Disclosed is an essentially shaped cementitious product wherein the direct tensile strength of the product as determined by ASTM C307 is at least 120% of a predicted direct tensile strength of the product per an equation selected from the group consisting of f′dt=0.06*f′c, f′dt=0.07*f′c, f′dt=0.08*f′c and f′dt=0.11*f′c, and wherein the flexural strength of the product as determined by ASTM C348 is at least 150% of a predicted flexural strength of the product per an equation selected from the group consisting of f′r=0.1*f′c, f′r=0.17*f′c, f′r=9.5*((f′c)̂0.5) and f′r=7.5*((f′c)̂0.5).

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

The invention now will be described more fully hereinafter. The invention may, however, be embodied in many different forms and should not be construed as limited to the embodiments set forth herein; rather, these embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will be thorough and complete, and will fully convey the scope of the invention to those skilled in the art. As used in this specification and the claims, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. “Or” as in “A or B” is conjunctive, not disjunctive, and accordingly in this instance means at least one member of the set {A, B}.

A material such as is described herein provides inter alia an optionally load-bearing essentially shaped cementitious product manufactured by steps comprising:

(a) admixing a liquid medium, a hydraulic binding agent, a latex polymer and optionally one or more other components, wherein the mass ratio of hydraulic binding agent to latex polymer is between about 1:1000 and about 1000:1, to form a mixture;

(b) placing the mixture in an essentially prismatic disposition wherein the mixture sets, thereby forming a set essentially shaped mixture; and

(c) permitting the set essentially shaped mixture to harden, thereby forming the essentially shaped cementitious product;

wherein a 51-mm-thick sample of the product halts a full metal jacket bullet fired into the sample's thickness from a 9 mm handgun at a distance of 15 meters and wherein spallation resulting from entry of the projectile into the thickness occurs in a zone on the entry surface not greater than about 50 times the area of the bullet hole resulting from the bullet's entry into the thickness of the sample.

A material such as is described herein accordingly provides a material less susceptible than materials known in the art to brittle failure in either blast or ballistic applications. A material such as is described herein may incorporate latex polymer film into a microstructure of the material as a means for influencing toughness characteristics. A material such as is described herein may possess a specified ductile behavior according to the material's the polymer/cement ratio, i.e., defining the material's modulus of elasticity according to the polymer/hydraulic binder ratio. A material such as is described herein may be used to create either individual specimens or in full pour type applications, with examples not being limited to bricks and walls, respectively. As a coating, a material such as is described herein may be applied with any common set up, with examples not being limited to pour, gunnite, shot-crete, low pressure spray, trowel, brush, roller, knife, direct injection, pumping apparatus or simply applied by hand.

Direct tensile strength and modulus of rupture of a polymer modified cementitious material may increase with increases in polymer/cement ratio up to some optimum level, then the mechanical property strength values gradually decrease with increases in polymer/cement ratio. Material deformation continually increases as a result of more elastic behavior with increases in polymer/cement ratio. In direct tensile strength testing, elongation at break increases continually with increases in polymer/cement ratio though strength values may gradually decrease beyond an optimum value with increases in polymer/cement ratio.

A material such as is described herein may accordingly possess any of a wide range of performance characteristics. Table 1 displays experimental results for a rapid setting hydraulic cement based patch and repair mortar at different polymer/cement ratios after curing in a sealed plastic container in ambient outdoor Kentucky springtime conditions for 27 days (13 Mar. 2012-9 Apr. 2012) when exposed to a single gunshot from a 9 mm handgun with 115 grain full metal jacket bullets at a distance of 15 meters (49 ft).

As seen in Table 1, a non-polymer modified control sample experienced brittle failure. A mortar with polymer/cement ratio of 2/5 stopped a bullet with little cracking. A mortar with polymer/cement ratio of 1/1 allowed a bullet to pass completely through with small entrance and somewhat small exit displaying little spall and little cracking. A mortar with polymer/cement ratio of 2/1 also allowed a bullet to pass completely through with small entrance and somewhat small exit displaying little spall and little cracking

These results were obtained with stand-alone, unconfined mortar specimens which were 51 mm (2 in) thick. The failure modes associated with the control, p/c=2/5, p/c=1/1 and p/c=2/1 provide a clear illustration of optimum strength characteristics with increasing polymer/cement ratio. Although materials with p/c=1/1 and p/c=2/1 allowed complete bullet pass through for these thin members, such materials present viable options for mitigating spalling behavior in stand alone applications as increasing specimen thickness increases a material's capacity to absorb energy. An important characteristic for materials tested at this specimen thickness is the relatively insignificant amount of cracking for mortars with polymer/cement ratio of 2/5, 1/1 and 2/1. Insignificant cracking illustrates a material's ability to maintain sufficient structural integrity in ideal applications.

A material such as is described herein displays excellent adhesion characteristics to cementitious materials. Polymer modified cementitous materials typically result in cohesive failure of the cement based substrate material when tested in direct pull off testing similar to ASTM C1583, Standard Test Method for Tensile Strength of Concrete Surfaces or the Bond Strength or Tensile Strength of Concrete Repair and Overlay Materials by Direct Tension (Pull Off Method). Given the likelihood the substrate material will fail before the adhesion bond fails, a material such as is described herein provides a spall-resistant polymer modified cementitous coating material. Furthermore, a material such as is described herein is suitable for use either creating or supplementing spall liners, with examples of spall liners not being limited to use with either construction or “up armoring” of armored vehicles, maritime vessels, structures and automobiles. For example, at a p/c=1/1 after 28 days of curing in ambient conditions, a material such as is described herein provided a very tough, flexible polymer modified cementitious coating with flexural strength values of approximately 10 MPa (1450 psi) and direct tensile strength values of approximately 7 MPa (1000 psi) and compressive strength values near 28 MPa (4000 psi) effectively mitigating spall if the cementitious substrate material fails in brittle fashion as a result of a sudden shock wave, vacuum or gunshot.

A material such as is described herein can be applied to reinforced concrete structures in similar fashion to automobile crumple zones. Polymer modified cementitous materials are typically lower in compressive strength, but higher in both direct tensile strength and flexural strength when compared with contemporary cementitious materials. Such mechanical property correlations allow for significant material deformation while maintaining some sense of structural integrity. For the sake of load bearing columns in blast or ballistic applications, a section of column is cast with polymer modified mortar with sufficient compressive strength and ductility as defined by polymer/cement ratio such that the polymer modified portion will slightly deform while maintaining the majority of its structural integrity when exposed to significant, sudden loads, similar to a single-use shock absorber, as these polymer modified cementitious materials have no memory. Such behavior characteristic of a material such as is described herein can be generalized to the case of being incorporated into development of layered systems designed for ballistic or blast loading, not being limited to the concept underlying functionality of Chobham type armor systems.

A material such as is described herein reduces spall of cementitious materials under blast or ballistic loading scenarios. A material such as is described herein may be utilized to create spall liners, modular units, cast in place structures, coating materials, insert materials, or any number of possibilities given the vast range of mechanical property performance correlations which can be achieved by varying the polymer/cement ratio in cementitious materials formulations. A material such as is described herein allows creation of ductile cementitious materials without the addition of fibers or other means of reinforcement, though addition of fibers and reinforcing materials may benefit the performance of a material such as is described herein for specific applications.

Latex polymers suitable for a material such as is described herein may include elastomeric latexes, thermoplastic latexes and thermosetting latexes or any combination thereof. Elastomeric latexes consist of natural and synthetic rubbers. Thermoplastic latexes are not limited to examples such as polyacrylic esters, copolymers of vinyl acetate/ethylene (VAE or EVA), terpolymers of vinyl acetate/ethylene/vinyl chloride (VAE/VC), terpolymers of vinyl acetate/ethylene/veova (VAE/Veova), VAE/Veova/VC, styrene acrylics, poly styrene acrylic esters, polyvinyl acetate, polyvinyl propionate, polypropylene, poly vinylidene chloride vinyl chloride (PVDC). Thermosetting latexes are not limited to epoxies. Examples of VAE liquid polymer dispersions are Vinnapas 526BP and Mowilith LDM 1852. An example of a styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) liquid polymer dispersion is Axilat SB500. An example of an acrylic liquid polymer dispersion is Axilat L8840.

Dispersible polymer powders are characterized such that they disperse readily into their constituent polymer components when exposed to water thereby forming a tough, elastic water resistant polymer film. Examples of dispersible polymer powders according to a material or process such as is described herein are copolymers of vinyl acetate and ethylene (VAE) are Vinnapas 5044N and Vinnapas 5010N. A suitable example for a polymer powder of styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) chemistry is Axilat PSB150.

When used in the present context, the term “hydraulic binder” refers to a pulverized material in the solid, dry state, which when mixed with water yields mixtures which are able to set and harden, with a common example being the term “cement”. A hydraulic binder may comprise one or more individual component materials. A hydraulic binder may undergo setting and hardening when exposed to suitable medium. Utilizing cement chemistry nomenclature where C=CaO, Ś=SO3, S=SiO2, A=Al2O3, H=H2O, F=Fe2O3, N=sodium based materials, K=potassium based materials, any of such hydraulic binder materials may hydrate to form materials containing C-A-Ś-H type phases and (N,K)-A-Ś-H type phases in addition to more traditional type phases common to ordinary portland cement hydration. Examples of such individual component materials should not be limited to all forms of calcium sulfate, hydrated lime, quicklime, alumina, alumina tri-hydrate, alite, belite, tri-calcium aluminate, yeelimite (kleins compound), calcium aluminate, C12A7, coal ash, slag, silica fume, pozzolana, clay, bauxite, red mud, brownmillerite or any other suitable material or combination of materials which when exposed to water or other suitable medium is able to set and harden. The term “cement” includes hydraulic and alite cements such as portland cement, blended cement, slag cement, pozzolanic cement, calcium aluminate cement, calcium sulfoaluminate cement or any other common cementing material or combination thereof.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as viscosity modifiers commonly used in cementitious systems. These viscosity modifiers are typically polysaccharides and their derivatives including polysaccharide ethers soluble in water such as cellulose ether, starch ether (amylose and/or amylopectin and/or their derivatives), guar ether and/or dextrins. It is also possible to use synthetic polysaccharides such as anionic, non-ionic or cationic heteropolysaccharides such as xanthan gum or wellan gum. The polysaccharides can, but need not, be chemically modified with carboxymethyl groups, carboxyethyl groups, hydroxyethyl groups, hydroxypropyl groups, methyl groups, ethyl groups, propyl groups and/or long chain alkyl groups. Further natural stabilizing systems consist of alginates, peptides and/or proteins such as gelatin, casein and/or soy protein. Examples include dextrins, starch, starch ether, casein, soy protein, hydroxyl alkyl cellulose and/or alkyl hydroxalkyl cellulose. Other synthetic stabilizing systems include one or several polyvinyl pyrrolidones and/or polyvinyl acetals having molecular weights of approximately 2000 to 400,000; fully or partially saponified and/or modified fully or partially saponified poly-vinyl alcohols with a degree of hydrolysis of approximately 70 to 100 mole %, or in another respect approximately 80 to 98 mole %. Additionally, poly-vinyl alcohols may be incorporated at larger percentages to further enhance a material's ability to mitigate spall. Commonly referred to rheology modifying materials have been known to include methylhydroxyethylcellulose, hydroxymethylethylcellulose, carboxymethylcellulose, methylcellulose, ethylcellulose, hydroxyethylcellulose, hydroxyethylpropylcellulose, etc.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as plasticizers, super-plasticizers, high range water reducers or any suitable product which delivers desired characteristics. Common materials used for such purposes are melamine sulphonate formaldehyde condensates, naphthalene sulphonates, calcium lignosulphonates, sodium lignosulphonates, saccharose, sodium gluconate, sulphonic acids, carboxylates, poly-carboxylates, carboxylic acids, polyhydroxycarboxilic acids, sulphonated melamine or any other suitable material, whether it be naturally occurring or processed. Examples are not limited to the Glennium family of products or the Melflux family of products.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as set retarders. Set retarders are often used to delay the hydration reactions associated with hydraulic binders and possibly reactions of other constituent components. Set retarders can vary in effectiveness of delaying onset or rapidity of hydration for differing hydraulic binders and/or different or varying combinations of constituent materials. Commonly used set retarders are not limited to tartaric acid, citric acid, sodium citrate, hydroxyl carboxylic acids and their salts, malic acid, sodium gluconate, sucrose, etc.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as set accelerators or accelerating admixtures. Such materials are frequently used, but not limited to increasing the rate of hydration reaction or providing some means of control for specific interactions which are inevitable when certain materials interact under certain conditions. Common examples of set accelerators or accelerating admixtures include but are not limited to lithium carbonate, calcium formate, quicklime, calcium oxide, sodium chloride, various alkali earth metals and their salts, aluminous materials when combined with other proper constituents, etc.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as surfactants for various purposes, whether they be foaming materials, de-foaming materials or provide any other desired properties. Suitable foaming and stabilizing surfactants may include but are not limited to mixtures of an ammonium salt of an alkyl ether sulfate, a cocoamidopropyl betaine surfactant, a cocoamidopropyl dimethylamine, oxide surfactant, mixtures of an ammonium salt of an alkyl ether sulfate surfactant, a cocoamidopropyl hydroxysultaine surfactant, hydrolyzed keratin, an alkyl or alkene dimethylamine oxide surfactant, aqueous solutions of an alpha-olefinic sulfonate surfactant and a betaine surfactant and/or any other suitable materials. An example of a foaming material is ZONESEAL 2000 foaming additive commercially available from Halliburton.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as defoaming materials which also may be known as air detrainers. These types of defoaming materials can be very important for creating impermeable coatings. These defoaming materials typically decrease the amount of entrained air within the designed system. Common examples of these materials are tributyl phosphate dibutyl phthalate, octyl alcohol, water insoluble esters of carbonic and boric acid as well as silicone based materials. Common examples of available defoamers include but are not limited to Agitan P800 and Surfynol MD600.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as “fugitive plasticizers” or “coalescing solvents” with a primary function being not limited to aiding the mechanisms for facilitating film formation or film integration during either the drying, setting, hardening or overall curing process. Some common “fugitive plasticizers” or “coalescing solvents” are volatile organic compounds not being limited to the examples including toluene, xylene, n-butyl acetate, ethoxyethyl acetate, ethyleneglycol monobutyl ether acetate, and diethyleneglycol monobutyl ether acetate.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as filling materials. Typically, filling materials are finely ground materials. These fillers often possess, but should not be limited to a particle size distribution with both median and mean values less than 100 microns. This is one classification characteristic when comparing fillers and aggregate. Examples of common filling materials or fillers are ground carbonates with examples being calcium carbonate and sodium bi-carbonate, all classifications of clay materials, metakaolin, diatomaceous earth, carbon black, activated carbon, titanium dioxide, finely ground quartz, finely ground silica based materials often referred to as micro-silica, silica fume, fumed silica, kiln dust, pulverized stone, pulverized glass, ultra fine fly ash, fly ash, blast furnace slag, ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS), ground recycled materials, pulverized glass, crum rubber, recycled tires, powdered waste from recycling automobiles, powdered waste from recycling electronic components, etc.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more common reinforcing materials typically used in either cementitious materials design or coating materials design such as fibrous materials or mesh type materials. Examples of fiber type materials should not be limited to metal fibers, organic fibers, synthetic fibers, polymeric fibers, carbon nano tube type fibrous materials or any mixture of fibers. Examples of fibers should not be limited to polyvinyl alcohol fibers (PVA), polyacrylonitrile fibers (PAN), polyethylene fibers (PE), high density polyethylene fibers (HDPE), polypropylene fibers (PP) or homo or co-polymers of polyamide or polyimide. Mixtures of any type of fibers may also be used, especially mixtures of fibers with different physical dimensions and different orientations. Addition of fibrous material to cementitious type mixtures may be facilitated by use of a viscosity modifying agent which ensures proper dispersal of fibers throughout the mixture, with an example being Kelco-Crete which is an anionic polysaccharide from CP Kelco. Furthermore, aramid type materials, not limited to currently available material forms such as pulp, yarn, fibers, or mesh, such potentially being comprised of chains with AABB configuration, with examples not being limited to Kevlar, Twaron, Nomex, New Star and Teijinconex, may be included in a multitude of possible arrays. Additionally, novel materials such as combinations of boron oxides and polyethylene may be utilized as means of reinforcement. Mesh type materials may also be used as a means of reinforcement. Examples of mesh type materials should not be limited to metal mesh, alloy mesh, fabric mesh, carbon fiber mesh, carbon nano-tube mesh, fiberglass mesh, polyethylene mesh, polypropylene mesh or aramid mesh. Additionally, materials with more complex design characteristics may be included, with examples not being limited to shear thickening fluids and not so commonly used metals such as depleted uranium. Other more common types of reinforcement should not be limited to theories surrounding practices of pre-stressed concrete, post-stressed concrete, reinforced concrete where any reinforcing type material could potentially be placed within the constructed material with fully bonded orientation, partially bonded orientation, un-bonded orientation; or, the reinforcing material may be bonded in any fashion to any material comprising the constructed material.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as materials sometimes needed for protection from microorganism attack. As a result, the mixing process may incorporate fungicides or anti-bacteria substances. Examples of such materials should not be limited to pentachlorophenol, sodium o-phenylphenate and/or various organic mercury compounds.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as flame-retarding materials. Examples of flame retarding materials should not be limited to chlorinated paraffin waxes and antimony trioxide.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as common aggregate materials not limited to specification of chemical composition or specimen geometry. Examples of common aggregate materials are siliceous materials with one specific example being silica sand, calcium based materials with an example being stone, limestone, river gravel, river sand, pea gravel, pozzolanic material with an example being volcanic rock, bottom ash, cinders, along with numerous other possibilities for both recycled and manufactured aggregates. A material such as is described herein may also comprise engineered aggregate materials such as high performance ceramic aggregate or light weight aggregate.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as antioxidants to retard deterioration of polymeric materials, and optionally surface active substances to enhance colloidal stability and ability to “wet out” surfaces. Coating materials may become exposed to acidic materials on the molecular level due to consequences from polymer hydrolysis, with one example being the liberation of hydrogen chloride. Common anti-oxidant materials should not be limited to phenyl-2-naphthylamine or carbon black. Common acid accepting substances for mix design purposes should not be limited to zinc oxide and calcium carbonate.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as anti-freeze materials not limited to ethylene glycol or glycerol.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more corrosion inhibiting substances with one example not being limited to sodium benzoate.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as powdered metals, powdered alloys or powdered conductive materials for the purposes of producing a coating capable of conducting either electron, proton or neutron transfer in either continuous or dis-continuous fashion. Such conductive materials should not be limited to powder form, such conductive materials may also be added in the form of fibrous material, platy material, ground material, spherical material or virtually any geometry required for the given degree of conductivity.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more other materials such as pigments, dyes or other common color enhancing additives.

A material such as is described herein may also comprise one or more chemical materials with specific purpose such as alkali activating agents or polymer cross-linking agents. Examples of alkali activating agents should not be limited to sodium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide or magnesium hydroxide. Polymer cross-linking agents should not be limited to sodium borate and maleic anhydrite.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, superplasticizer and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, superplasticizer, rheology modifier and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, superplasticizer, rheology modifier, filler and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, superplasticizer, rheology modifier, filler, aggregate and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, superplasticizer, rheology modifier, filler, aggregate and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, superplasticizer, rheology modifier, filler and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, filler and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, filler, rheology modifier and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, filler, rheology modifier and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, filler, rheology modifier, accelerator and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, filler, rheology modifier, accelerator, retarder and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, filler, rheology modifier, accelerator, retarder, means of re-inforcement and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture comprising sufficient liquid medium, hydraulic binding agent, filler, rheology modifier, accelerator, retarder, means of re-inforcement, aggregate and latex polymer such that the mass ratio of polymer solids (or effective polymeric material amount) to hydraulic binder is within the range of 1/1000 to 1000/1.

In an embodiment, a process such as is described herein comprises formation of a mixture containing hydraulic binding agent and latex polymer with any common constituent material for cement mix design with examples not being limited to filler, aggregate, re-inforcing material, accelerator, retarder, plasticizer, super-plasticizer, rheology modifier, flame retarding material, conductive material, insulating material, anti-freeze material, anti-oxidizing material, pigment material, defoaming material, air entraining material, surfactant material, cross-linking material, alkali activating material biocide material, anti-fungal material or fugitive plasticizing material.

The following examples are meant for illustrative purposes.

FIGS. 1-5illustrate field testing of “spall behavior” for cement mortars similar to the mortars displayed in Table 2.FIGS. 1-5are further described by reference to Table 1.FIGS. 1-5clearly demonstrate the utility of a material or process such as is described herein for defining ductile behavior of materials incorporating hydraulic binding agents by varying the material's polymer/hydraulic binding agent ratio. The ductile behavior of the material influences the toughness of the material which defines the “spall behavior” of the material.FIG. 1illustrates a “control” sample which contains no polymer exhibiting brittle behavior, with significant spall, after being shot with a 9 mm handgun at a distance of 15 m.FIG. 2illustrates a mortar sample with polymer/cement ratio of 2/5 exhibiting tough, ductile behavior, actually stopping the bullet while maintaining structural integrity after being shot with a 9 mm handgun at a distance of 15 m.FIG. 3illustrates a mortar sample with polymer/cement ratio of 1/1 exhibiting elastic behavior, actually allowing the bullet to pass through with minimal spall while maintaining structural integrity after being shot with a 9 mm handgun at a distance of 15 m.FIG. 4illustrates a mortar sample with polymer/cement ratio of 2/1 exhibiting elastic behavior, actually allowing the bullet to pass through with minimal spall while maintaining structural integrity after being shot with a 9 mm handgun at a distance of 15 m.

FIG. 5andFIG. 6are bullet entrance and exit comparisons for mortar samples with polymer/cement ratios of 2/5, 1/1 and 2/1. For this specific experiment, the mortar with polymer/cement ratio of 2/5 stopped the bullet with no spall; whereas, the mortars with polymer/cement ratios of 1/1 and 2/1 allowed the bullet to pass through the samples.FIG. 6illustrates decreased spall for the sample with polymer/cement ratio of 2/1 when compared with the sample with p/c=1/1.

Uni-axial direct tensile strength stress/strain diagrams were obtained per ASTM C307 for mortar formulations in Table 2. Mortars possessing different polymer/cement ratios demonstrated different ductile behaviors. Greater deformation at break was observed with increasing polymer/cement ratio. An increased area under the curve was noted for increasing polymer/cement ratio.

FIG. 7andFIG. 8display direct tensile strength information for the mortars displayed in Table 2.FIG. 7shows the direct tensile strength being similar for the polymer modified mortars displayed in Table 2.FIG. 8displays average elongation at break, as a percentage of total specimen length, for the average values displayed inFIG. 10.FIG. 8clearly illustrates different ductile behavior as a function of polymer/cement ratio for the polymer modified mortars displayed in Table 2.

FIG. 7displays direct tensile strength values for the polymer modified mortars listed in Table 2 after curing for seven days in a sealed plastic bag at ambient laboratory temperature of 23° C. (73° F.). The direct tensile strength values for mortars possessing polymer/cement ratios of 0.15, 0.3 and 0.45 are 692 psi (4.8 MPa), 775 psi (5.3 MPa) and 719 psi (4.9 MPa), respectively. Statistical software was utilized for data analysis. One-way ANOVA was used to test the equality of the population means for direct tensile strength testing of polymer modified mortars at polymer/cement ratios of 0.15, 0.3 and 0.45. Results from ANOVA are: F(2/6)=12.9, p=0.007, pooled standard deviation=20.48 and R2=81.14%. Based upon the F value of 12.9 and corresponding p-value=0.007, if an alpha value of 0.05 is chosen, it is safe to reject the null hypothesis and ultimately conclude that at least two means differ from one another, and this inequality is highly unlikely due to chance. Further “post hoc” statistical analysis utilizing Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference Test assigned the mortar with p/c=0.15 to “B” direct tensile strength classification, the mortar with p/c=0.3 to “A” direct tensile strength classification while the mortar with p/c=0.45 has also been assigned to “B” direct tensile strength classification. For the Tukey comparison method, mortars that do not share the same letter strength classification are significantly different.

Table 3 compares common empirical equations for predicting direct tensile strength behavior for ordinary portland cement based concrete with experimental results for polymer modified mortar. The equations were sourced from Hassoun, M. N., 1985, Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures ISBN 0-534-03759-4 and Illston, J. M., Domone, P. L. J., 2001, Construction Materials Their Nature and Behavior, 3rd Edition, ISBN 0-419-25860-3.

The empirical formulations displayed in Table 3 reference the compressive strength (f′c) of concrete for predicting tensile strength behavior. As seen in Table 3, the polymer modified mortars do not follow any of the reported empirical relationships for predicting direct tensile strength behavior as a function of compressive strength. The presence of tough flexible polymer film somewhat uniformly distributed throughout the microstructure increases the ductile behavior of the polymer modified material ultimately leading to deviation from conventional concrete behavior.

FIG. 8displays percent elongation at break as measured by the universal testing machine for direct tensile strength information. The average elongation at break values for direct tensile strength dog bone samples possessing polymer/cement ratios of 0.15, 0.3 and 0.45 are 4, 6 and 8 percent, respectively. The information displayed in bothFIG. 7andFIG. 8illustrates a trend for increased ductile behavior with increases in polymer/cement ratio.

FIG. 9andFIG. 10display flexural strength information and compressive strength information for the polymer modified mortars displayed in Table 2. The trends displayed in bothFIG. 9andFIG. 10clearly demonstrate a difference in ductile behavior for mortars possessing different polymer/cement ratios.

FIG. 9displays flexural strength values for the polymer modified mortars listed in Table 2 after curing for seven days in a sealed plastic bag at ambient laboratory temperature of 23° C. (73° F.). The flexural strength values for mortars possessing polymer/cement ratios of 0.15, 0.3 and 0.45 are 1169 psi (8 MPa), 1406 psi (9.7 MPa) and 1596 psi (11 MPa), respectively. Statistical software was utilized for data analysis. One-way ANOVA was used to test the equality of the population means for flexural strength testing of polymer modified mortars at polymer/cement ratios of 0.15, 0.3 and 0.45. Results from ANOVA are: F(2/6)=96.74, p=0.000, pooled standard deviation=0.26 and R2=96.99%. Based upon the F value of 96.74 and corresponding p-value=0.000, if an alpha value of 0.05 is chosen, it is safe to reject the null hypothesis and ultimately conclude that at least two means differ from one another, and this inequality is highly unlikely due to chance. Further “post hoc” statistical analysis utilizing Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference Test assigned the mortar with p/c=0.15 to “C” flexural strength classification, the mortar with p/c=0.3 to “B” flexural strength classification while the mortar with p/c=0.45 has been assigned to “A” flexural strength classification. For the Tukey comparison method, mortars that do not share the same letter strength classification are significantly different.

Table 4 compares common empirical equations for predicting flexural strength behavior for ordinary portland cement based concrete with experimental results for polymer modified mortar. The equations were sourced from Hassoun, M. N., 1985, Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures ISBN 0-534-03759-4 and llston, J. M., Domone, P. L. J., 2001, Construction Materials Their Nature and Behavior, 3rd Edition, ISBN 0-419-25860-3.

The empirical formulations displayed in Table 4 reference the compressive strength (f′c) of the concrete for predicting flexural strength behavior. As seen in Table 4, the polymer modified mortars do not follow any of the reported empirical relationships. The presence of tough flexible polymer film somewhat uniformly distributed throughout the microstructure increases the ductile behavior of the polymer modified material ultimately leading to deviation from typical concrete behavior.

FIG. 10displays compressive strength values for the polymer modified mortars listed in Table 2 after curing for seven days in a sealed plastic bag at ambient laboratory temperature of 23° C. (73° F.). The compressive strength values for mortars possessing polymer/cement ratios of 0.15, 0.3 and 0.45 are 3684 psi (25 MPa), 3239 psi (22 MPa) and 2611 psi (18 MPa), respectively. Statistical software was utilized for data analysis. One-way ANOVA was used to test the equality of the population means for compressive strength testing of polymer modified mortars at polymer/cement ratios of 0.15, 0.3 and 0.45. Results from ANOVA are: F(2/6)=111.75, p=0.000, pooled standard deviation=0.609 and R2=97.39%. Based upon the F value of 111.75 and corresponding p-value=0.000, if an alpha value of 0.05 is chosen, it is safe to reject the null hypothesis and ultimately conclude that at least two means differ from one another, and this inequality is highly unlikely due to chance. Further “post hoc” statistical analysis utilizing Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference Test assigned the mortar with p/c=0.15 to “A” compressive strength classification, the mortar with p/c=0.3 to “B” compressive strength classification while the mortar with p/c=0.45 has been assigned to “C” compressive strength classification. For the Tukey comparison method, mortars that do not share the same letter strength classification are significantly different.

Table 5 displays formulation information for a rapid setting hydraulic cement mortar with polymer/cement ratio=1/1. Table 6 displays mechanical property performance information for the formulation displayed in Table 5 after curing for 7 days at ambient laboratory temperature of 23° C. and 50% relative humidity. There is an increase in ductile behavior with increase in polymer content per specific volume of microstructure. One mortar with p/c=0.45 displays 8% elongation; whereas, a mortar with p/c=1/1 displays 21% elongation.

The information displayed in Table 7 further illustrates the influence of polymer/cement ratio on material toughness.

InFIG. 11are examples of sample specimens for ASTM C307 uni-axial direct tensile strength testing. Such samples are colloquially referred to as “dog bone” samples in thee art. For testing, grips were attached to each end via clamps at the neck. A universal testing machine pulled the grips apart along a straight line resulting in a clean break at the neck as pictured inFIG. 11. The % elongation at break is a measure of the distance the grips traveled away from one another as the dog bone sample elongated before reaching its breaking point. For the samples depicted inFIG. 11as well as those described in Table 8 andFIG. 12, the only variable in formulations was polymer mass. It is important to note that, while strength varied according to the variable polymer mass, strength is less important than % elongation for various materials such as are described herein. That is, % elongation defines elasticity, and elastic materials elongate before breaking, whereas brittle materials suddenly break in violent fashion. Increases in polymer/cement ratio are related to increases in elongation before the point of breaking, i.e., elongation at break. Such information complements the information provided in the stress/strain diagrams obtained per ASTM C307, which detail the exact distance the grips moved away from one another during the process of breaking the dog bone samples. Each time a dog bone is broken, the universal testing machine provides the stress in psi required to break the sample, and the distance the grips traveled as % elongation.

With respect to the formulations shown in Table 8, it will be noted that polymer mass was the only variable other than water. The polymer/cement ratio increased from EF6-230 BPA to AST3-250 (0.15→0.3→0.45).

Similarly, with respect to formulations whose performance is depicted inFIG. 12, it will be noted that increasing polymer content was the only change in mortar formulations: EF6-230BPA (p/c=0.15), AST2-230 (p/c=0.3) and AST3-250 (p/c=0.45). Increasing polymer/cement ratio was responsible for increased elastic behavior, i.e., increased elongation at break. Increased elongation at break means the sample physically got longer before it broke in the middle of the neck as shown inFIG. 11. The polymer film developed according to a process such as is described herein was observed to be semi-continuous. That is, samples such as those shown inFIG. 11, upon a 24-hour acid etch, retain the original shape of the dog bone. At high polymer/cement ratios, such an acid etch yields a semi-continuous film having essentially the same dimensions as the original sample specimen, yet with a multiplicity of small lacunae.

Table 9 displays a listing of specifications related to caliber and ammunition for testing according to UL 752.FIGS. 13,14and15demonstrate spall behavior of materials such as are described herein with varying polymer/cement ratios when tested with a 44 magnum handgun utilizing 240 grain lead, semi-wad cutter gas checked ammunition.FIGS. 13,14and15illustrate blocks of approximate dimension 9 in×12 in×4 in constructed with identical mortars varying polymer/cement ratio.FIGS. 13,14and15display spall behavior of materials with polymer/cement ratios of approximately 1/7, 5/7 and 7/7, respectively when shot with a Smith and Wesson Model 629 Classic 44 Magnum at a distance of approximately 10 ft (3.05 m).FIG. 13clearly displays impact markings associated with 3 ricochet bullets with minimal spall.FIG. 14clearly displays the material with polymer/cement ratio of 5/7 absorbing all 3 bullets into the material microstructure while generating minimal spall or structural damage. Shots 2 and 3 were virtually placed on top of one another inFIG. 14.FIG. 15clearly displays the material with polymer/cement ratio of 7/7 absorbing all 3 bullets into the material microstructure while generating minimal spall or structural damage.

FIG. 16illustrates further testing of the blocks displayed inFIGS. 13,14and15.FIG. 16illustrates the higher polymer/cement ratio materials generating less spall when shot 5 times with a 0.223 caliber Ruger Ranch Rifle with 55 grain full metal jacket bullets.FIG. 16illustrates the block with polymer/cement ratio of 1/7 virtually disintegrating after being shot 3 times with a 44Magnum and subsequently being shot 5 times with a 0.223 rifle.FIG. 16is of great significance as it demonstrates the ability of the higher polymer/cement ratio materials to absorb significant amounts of energy in comparison to traditional, brittle cementitious materials.

Every reference cited herein is incorporated fully by reference. To the extent that there be any conflict between the teaching of any reference and that of the instant specification, the teaching of the instant specification shall control.