<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

Adhesive Strength of Modified Cement-Ash Mortars

Leonid Dvorkin, Patrycja Duży, Karolina Brudny, Marta Choińska, Kinga

Korniejenko

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

► To cite this version:

Leonid Dvorkin, Patrycja Duży, Karolina Brudny, Marta Choińska, Kinga Korniejenko. Adhesive Strength of Modified Cement-Ash Mortars. Energies, 2022, 15 (12), pp.4229. 10.3390/en15124229. hal-04730959

HAL Id: hal-04730959

https://hal.science/hal-04730959v1

Submitted on 10 Oct 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Article

# Adhesive Strength of Modified Cement-Ash Mortars

Leonid Dvorkin <fnref n="1" />*, Patrycja Duży <fnref n="2" /> ID, Karolina Brudny <fnref n="3" />, Marta Choińska <fnref n="4" /> and Kinga Korniejenko <fnref n="3" /> ID

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

check for
updates

**Citation:** Dvorkin, L.; Duży, P.; Brudny, K.; Choińska, M.; Korniejenko, K. Adhesive Strength of Modified Cement-Ash Mortars. *Energies* **2022**, *15*, 4229. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15124229

Academic Editors: F. Pacheco Torgal and Paulo Santos

Received: 27 April 2022

Accepted: 7 June 2022

Published: 8 June 2022

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

**Copyright:** © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

**Abstract:** The main aim of this article, carried out in relation to ash-cement mortars, is to determine the effect of complex additives of polyfunctional modifiers, including, in addition to superplasticizers, air-entraining and water-retaining additives, at different values of water-cement ratios. With the use of experimental-statistical models, the complex effect on the adhesive strength of cement-ash mortars of water-cement and ash-cement ratios, as well as complex additives of polyfunctional modifiers, including air-entraining and water-retaining additives, is considered. The extreme nature of the water-cement and ash-cement ratios on the adhesive strength of ash-cement mortars are established. Their optimal values are in the ranges of 0.7-0.75 and 0.35-0.4, respectively. The addition of a naphthalene-formaldehyde superplasticizer makes it possible to increase the adhesive strength of mortars by up to 40%. A positive effect is achieved along with the addition of a superplasticizer by introducing optimal amounts of air-entraining and water-retaining additives into the mortar mixtures. Quantitative parameters of mortar compositions that positively affect adhesive strength are established. The influence on the adhesive strength of the fly ash was also investigated, as well as on the binder-sand ratio. In addition, a positive effect on the adhesive strength of modified cement-ash mortars was experimentally shown by increasing the specific surface area of fly ash by regrinding it and increasing the cement-sand ratio.

**Keywords:** adhesive strength; water-cement; ash-cement ratio; superplasticizer; air-entraining and water-retaining additives; fly ash

## 1. Introduction

Adhesive mixtures are usually polymer-mineral systems containing mineral binders, fillers, and polymer additives that regulate the physico-mechanical and rheological properties of mortar mixtures and mortars [1,2].

The main requirement for hardened mortar mixtures is the strength of the adhesive bond [3]. It is crucial for many different building applications [4], including restoration work [5] and archeological applications [6]. Depending on the working conditions, the strength of the adhesive joints must comply with suitable regulations. One such applicable norm is Russian standard GOST R56387-2015. Their requirements are presented in Table 1.

The recipes for adhesive mixtures are quite diverse, and different additives are applied to the reinforced adhesive strength of concreate-based materials [7,8]. They are added when the content of Portland cement and quartz sand is between 25-40% and 25-75%, respectively. Reducing the consumption of cement and, in part, sand is achieved by introducing a dispersed mineral filler. Limestone flour is often used as a filler [9,10]. The

<footnote n="1">¹ Department of Building Elements Technology and Materials Science, National University of Water and Environmental Engineering, 33028 Rivne, Ukraine</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Faculty of Civil Engineering, Cracow University of Technology, 31-864 Kraków, Poland; patrycja.duzy@doktorant.pk.edu.pl</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Faculty of Materials Engineering and Physics, Cracow University of Technology, Al. Jana Pawła II 37, 31-864 Kraków, Poland; karolina.brudny@student.pk.edu.pl (K.B.); kinga.korniejenko@pk.edu.pl (K.K.)</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Research Institute in Civil and Mechanical Engineering GeM-UMR CNRS 6183, 58, Nantes University—IUT Saint-Nazaire, Rue Michel Ange, 44 600 Saint Nazaire, France; marta.choinska@univ-nantes.fr</footnote>

<footnote>* Correspondence: dvorkin.leonid@gmail.com</footnote>
same effective filler is the active mineral additive—fly ash. The use of fly ash has a positive effect on the water-holding capacity of mortar mixtures, the strength of mortars, and their corrosion resistance. It also eliminates efflorescence formation and reduces shrinkage deformations [11,12]. At the same time, when fly ash as a component of dry mixtures, the stability of its chemical composition and the regulation of the content of unburned carbon particles become important [13]. The influence of the characteristics of the initial components of mortars, including ash-containing mortars, on their adhesive properties has not been sufficiently studied.

<table><caption>**Table 1.** Requirements for adhesive mixtures of various classes *.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Name of Indicator</th><th colspan="3">Value for Class, MPa</th></tr><tr><th>C0</th><th>C1</th><th>C2</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Strength of the adhesive bond after exposure to an air-dry environment for 28 days</td><td>≥0.5</td><td>≥0.5</td><td>≥1.0</td></tr><tr><td>Strength of the adhesive bond after exposure to the aquatic environment</td><td>-</td><td>≥0.5</td><td>≥1.0</td></tr><tr><td>Adhesive bond strength after exposure to high temperatures</td><td>-</td><td>≥0.5</td><td>≥1.0</td></tr><tr><td>Adhesive strength after cyclic freezing and thawing</td><td>-</td><td>≥0.5</td><td>≥1.0</td></tr></tbody></table>

Notes: * according to Russian standard GOST R56387-2015.

Due to the specificity and variety of phenomena that occur at different stages of the bonding process, the creation of a general theory of bonding (adhesion) becomes much more complicated [14]. One of the first theories proposed to explain the bonding process is McBain's hypothesis [15,16], which considers this process as a mechanical "wedging" of the adhesive into the pores (or depressions) of the bonded material. However, the provisions put forward by McBain have been refuted in subsequent works [3,16].

Currently, the adsorption, electrical, diffusion, and chemical theories of adhesion adsorption, electrical, diffusion, and chemical have gained the greatest importance [17,18]. None of these theories of adhesives are universal. Although none of these theories are currently preferred, it can be stated that each of them contributes to the general theory of the bonding mechanism [19,20].

Along with the introduction of polymer additives, there are several ways to improve the adhesive capacity of cement stone while limiting its content in concrete. One of them is based on the concept that considers cement stone as micro concrete [21,22]. According to this concept, it is advisable to increase the dispersion of the cement adhesive, ensuring its complete hydration. For cement grains larger than 40 microns, practically non-hydrated, it is rational to replace them with dispersed fillers. This concept is based on the technology of dry and wet grinding of cement together with sand and other fillers, as well as the production of colloidal cement glue [23]. However, cement grinding has not gained popularity due to high energy consumption, imperfection of the design of grinding units, and rapid loss of activity due to finely dispersed cement. The use of colloidal cement adhesive obtained using vibratory mills and mixers is limited to a narrow range of adhesive mixtures.

Significant progress has been made in studies on the activation of cement binders, as well as mixtures with fillers [23,24]. To the greatest extent, activation methods have been developed in relation to cement. The main ones are regrinding, vibration activation, turbulent, acoustic, ultrasonic, thermal, aerothermal, and treatment [24,25].

Currently, there are several recommendations for the activation of binders and fillers by modifying the surface with various chemicals, including surfactants, halogen-containing, and organosilicon substances [23,26]. The essence of mechanical methods of activation is to increase the reactivity of powders by opening new active surfaces of grains, changing the crystal structure of minerals, the formation of a large number of unsaturated valence bonds, and, with deep grinding, their amorphization occurs. The expediency of activating
the filler by modifying its surface with surfactant additives follows from the Dupre-Young equation [27], which relates the work of adhesion $W_{ad}$ to the surface energy of a solid:

$$W_{ad} = \sigma_s - \sigma_s^*(m + \cos \theta) \quad (1)$$

where $\sigma_s$ is the surface energy of the solid body; $\sigma_s^*$ is the free surface energy of a solid body in an atmosphere of vapors and gases; $m = \sigma_l^*/\sigma_l > 1$ ($\sigma_l^*$ is the surface tension of the liquid oriented under the influence of the force field of the solid surface; $\sigma_l$ is the surface tension of the wetting liquid); and $\theta$—contact angle of wetting.

It follows from the equation that, to achieve high adhesive strength, it is important to ensure the necessary wettability of the filler with a binder and to reduce the interfacial surface energy, which is achieved by treating the filler with a surfactant. The decrease in interfacial surface energy during the creation of an adsorption-active medium is determined from the following equation:

$$\Delta U = K \cdot T \int_{0}^{c} n_{a}(c) d l n c, \quad (2)$$

where $\Delta U$ is the difference between the interfacial surface energy without surfactant and in the presence of surfactant with concentration $c$; $n_a$ is the adsorption value determined by the number of surfactant molecules adsorbed on 1 cm² of the interface; $K$ is the Boltzmann constant; and $T$ is the absolute temperature in $K$.

A necessary condition for the effectiveness of surfactants is the ability of the chemisorption effect on the surface of the filler particles. In general, cationic surfactants are recommended [23] for mineral fillers and active mineral additives of the acid type, and anionic surfactants for the basic type.

The adhesive characteristics of cement-ash mortars are considered in a number of works [28,29]. However, in these works, the possibility of increasing the adhesive strength with complex chemical admixtures and, in particular, those that have an air-entraining and water-retaining effect, has not been studied. Quantitative dependences are not given, allowing one to evaluate the overall positive effect of the introduction of these additives, depending on the composition of mortars and dispersion of fly ash. To obtain such dependences, it is necessary to use mathematical models that consider the complex influence of the technological factors. Obtaining such models is possible, only on the basis of experimental data. For this purpose, the use of the mathematical planning of experiments is the most rational way. This methodology makes it possible to obtain, as a result of experiments performed according to a statistically effective plan, adequate (with 95% confidence) experimental-statistical models that produce quantitative estimates of the influence on a studied parameter of individual factors and the effects of their interaction.

The purpose of this work, conducted in relation to ash-cement mortars, is to determine, based on experimental-statistical models, the effect of complex additives of polyfunctional modifiers, including, in addition to superplasticizers, air-entraining and water-retaining additives, at different values of water-cement ratios. The influence of the adhesive strength of the dispersion and the binder-sand ratio was also studied.

## 2. Materials and Methods

In the work, Portland cement CEM-1 with a strength class of 42.5 MPa and fly ash from the Burshtyn Thermal Power Plant (Burshtyn, Ukraine), were used as components of the binder. The chemical composition of Portland cement and fly ash, as well as their physical properties, are presented in Tables 2 and 3.

The mineralogical composition of the clinker was as follows: $C_3S=57.10\%$; $C_2S=21.27\%$; $C_3A=6.87\%$; $C_4AF=12.19\%$.

The chemical composition of the ash satisfies the standard requirements as additives for mortars. To obtain ash with an increased specific surface, we ground it in a laboratory ball mill. The specific surface of the ash was measured using the method of
air permeability (according to Blaine) and the grain composition was determined by sedimentation analysis.

<table><caption>**Table 2.** Chemical composition of raw materials.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Name Material</th><th rowspan="2">L.O.I.</th><th colspan="8">Oxide Content, %</th></tr><tr><th>SiO<sub>2</sub></th><th>Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub></th><th>Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub></th><th>CaO</th><th>MgO</th><th>SO<sub>3</sub></th><th>K<sub>2</sub>O</th><th>Na<sub>2</sub>O</th><th>CaO<sub>free</sub></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Clinker</td><td>-</td><td>21.80</td><td>5.32</td><td>4.11</td><td>66.80</td><td>0.95</td><td>0.63</td><td>0.54</td><td>0.42</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Fly ash</td><td>5.1</td><td></td><td>84.5</td><td></td><td>2.1</td><td>2.0</td><td>2.3</td><td></td><td>1.2</td><td>2.5</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>**Table 3.** Physical properties of fly ash and Portland cement.</caption><thead><tr><th>Indicators</th><th>Portland Cement</th><th>Unground Ash</th><th>Ground Ash</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Specific surface, m<sup>2</sup>/kg</td><td>350</td><td>290</td><td>455</td></tr><tr><td>Fraction content, µm, %</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>up to 20</td><td>-</td><td>17.8</td><td>29.7</td></tr><tr><td>20–40</td><td>-</td><td>35.9</td><td>40.25</td></tr><tr><td>40–80</td><td>-</td><td>32.6</td><td>27.3</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;80</td><td>8</td><td>13.7</td><td>2.75</td></tr><tr><td>Normal consistence, %</td><td>25.2</td><td>26.0</td><td>28.5</td></tr><tr><td>Absorption activity CaO, mg/g</td><td>-</td><td>36.3</td><td>52.1</td></tr><tr><td>Compressive strength, MPa in 28 days</td><td>53.4</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr></tbody></table>

In the investigation, powdered naphthalene formaldehyde superplasticizer SP-1 was used. The SP-1 is a product of condensation of naphthalite sulfonic acids and formaldehyde. The content of the "active substance" in it was at least 69%, the ash content was not more than 38%, and the pH of a 2.5% aqueous solution was between 7 and 9%.

As air-entraining admixture (Airad), a dry powdery admixture "Mix-DH" was used—a mixture of synthetic air-entraining components and sodium salts of abietic acid.

As a water-retaining admixture, we used cellulose ethers (ECs)—methylhydroxyethyl-cellulose Tylose MH 15002P6—a product of the substitution of hydrogen atoms of cellulose hydroxyl groups for alcohol residues, obtained as a result of the process of activation of cellulose with sodium hydroxide and its subsequent esterification with methylene chloride and ethylene oxide. Silica sand with module fineness $M_f = 1.42$, content of dust and clay impurities 1.7% was used as mortar aggregates.

Mortar samples were made in a cement–ash binder ratio:sand = 1:3 (by weight). To determine the adhesive strength, the hardening of strength was conducted at a humidity of 90% and a temperature of $20 \pm 2$ °C.

The adhesive ability of the cement–ash mortars was determined as the peeling strength of the concrete base of a sample of 50 × 50 mm in size, cut from ceramic tiles. The influence of the water-cement (W/C) and ash-cement (A/C) ratios, as well as the type and content of the additives, was studied using experiments algorithmized according to plan $B_4$ [30].

### 3. Results and Discussion

The statistical processing of the results of the experiment was performed according to the three-level plan $B_4$ [30], including the necessity to take into account the testing of 24 series of samples, the compositions of which are determined by the matrix and are in the range specified in Table 4. The experimental data are shown in Table 5. As a result of the statistical processing of the data in Table 5, mathematical models were obtained, presenting the adhesive strength (Table 6).
<table><caption>**Table 4.** Conditions for planning an experiment on the study of adhesion properties of modified cement-ash mortars.</caption><thead><tr><th>Technological Factors</th><th></th><th></th><th>Levels of Variation</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Natural view</td><td>coded view</td><td>-1</td><td>0</td><td>+1</td></tr><tr><td>Water-cement ratio (W/C)</td><td>X<sub>1</sub></td><td>0.6</td><td>0.8</td><td>1.0</td></tr><tr><td>Ash-cement ratio (A/C)</td><td>X<sub>2</sub></td><td>0</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.7</td></tr><tr><td>The content of the superplasticizer, % of the mass of cement</td><td>X<sub>3</sub></td><td>0</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.7</td></tr><tr><td>The content of the air-entraining additive (Air<sub>ad</sub>), % of the mass of cement</td><td>X<sub>4(I)</sub></td><td>0</td><td>0.025</td><td>0.05</td></tr><tr><td>The content of the water-retaining additive Tylose (EC), % of the mass of cement</td><td>X<sub>4(II)</sub></td><td>0</td><td>0.15</td><td>0.3</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>**Table 5.** Planning matrix and experimental adhesion-strength values.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Test No.</th><th colspan="4">Factors</th><th colspan="2">Polyfunctional Modifier PFM<sub>1</sub> (SP + Air<sub>ad</sub>)</th><th colspan="2">Polyfunctional Modifier PFM<sub>2</sub> (SP + EC)</th></tr><tr><th>X<sub>1</sub></th><th>X<sub>2</sub></th><th>X<sub>3</sub></th><th>X<sub>4</sub></th><th>R<sub>ad,7</sub>, MPa</th><th>R<sub>ad,28</sub>, MPa</th><th>R<sub>ad,7</sub>, MPa</th><th>R<sub>ad,28</sub>, MPa</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>0.22</td><td>0.41</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.54</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>0.18</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.21</td><td>0.42</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>0.15</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.21</td><td>0.38</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>0.11</td><td>0.29</td><td>0.14</td><td>0.27</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>0.23</td><td>0.38</td><td>0.27</td><td>0.46</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.32</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.33</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>0.16</td><td>0.37</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.36</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>0.12</td><td>0.31</td><td>0.12</td><td>0.25</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.45</td><td>0.33</td><td>0.58</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>0.25</td><td>0.41</td><td>0.26</td><td>0.48</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>0.21</td><td>0.39</td><td>0.26</td><td>0.42</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>0.18</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.20</td><td>0.33</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>+1</td><td>0.27</td><td>0.44</td><td>0.32</td><td>0.52</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>-1</td><td>0.24</td><td>0.39</td><td>0.25</td><td>0.42</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>+1</td><td>0.20</td><td>0.42</td><td>0.24</td><td>0.42</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>0.17</td><td>0.38</td><td>0.18</td><td>0.34</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>+1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.53</td><td>0.31</td><td>0.58</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>-1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0.34</td><td>0.59</td><td>0.36</td><td>0.64</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>0</td><td>+1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0.31</td><td>0.57</td><td>0.36</td><td>0.66</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>0</td><td>-1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0.31</td><td>0.57</td><td>0.34</td><td>0.62</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>+1</td><td>0</td><td>0.37</td><td>0.60</td><td>0.41</td><td>0.70</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>-1</td><td>0</td><td>0.30</td><td>0.57</td><td>0.33</td><td>0.58</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>+1</td><td>0.33</td><td>0.61</td><td>0.38</td><td>0.69</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>-1</td><td>0.29</td><td>0.56</td><td>0.32</td><td>0.59</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>**Table 6.** Mathematical models of the adhesive strength of cement-ash mortars.</caption><thead><tr><th>Additive</th><th>Mathematical Models of Adhesive Strength</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Polyfunctional modifier PFM<sub>1</sub> (SP + Air<sub>ad</sub>)</td><td>R<sub>ad,7</sub> = 0.356 - 0.028X<sub>1</sub> + 0.035X<sub>3</sub> + 0.017X<sub>4</sub> - 0.0459X<sub>1</sub><sup>2</sup> - 0.0459X<sub>2</sub><sup>2</sup> - 0.0209X<sub>3</sub><sup>2</sup> -<br>0.0459X<sub>4</sub><sup>2</sup> - 0.004X<sub>1</sub>X<sub>2</sub><br>R<sub>ad,28</sub> = 0.639 - 0.028X<sub>1</sub> + 0.018X<sub>2</sub> + 0.057X<sub>3</sub> + 0.026X<sub>4</sub> - 0.0792X<sub>1</sub><sup>2</sup> - 0.074X<sub>2</sub><sup>2</sup> -<br>0.0542X<sub>3</sub><sup>2</sup> - 0.0542X<sub>4</sub><sup>2</sup> + 0.004X<sub>1</sub>X<sub>2</sub> + 0.004X<sub>1</sub>X<sub>4</sub> + 0.011X<sub>2</sub>X<sub>3</sub></td><td>(3)</td></tr><tr><td>Polyfunctional modifier PFM<sub>2</sub> (SP + EC)</td><td>R<sub>ad,7</sub> = 0.392 - 0.027X<sub>1</sub> + 0.007X<sub>2</sub> + 0.036X<sub>3</sub> + 0.034X<sub>4</sub> - 0.0574X<sub>1</sub><sup>2</sup> - 0.0424X<sub>2</sub><sup>2</sup> -<br>0.0224X<sub>3</sub><sup>2</sup> - 0.0424X<sub>4</sub><sup>2</sup> + 0.002X<sub>1</sub>X<sub>4</sub> + 0.002X<sub>3</sub>X<sub>4</sub><br>R<sub>ad,28</sub> = 0.706 - 0.030X<sub>1</sub> + 0.021X<sub>2</sub> + 0.060X<sub>3</sub> + 0.052X<sub>4</sub> - 0.097X<sub>1</sub><sup>2</sup> - 0.067X<sub>2</sub><sup>2</sup> -<br>0.067X<sub>3</sub><sup>2</sup> - 0.067X<sub>4</sub><sup>2</sup> + 0.006X<sub>1</sub>X<sub>2</sub> + 0.006X<sub>1</sub>X<sub>4</sub> + 0.016X<sub>2</sub>X<sub>3</sub> + 0.003X<sub>3</sub>X<sub>4</sub></td><td>(5)<br>(6)</td></tr></tbody></table>

The effect on the value of the adhesive strength was studied, as well as the ratio of cement-ash binder: aggregate. The results of the experiments are given in Table 7.
<table><caption>**Table 7.** Adhesion strength of modified cement-ash mortars using ash of various dispersions.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">(Cement + Ash)/Sand<br>(C + A)/S</th><th rowspan="2">Specific Surface<br>S<sub>s</sub>, m<sup>2</sup>/kg</th><th colspan="2">Adhesion Strength, MPa, Aged</th></tr><tr><th>7 Days</th><th>28 Days</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="4">Modifier PFM<sub>1</sub> (W/C = 0.8; A/C = 0.6; SP = 0.5%; Air<sub>ad</sub> = 0.03%)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">1:3</td><td>290</td><td>0.34</td><td>0.60</td></tr><tr><td>340</td><td>0.38</td><td>0.66</td></tr><tr><td>390</td><td>0.43</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><td>290</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.53</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">1:4.5</td><td>340</td><td>0.32</td><td>0.57</td></tr><tr><td>390</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.62</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3">Modifier PFM<sub>2</sub> (W/C = 0.8; A/C = 0.6; SP = 0.5%; EC = 0.3%)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">1:3</td><td>290</td><td>0.38</td><td>0.64</td></tr><tr><td>340</td><td>0.42</td><td>0.69</td></tr><tr><td>390</td><td>0.45</td><td>0.73</td></tr><tr><td>290</td><td>0.29</td><td>0.55</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">1:4.5</td><td>340</td><td>0.31</td><td>0.59</td></tr><tr><td>390</td><td>0.33</td><td>0.62</td></tr></tbody></table>

An analysis of the adhesive strength shows that the influence of both W/C and A/C on it is significant (Figures 1 and 2). Therefore, with an increase in the W/C mortar from 0.6 to 0.7–0.75, the adhesive strength increases by 8–10%; with a further increase in W/C, it decreases by 20–25% of the maximum values. In this case, the maximum R<sub>ad</sub> is observed at A/C = 0.35–0.4. This effect of the mentioned technological factors on adhesion can be explained by the influence of not only the porosity of the contact layer, but also the degree of wetting with the base mortar [31,32].

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** Dependence of the adhesive strength (MPa) of PFM<sub>1</sub>-modified cement-ash mortars on water-cement and ash-cement ratios at 7 days.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** Dependence of adhesive strength (MPa) of cement ash mortars modified with PFM₁ from the water-cement and ash-cement ratios at 28 days.</figcaption></figure>

The superplasticizer (SP-1) and the air-entraining admixture MixDH have a positive effect on the adhesion of mortars (Figure 3), as a result of a change in their surface energy and a change in the qualitative characteristics of the contact layer. The introduction of the hydrophilic additive SP improves the mortar characteristics of the contact layer, obviously, primarily as a result of improving its wettability and reducing the content of excess moisture. With an increase in the superplasticizer content from 0 to 0.35% by weight of cement, the adhesive strength increases by 16–35% at W/C = 0.6 and by 25–40% at W/C = 1.0. A further increase in the content of SP to 0.7% leads to another increase in R<sub>ad</sub> by another 13–20%.

The introduction of the air-entrainment and, especially, polymeric additive Tylose into the mortars provides the necessary water-retention capacity of the mortar mixture and reduces the thickness of the adhesive layer, which also has a positive effect on the adhesion value [33]. Ceteris paribus, an increase in the content of air-entraining additive (Air<sub>ad</sub>) from 0 to 0.025% by weight of cement increases the adhesive strength by 30–45%; with a further increase in the content of Air<sub>ad</sub>, the adhesive strength decreases slightly. An increase in the content of the Tylose water retention additive from 0 to 0.15% leads to an increase in adhesive strength by 25–55%; a further increase in the content of the additive has little effect on the adhesion of mortars containing ash.

An additional factor that contributes to an increase in the adhesive strength of mortars is an increase in the dispersion of fly ash (Table 7). Therefore, the regrinding of ash to a specific surface area of 390 m²/kg makes it possible to increase the adhesion strength of the mortar with the 7-day-old base by 14–26%, at 28 days old—by 13–18%.
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3.** Dependences of adhesive strength (MPa) of cement-ash mortars at 28 days on the content of modifier additives.</figcaption></figure>

Freshly formed surfaces of mineral materials are known to have significantly higher surface energy, which determines their high adhesive activity [34,35]. Mechanical processes during grinding of mineral and organic materials cause, along with an increase in their surface energy, an increase in the isobaric potential of powders and, accordingly, their chemical activity, which also contributes to high adhesive strength when they come into contact with a binder. However, the tendency of ground powders to rapidly deactivate should be considered. The duration of the existence of radicals in the air environment, which arise during mechanochemical treatment, is only 10⁻³–10⁻⁶ s [27]. The adsorption of water vapor and carbon dioxide from the air by freshly milled powders and the saturation of uncompensated molecular forces lead not only to the "aging" of the filler surface, but also serve as an additional barrier to the formation of reliable adhesive contacts. Therefore, the mechanochemical activation of fillers is effective when a primary contact layer of a structured binder is created on the grains directly in the grinding process.

Changes in the ratios of the cement-ash binder and the sand also affect the adhesive strength.

## 4. Conclusions

The results obtained show the effect of complex additives of polyfunctional modifiers, including, in addition to superplasticizers, air-entraining and water-retaining additives, at different values of water-cement ratios. Moreover, the influence of the adhesive strength of the fly ash dispersion, as well as the binder-sand ratio, was presented. The provided investigations allow us to formulate the following conclusions:
* The effect of the water and ash cement ratios on the adhesive strength of the ash-cement mixtures was studied. A significant decrease in adhesive strength occurred when the W/C ratio exceeded 0.75 and the ash-cement ratio was 0.4.

* The introduction of a superplasticizer additive of the naphthalene-formaldehyde type increased the adhesive strength of the mortar in the studied dose range. An increase in adhesive strength was also observed with the additional introduction of an air-entraining additive up to 0.025 by weight of cement.

* A significant increase in adhesive strength was also observed with the introduction of a complex modifier additive, including a superplasticizer and a water-retention additive Tylose in an amount of up to 0.15% of the mass of cement.

* For cement-ash mortar mixtures, an increase in adhesive strength was characteristic with an increase in the dispersion of ash and in the ratio of cement-ash binder to sand aggregate.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, L.D.; Formal analysis, L.D., P.D., K.B. and K.K.; Funding acquisition, P.D., M.C. and K.K.; Investigation, L.D.; Methodology, L.D.; Visualization, P.D., M.C. and K.B.; Writing—original draft, L.D.; Writing—review and editing, M.C., K.K. and K.B., Supervision, L.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This work was financed by the Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange under the International Academic Partnership Programme within the framework of the grant: E-mobility and sustainable materials and technologies EMMAT (PPI/APM/2018/1/00027).

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Acknowledgments:** The research was part of the work provided by the interdisciplinary research group: Geopolymer composites for construction (GEOMAT).

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

## References

1. Hossain, M.R.; Sultana, R.; Patwary, M.M.; Khunga, N.; Sharma, P.; Shaker, S.J. Self-healing concrete for sustainable buildings. A review. *Environ. Chem. Lett.* **2022**, *20*, 1265–1273. [CrossRef]

2. Aliha, M.R.M.; Karimi, H.R.; Abedi, M. The role of mix design and short glass fiber content on mode-I cracking characteristics of polymer concrete. *Constr. Build. Mater.* **2022**, *317*, 126139. [CrossRef]

3. Salustio, J.; Torres, S.M.; Melo, A.C.; Silva, Â.J.C.E.; Azevedo, A.C.; Tavares, J.C.; Leal, M.S.; Delgado, J.M.P.Q. Mortar Bond Strength: A Brief Literature Review, Tests for Analysis, New Research Needs and Initial Experiments. *Materials* **2022**, *15*, 2332. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4. Tarque, N.; Pancca-Calsin, E. Building constructions characteristics and mechanical properties of confined masonry walls in San Miguel (Puno-Peru). *J. Build. Eng.* **2022**, *45*, 103540. [CrossRef]

5. Aucouturier, M.; Darque-Ceretti, E. Materials Surface Science Applied to the Investigation of Cultural Heritage Artefacts. *Procedia Mater. Sci.* **2015**, *9*, 31–47. [CrossRef]

6. Karatasios, I.; Amenta, M.; Kilikoglou, V. Hydraulic mortars for joining archaeological stone fragments—A methodological approach. *Procedia Struct. Integr.* **2018**, *10*, 211–218. [CrossRef]

7. Petit, J.Y.; Wirquin, E. Evaluation of various cellulose ethers performance in ceramic tile adhesive mortars. *Int. J. Adhes. Adhes.* **2013**, *40*, 202–209. [CrossRef]

8. Žižlavský, T.; Bayer, P.; Vyšvařil, M. Bond Properties of NHL-Based Mortars with Viscosity-Modifying Water-Retentive Admixtures. *Minerals* **2021**, *11*, 685. [CrossRef]

9. Benjeddou, O.; Alwetaishi, M.; Tounsi, M.; Alyousef, R.; Alabduljabbar, H. Effects of limestone filler fineness on the rheological behavior of cement—Limestone filler grouts. *Ain Shams Eng. J.* **2021**, *12*, 3569–3578. [CrossRef]

10. Nepomuceno, M.C.S.; Bernardo, L.F.A.; Pereira-de-Oliveira, L.A.; Timóteo, R.O. Cement-based grouts for masonry consolidation with high content of limestone filler, metakaolin, glass powder and ceramic waste. *Constr. Build. Mater.* **2021**, *306*, 124947. [CrossRef]

11. Giergiczny, Z. Fly ash and slag. *Cem. Concr. Res.* **2019**, *124*, 105826. [CrossRef]

12. Barnat-Hunek, D.; Grzegorczyk-Frańczak, M.; Klimek, B.; Pavlíková, M.; Pavlík, Z. Properties of multi-layer renders with fly ash and boiler slag admixtures for salt-laden masonry. *Constr. Build. Mater.* **2021**, *278*, 122366. [CrossRef]
13. Choo, H.; Won, J.; Burns, S.E. Thermal conductivity of dry fly ashes with various carbon and biomass contents. *Waste Manag.* **2021**, *135*, 122–129. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14. Bezborodov, V.A.; Belan, V.I.; Meshkov, P.I. *Dry Mixes in Modern Construction*, Novosibirsk, Russia, 1998; 94p.

15. Karapuzov, E.K.; Lutz, G.; Gerold, H. Dry Building Mixes. K.: "Technique". 2000; 226p.

16. Adin, M.S.; Kılıçkap, E. Strength of double-reinforced adhesive joints. *Mater. Test.* **2021**, *63*, 176–181. [CrossRef]

17. Gursel, A.; Mohamad, A.A.; Mohd Nazerib, M.F. Adhesion Mechanism and Failure Modes in Adhesively Bonded Joints. In *Proceedings of the International Conference on Material Science and Technology in Kızılcahamam/ANKARA(IMSTEC)*, Cappadocia, Turkey, 18–20 October 2019; pp. 108–114.

18. Guo, F.; Pei, J.; Zhang, J.; Xue, B.; Sun, G.; Li, R. Study on the adhesion property between asphalt binder and aggregate: A state-of-the-art review. *Constr. Build. Mater.* **2020**, *256*, 119474. [CrossRef]

19. Myshkin, N.; Kovalev, A. Adhesion and surface forces in polymer tribology—A review. *Friction* **2018**, *6*, 143–155. [CrossRef]

20. Chen, H.; Ling, M.; Hencz, L.; Yeu Ling, H.; Li, G.; Lin, Z.; Liu, G.; Zhang, S. Exploring Chemical, Mechanical, and Electrical Functionalities of Binders for Advanced Energy-Storage Devices. *Chem. Rev.* **2018**, *118*, 8936–8982. [CrossRef]

21. Solomatov, V.I. Ways of Activation of Fillers of Composite Building Materials. Solomatov, V.I., Dvorkin, L.I., Chudnovsky, S.M., Eds.; Izv. Universities: Construction and Architecture, 1987; Volume N1, 60–63.

22. Kulesza, M.; Debski, D.; Michalak, S. Effect of re-dispersible polymer powder on selected mechanical properties of thin-bed cementations mortars. *Cem. Wapno. Beton* **2020**, *25*, 168–177. [CrossRef]

23. Dvorkin, L.I.; Solomatov, V.I.; Vyrovoy, V.N.; Chudnovsky, S.M. *Cement Concrete with Mineral Fillers*; Budivelnik: Kyiv, Ukraine, 1991; 136p.

24. Jahani, Y.; Baena, M.; Barris, C.; Perera, R.; Torres, L. Influence of curing, post-curing and testing temperatures on mechanical properties of a structural adhesive. *Constr. Build. Mater.* **2022**, *324*, 126698. [CrossRef]

25. Petit, J.Y.; Comelli, B.; Perrin, R.; Wirquin, E. Effect of formulation parameter on adhesive properties of ANSI 118-15 and 118-1. *Int. Adhes.* **2016**, *66*, 73–80. [CrossRef]

26. Phoo-ngernkham, T.; Hanjitsuwan, S.; Li, L.Y.; Damrongwiriyanupap, N.; Chindaprasirt, P. Adhesion characterisation of Portland cement concrete and alkali-activated binders. *Adv. Cem. Res.* **2019**, *31*, 69–79. [CrossRef]

27. Rebinder, P.A. Physical and Chemical Mechanics of Disperse Systems. M.: Nauka. 1966; 400p.

28. Wang, C.P.; Chuang, Y.C.; Lin, J.Y. Evaluation on feasibility of fly ash cement mortar as adhesive of post-installed rebar. *IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng.* **2019**, *615*, 012021. [CrossRef]

29. Wieczorek, M. The effect of fly ash and granulated blast furnace slag on slip and tensile adhesion strength of tile adhesives mortars. *MATEC Web Conf.* **2020**, *322*, 01017. [CrossRef]

30. Dvorkin, L.; Dvorkin, O.; Ribakov, Y. *Mathematical Experiments Planning in Concrete Technology*; Nova Science Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 2012; 172p.

31. Stolz, C.M. Influence of the Interaction between the Rheological Parameters of Mortars and the Potential Area of Contact of Substrates in the Adhesion of Coating Mortars. Master’s Thesis, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2011.

32. Melo, A.C.; Silva, A.; Torres, S.; Delgado, J.; Azevado, A. Influences of the contact area in the adherence of mortar—Ceramic tiles interface. *Constr. Build. Mater.* **2020**, *243*, 118274. [CrossRef]

33. Solomatov, V.I. Polymer-Cement Concretes and Plastbetons. M.: Stroyizdat. 1967; 184p. Available online: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp86-00513r001652220011-1 (accessed on 26 April 2022).

34. Santos, D.P.; Azevedo, A.R.G.; Alexandre, J.; Monteiro, S.N.; Xavier, G.C.; Mendes, B.C.; Pedroti, L.G. Evaluation of the Properties of the Adhesive Mortar in the Fresh State with Addition of Glass Waste. In *Characterization of Minerals, Metals, and Materials 2017; The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series*; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017. [CrossRef]

35. Barnat-Hunek, D.; Siddique, R.; Łagód, G. Properties of hydrophobised lightweight mortars with expanded cork. *Constr. Build. Mater.* **2017**, *155*, 15–25. [CrossRef]