14, 28, 56, and 91 days, | 1: 1 blends with 0.5 wt.%, 0.75 wt.%, and 1 wt.%. NT and 0.75% NS show total resistance to carbonation. Mixtures with nano-TiO2 generally showed a lower carbonation depth than blends with nano-SiO2. Similarly, mortars from the 1: 1 family showed a lower depth of carbonation than the mortars from the 1: 2 family. |
| Duan et al. [ | Geopolymer paste based on fly ash activated in an alkaline sodium silicate solution | 20% CO2, | 1, 3, 5% n-TiO2 | At 3, 7, 28, 90, and 180 days, the depth of carbonation was measured along the exposed surface of the split specimens 40 mm long at 12 points using the phenolphthalein spray test | The improvement of the resistance to carbonation was observed only after 28 days, after 180 days, the sample with 1% TiO2 showed the highest resistance |
| Hernandez et al. [ | Cement mortar | Normal carbonation | Addition of P25 in the amount of 5 and 10 wt.% in the surface layer | Determined with a 1% solution of phenolphthalein in ethanol after 28 days and 365 days | No significant carbonation was observed after 28 days, despite the detection of Ca(OH)2 by thermal analysis. Carbonation was more significant after 365 days, although mortars with/ without an additive of TiO2 were affected to the same extent. |
| Diamanti et al. [ | Cement mortar w/c = 0.52 or w/c = 0.69 | After 3 days of curing, the samples were moved to the carbonation room: 4% CO2, | P25 addition in the amount of 2.5 and 5 wt.% | Determined with a solution of phenolphthalein with a concentration of 1% in ethanol after 28 days and 70 days in four points | An increase in the depth of carbonation with an increase in the w/c proportion, the addition of titanium dioxide caused a slight increase in the depth of carbonation, for example, in mixtures with a w/c of 0.69, after 70 days of exposure, the average depth of carbonation increased from about 9 mm to 11 mm and 11, 5 mm in concrete with content of 2.5 and 5% compared to cement TiO2. |
Figure 5Change in compressive strength of normally and CO2-hardened cement pastes depending on the used dose of nano-TiO2 [160] (RightsLink for Elsevier).
Figure 6View of a parking lane with a photocatalytic paving stone in Antwerp [165].
Figure 7Tunnels after renovation: Leopold II tunnel in Brussels (left) [165] and “Umberto I’’ in Rome (right) [172] (RightsLink for Elsevier).