Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53

https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-019-1353-x (0123456789().,-volV)
(0123456789().,-volV)

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Evaluation of roughcast on the adhesion mechanisms

of mortars on ceramic substrates
Euzébio Bernabé Zanelato . Jonas Alexandre . Afonso Rangel Garcez de Azevedo .
Markssuel Teixeira Marvila

Received: 2 February 2019 / Accepted: 11 April 2019 / Published online: 17 April 2019
 RILEM 2019

Abstract Buildings frequently suffer from the low
durability of external coating layers that use mortar.
Low durability can be caused by a low efficiency of the
adhesion between the coating mortar and the substrate,
which may be ceramic, concrete, natural stone or other
material. The application of the roughcast is often used
empirically to increase adhesion, however, there are
few studies to support this practice. The objective of
this study was to analyze the adhesion mechanisms
between the substrate and the mortar layer, evaluating
tensile bond strength implications beyond the
microstructure in the transition zone. Two conven-
tional mortar coatings were used, applied on two
ceramic substrates fired at 700 C and 950 C, besides
the application or not of the intermediate adhesion
system (roughcast). Both mortars and ceramic blocks
were characterized according to the main testing
standards. The tensile bond strength was performed
for all the combinations proposed. The heat of
hydration of samples of the roughcast was also
analyzed. The results indicated that the adoption of
the intermediary adhesion mechanisms between the
ceramic substrate and the mortar, referred to as
‘‘Roughcast’’, significantly increased the tensile bond
E. B. Zanelato (&)  J. Alexandre 
A. R. G. de Azevedo  M. T. Marvila
UENF - State University of the Northern Rio de Janeiro,
LECIV – Civil Engineering Laboratory, Av. Alberto
Lamego, 2000, Campos Dos Goytacazes 28013-602,
Brazil
e-mail: ebzanelato@gmail.com
strength and altered the type of rupture in the test. The
composition of the mortar as well as the firing
temperature of the ceramic substrate also influenced
the strength conditions.
Keywords Adhesion  Mortar  Ceramic block 
Roughcast
1 Introduction
The mortar coatings are among the most commonly
used in walls, mainly in Brazil, which are used both as
internal coatings as for facades [1]. The use of a layer
of mortar on the concrete structure is also common in
many countries, especially in larger building and
subject to harsh weather conditions, since they provide
the protection for structures and masonry [2].
Even with its widespread use and extensive use
throughout history, mortar coatings still have several
pathological manifestations, in which cracking and
detachment are noted due to lack of adhesion between
the constituent layers of the coating system of a
building, contributing to decreasing the useful life of
structures [3].
Adherence is a highly complex system dependent
on several factors, including: the curing conditions to
which the coating is exposed; the coating application
technique; the characteristics and properties of the
53 Page 2 of 13
porous material that serves as a base and the properties
of the mortar and its constituent materials [1].
Adherence mechanisms are driven by microadhe-
sion and macroadhesion and further research is on
these mechanisms is needed due to the wide variety of
substrate and mortar combinations imposes on the
system. Microadhesion occurs through the absorption
of the cement paste through the pores of the substrate,
which, upon hydration, promotes mechanical anchor-
ing of the mortar to the substrate [4]. The effectiveness
of microadhesion is directly related to the retention
capacity of the mortar and the water absorption of the
substrate [5–7]. The macroadhesion occurs when the
mortar fills the protuberances and indentations on the
surface of a substrate. The effectiveness of macroad-
hesion is directly related to the rheological properties
of the mortar [8]; and the roughness of the substrate
[9].
The objective of the application of the roughcast is
to control the amount of water transported from the
mortar to the substrate by applying a highly fluid
mortar layer, intermediary to the substrate and the
external. The execution of this layer increases the
surface area considerably. In addition, by being
applied with high fluidity, the roughcast is easily
absorbed by the substrate, promoting both microad-
hesion and macroadhesion, maximizing the final
efficiency of the system [10]. However, further studies
related to the performance of roughcast layer under
different situations are still needed, due to high
pathological incidence worldwide resulting lack of
adhesion, especially in outer layer of mortar related to
deficiencies in the transition systems [11, 12].
Furthermore, the rehydration capacity of the
cement particles in the roughcast is still not fully
understood. The roughcast is applied with high
fluidity; however, even with a high amount of water
content, it exhibits accelerated drying which prevents
complete hydration. Subsequently, the non-hydrated
cement particles present rehydration potential when
the mortar- coating is applied on the roughcast.
2 Roughcast
Roughcast is commonly in Brazilian constructions in
combination with mortar coatings [1], [12, 13], but is
also found in projects in countries such as France [14],
China [15] and Ireland [16].
Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53
A roughcast layer consists of a mortar mixture
dashed or thrown on a substrate surface. The mortars
composition most often recommended in the literature
is 1:3 (cement:sand, in volume) due to the optimiza-
tion of the rheological properties of the composition,
where the roughcast will tend to have low viscosity
due to an excess of water, facilitating its application
process.
The technique for applying the roughcast mortar
must provide a rough surface to the substrate, with a
thickness of 3–5 mm. Even with the high water
content, the roughcast exhibits accelerated drying
resulting in deficiency of hydration of the cement.
Accelerated drying occurs due to two factors, loss of
water to the substrate by absorption and water loss to
the environment which is potentiated by the low
thickness and high surface area of roughcast. Figure 1
shows the roughcast applied to the surface of on a
ceramic block.
Roughcast is a type of base preparation intended to
improve adhesion conditions. Roughcast can be used
both on ceramic substrates, widely used in countries
with a tradition of using masonry sealing, as well on
concrete substrates, used worldwide in external struc-
tures [10].
Roughcast is adopted because it tends to increase
adhesion due to the increase in surface area. It also
creates a complex system strongly influenced by other
external factors, such as weather conditions, degree of
exposure, among others. In order for mortar to exert
adequate extension of adhesion to the irregularities of
the base, it must present rheological properties com-
patible with the high fluidity required by this subsys-
tem [9].
Fig. 1 Roughcast applied on ceramic block
Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53
Mortars with low workability will have difficulty
filling irregularities in substrates, promoting voids
between the materials, increasing the appearance of
micro-cracks and generating pathological manifesta-
tions. Furthermore, the presence of voids exponen-
tially decreases the adhesive strength between the
materials [17].
Water absorption regularization has a special
function because of the different possible combina-
tions between: higher or lower water absorption of the
substrate with higher or lower water retention of the
mortar. The water retention capacity of mortars is
influenced mainly by the volume of fines in the
mixture; therefore, higher levels of hydrated lime
increases the water retention capacity of the mortar
[18]. Moreover, an increase in the firing temperature
of the ceramic blocks increases the density and
consequently decreases the pore size of the ceramic
blocks. The decrease in pore diameter promotes an
increase in capillary absorption, since pores with a
diameter between 0.1 and 1 lm are primarily respon-
sible for capillary absorption [19].
In a combination of a high absorption substrate and
a low retention coating mortar, excess water released
from the mortar generates a hydration deficiency in the
surface interface between the materials [20]. In this
combination, a roughcast layer would function as the
primary source of water for absorption by the
substrate. The loss of water from the coating mortar
would be reduced, allowing adequate hydration.
In a situation with a low absorption substrate and a
higher retention coating mortar, reduced released of
water from the mortar to the substrate impedes
microadhesion of the mortar to the pores of the
substrate [21]. In this situation, a roughcast layer
would facilitate the supply of water to the substrate,
since roughcast mixture have very low water retention,
thereby improving microadhesion. While, at the same
time, the coating mortar ensures adequate adhesion to
the roughcast by macroadhesion to the irregularities in
the roughcast.
In the remaining combinations, an equilibrium in
the properties of the mortar and the substrate occurs,
so that absorption does not significantly impair
adherence.
In addition to maximizing microadhesion and
macroadhesion, an intermediate roughcast layer also
enhances bonding with the coating mortar by its
rehydration. During rehydration, hydration reactions
Page 3 of 13 53
occurs in the roughcast that will form new composites
at the same time in which the coating mortar hydrates.
The formation of new composites in the transition
zone between the mortar and the roughcast strengthens
the bond between the two layers.
Rehydration of the roughcast can be analyzed by
measuring the heat release of samples collected from
the roughcast at different stages during the coating
execution process, since the hydration reactions of the
cement is exothermic. During the hydration process,
verification of heat release through a calorimeter
provides important data on the rate at which the
hydration reactions are occurring [22]. The higher the
heat released inside the calorimeter, the lower the
hydration of the roughcast in the coating.
The objective of this study is to evaluate the
performance of a highly fluid mortar transition layer,
known as roughcast, for its tensile bond strength with
different substrate types (high absorption and low
absorption) and coating mortar types (varying the
amount of hydrated lime added). These combinations
are evaluated with and without application of the
intermediate roughcast layer, in order to determine the
influence on adhesion as well as the degree of
hydration in each combination.
3 Materials and methods
3.1 Mortar
The study was carried out using a mortar containing
Portland CP II-E composite cement (NBR 16697
[23]), sand and water, with the addition of hydrated
lime CH-III (NBR 7175 [24]) to improve workability
and water retention. The CP II-E composite is a
Brazilian low-heat hydration cement composed of
56–94% of clinker and gypsum, 6–34% blast furnace
slag and 0–10% limestone [23]. The sand used was
extracted from a river and sieved to a maximum
diameter of 2 mm, to improve packing and provide a
smoother mortar surface. The CH-III is a Brazilian
hydrated lime which permits a higher percentage of
carbon dioxide (B 13%) [24].
The materials used in the preparation of the mortar
were characterized according to grain size distribution
using energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy,
Blaine Fineness (Blaine SS) and density.
53 Page 4 of 13
Two mixtures (Cement:Hydrated Lime:Sand) were
used to make the mortars, 1:1:6 (A1) and 1:2:9 (A2), in
volume. These were selected on the basis of several
studies [9, 25–27], and have been found to have
suitable properties for use in mortar coatings.
The variation in the amount of hydrated lime
between the two mixtures was justified by the
variation in water retention capacity that the incorpo-
ration of a finer material promotes in the mortar.
The amount of water added to the mortar was
sufficient to reach a spread of 260 ± 5 mm on the flow
table, thereby setting the consistency for the mortars
evaluated and providing adequate workability for the
application of the coating. A spread of 260 ± 5 mm is
a value indicated by the Brazilian standard (NBR
13276 [28]).
In order to characterize the two mortar composi-
tions used and correlate them with the tensile bond
strength results, the following tests were performed:
squeeze-flow, water retention, incorporated air con-
tent, bulk density of fresh mortar, flexural tensile
strength and compressive strength.
The determination of water retention properties of
mortars is essential for analyzing compatibility with
the ceramic block substrate [29]. The incorporated air
content influences the workability of the mortar [30],
and the squeeze-flow test enables the rheological
characterization of the mortar [31]. The bulk density
of the mortar in the fresh state influences the weight of
the layer before and after hardening [32]. Determina-
tion of mechanical strength is essential for the analysis
of tensile bond strength, as not all rupture occurs at the
interface between the layers, but can also occur due to
the lack of mechanical strength of the mortar [33].
3.2 Mortar characterization
• Water retention
The water retention capacity of the mortar was
determined according to the method described in
NBR 13277 [34] (equivalent to ASTM C1506-17
[35]). The test was performed 15 min after mixing of
the mortar. The mortar was submitted to a vacuum of
51 mm of mercury (6.8 9 103 Pa) for 15 min to
evaluate water loss. The water retention capacity was
calculated using Eq. (1):
Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53
ðW0  W1 Þ  100
Water retention ð%Þ ¼ ð1Þ
W0
where W0 represents the initial mass before the
vacuum; W1 is the loss of water mass after suction.
• Bulk density
The bulk density of the mortar in its fresh state was
evaluated according to the method described in NBR
13278 [36]. A 400 cm3 steel vessel was filled with the
mortar following a series of steps to remove the voids
between the mortar and the wall of the vessel. The bulk
density was calculated
  using Eq. (2):
kg mc  mv
Bulk density ¼  1000 ð2Þ
m3 vr
where mc is the vessel mass with mortar (g); mv is the
empty vessel mass (g); vr is the vessel volume (cm3).
• Entrained air content
The air content of the mortars was evaluated according
to the method described in NBR NM47 [37] (equiv-
alent to ASTM C231 [38]). Pressure procedures were
used to determine the entrained air content in this
method. The value of the incorporated air content was
obtained by the manometer of the apparatus.
• Compressive and flexural strength
The mechanical strength of the mortar was determined
according to the method described in NBR 13279 [39]
(equivalent to ASTM C348 [40] for flexural strength
and ASTM C349 [41] for compressive strength). The
tests were performed at 28 days according to the
standard. For the flexural test, six 4 9 4 9 16 cm
prismatic molds were used. After the flexural test, the
compression test was performed with each of the
halves of the prismatic molds, the load was applied in a
4 9 4 cm area. All tests were performed in a universal
testing machine (UTM) with a loading rate of 1.2 mm/
min. The flexural and compressive strength were
calculated using Eqs. (3) and (4) respectively:
1:5  Ft  L
Flexural strength ðMPaÞ ¼ ð3Þ
403
Ft
Compressive strength ðMPaÞ ¼ ð4Þ
402
Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53
where Ft is the applied load (N); L is the span length
between the points (mm).
3.3 The substrate
The ceramic block substrates were made by extrusion
at a specialized local factory. The clay used to make
the blocks has been researched extensively in studies
where the predominant presence of kaolinite was
indicated [20]. The ceramic block dimensions were
9 9 19 9 19 cm.
The ceramic blocks were fired at two different
temperatures: 700 C (B700) and 950 C (B950).
Ceramic blocks fired at around 700 C are widely used
in masonry applications because the transformation of
kaolinite into metakaolinite at this temperature is
already complete, providing adequate mechanical
strength to the ceramic piece [42]. However, an
additional gradual increase in the firing temperature
continues to promote reactions in the material, with
excellent performance at around 950 C [43].
The different firing temperature for the blocks
tested (700 C and 950 C), produces different levels
of capillary water absorption, enabling comparison of
the influence of the materials in the test. [20].
Given that capillary absorption is directly related to
the capacity of the ceramic block to suction water from
the mortar and promote microadhesion, it was neces-
sary to evaluate the capillary absorption capacity of
the ceramic blocks. Sorptivity tests were performed to
evaluate how much water the ceramic block absorbs
over time through capillary suction [44]. Sorptivity
was calculated using Eq. (5) which is a simplification
of the modified Darcy equation for water flow in
unsaturated materials:
i of implementation. Half of each masonry wall was
Sorptivity ðmm min1=2 Þ ¼ pffi ð5Þ
t coated with mortar 1:1:6 and the other half with the
where i is the accumulated volume of water absorbed
per unit area of inflow surface (mm3/mm2); t is elapsed
time (min).
The test preparation, where the 19 9 19 cm face of
the ceramic block was immersed 3 mm in water was
performed according to ASTM C67 [45].
Absorption data were collected at three specific
periods: W5 (during the first 5 min of absorption),
W15 (during the first 15 min of absorption) and W10-
150 (between 10 and 150 min of absorption). W5 and
Page 5 of 13 53
W15 measurements provide important data on initial
absorption, at the moment of contact between the
mortar and the ceramic, when most of the water is
absorbed. The W10–150 measurement provides
important data on the rate of water absorption at later
times. Even though the rate of water transported from
the mortar to the pores of the substrate is higher
initially, over a longer period of time, a significant
volume of water is transported, although at a slower
rate.
3.4 Tensile bond strength
The tensile bond strength of the coating mortar was
evaluated according to the method described in NBR
13528 [46]. In order to perform the tensile bond
strength tests, masonry walls were built from the
ceramic blocks according to the minimum dimensions
necessary for the execution of the tests (1 m high 9
1.2 m wide), as shown in Fig. 2a. The nomenclatures
used to identify the proposed combinations are shown
in Fig. 2b.
Twenty-eight days after wall construction, when
the joint mortar already exhibited high strength, the
surface of the masonry was brushed and moistened.
After moistening, a roughcast layer based on a 1:3
composition of cement:sand, was applied according to
the proposed combinations. The application of the
roughcast was done manually by throwing the material
with a metal trowel from a designated distance. The
execution of the roughcast was completed after
covering the entire area delimited for its application.
A single layer coating system was used in this study
where the mortar will have both the function of
regularizing the surface and finishing. This type of
coating has become conventional due to the low cost
mortar 1:2:9, in order to enable comparison of the
results.
For each of the test combinations, twelve circular
holes with 5 cm diameter were drilled to delimit the
pull-off test. The holes were spaced 5 cm apart. A
5 cm diameter metal plate was glued to the coating
mortar in each of the circular holes as show in Fig. 3a.
The resistance in tensile bond strength was obtained
with a hydraulic traction dynamometer with a 1500 kg
capacity as show in Fig. 3b.
53 Page 6 of 13 Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53

Fig. 2 Walls constructed a example of wall built; b proposed combinations

Fig. 3 Tensile bond

strength: a layout of the test
specimen. b Traction
dynamometer

In addition to the tensile strength, the rupture type
was evaluated. Only the rupture types shown in Fig. 4
were considered in the tensile strength results.
3.5 Heat of hydration
Given the importance of the heat of hydration of the
mixtures and the role of the roughcast in adhesion, a
test was conducted to determine the volume of
hydration of the roughcast at different stages. The
heat of hydration was measured with an isothermal
calorimeter (TAM air, thermometric), where the test
sample is deposited inside an isolated chamber and
water is added through a syringe. The heat of
hydration was monitored over 48 h. The tests were

Fig. 4 Types of rupture in

tensile bond strength test
Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53 Page 7 of 13 53

performed according to ASTM C1702 [47]. Internal Table 1 Density and blaine fineness
mixing procedures were used. Material Density (g/cm3) Blaine fineness (cm2/g)
To serve as a reference, the heat of hydration of a
sample of the roughcast mixture cement:sand ratio 1:3 CPII – E 2.98 4219
was measured. (Ref). Samples were also collected CH III 2.37 9831
from the roughcast after curing on each of the Sand 2.60 –
substrates (B700 and B950). Additional samples were
collected 28 days after the execution of each of the test
combinations (A1 B700, A1 B950, A2 B700 and A2
B950). a lower mass of hydrated lime was added to compen-
The collection of samples of the roughcast after sate the volume of cement.
application of the external mortar coating was per-
formed by removing the mortar coating layer from the 4.2 Mortar characterization
roughcast after the pullout test. With the data from
each sample, it was possible to measure the degree of The results of the consistency test yielded a water/
hydration of the roughcast at each stage of coating binder ratio of 1.125 for the 1:1:6 mixture. The 1:2:9
execution. In addition, it was possible to compare the mortar mixture had a water/binder ratio of 1.325. The
variation in hydration among the samples. higher water/binder ratio obtained for the 1:2:9
mixture is explained by the higher amount of fine
materials and a larger surface area due to the higher
4 Results and discussion proportion of hydrated lime, increasing the water
absorption capability.
4.1 Materials characterization The results obtained in the rheological tests are
shown in Fig. 6.
The physical characteristics of the mortar components In Fig. 6, the 1:2:9 mixture shows a tendency for
are shown in Fig. 5 and in Table 1. greater displacement under loads similar to those
The granulometric curve and the Blaine Fineness applied to the 1:1:6 mixture. The higher displacement
values indicate that the hydrated lime (CH III) has a can be explained by the higher proportion of hydrated
higher proportion of fines than the cement (CP II-E). lime which increases plasticity and is added to
Therefore, increasing the amount of hydrated lime in increase workability of the material.
the mortar tends to increase its water retention The results obtained for the other properties are
capacity. With respect to density measurements, the shown in Table 2.
cement has a higher density than the hydrated lime, so

100
90
80
Percent Passing (%)

70
60 CP II-E
50
40 CH III
30
Sand
20
10
0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Size (µm)

Fig. 5 Particle size distribution for mortar components

53 Page 8 of 13 Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53

Fig. 6 Rheological 1200

characterization of the
mortars by squeeze flow test 1000

800

Load (N)
600 1:1:6

400 1:2:9

200

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Displacement (mm)

Table 2 Mortar properties in the fresh and hardened state

Composition Water retention Bulk density of fresh mortar Entrained air Flexural strength Compressive strength
(%) (kg/m3) content (%) (MPa) (MPa)

1:1:6 91 2054 1.8 2.54 3.78

1:2:9 98 1989 2.6 2.19 3.29

As expected, the results indicate a higher water
retention capacity for the 1:2:9 composition, mainly
due to the higher presence of hydrated lime fines.
Water retention capacity is an important property for
coating mortars, since it is related to the hydration
reactions that promote the hardening of the material.
Higher water retention values indicate a longer time in
the plastic state, in which it is still possible to handle
the material. Another important factor in water
retention is its influence on the transport of water
from the mortar to the substrate, responsible for
microadhesion. The higher the water retention capac-
ity of the mixture, the greater the difficulty of the
substrate to absorb water, which can interfere with
bonding.
The bulk density of the 1:2:9 mixture in the fresh
state was slightly less than the 1:1:6 mixture, making
the coating mortar lighter and easier to apply.
In the fresh state, a higher air content in the 1:2:9
composition contributes to the results obtained in the
squeeze flow rheological.
Regarding the mechanical strength tests, the 1:1:6
mixture exhibited higher strength than 1:2:9 mixture,
due to the higher volume of cement and lower air
content. The properties in the hardened state are
determine the potential for cracking of the surface of
the mortar coating, one of the primary pathological
manifestation responsible for displacements [33].
4.3 Substrate characterization
The results obtained in the sorptivity test are shown in
Table 3.
Sorptivity results indicated an increase in capillary
suction as the firing temperature of the substrate
increased from 700 to 950 C for samples without
roughcast. This result is explained by the decrease in
the pore diameter and consequent increase of the
capillary suction caused by the higher firing temper-
ature, as also reported by other studies [20, 31, 32].
The use of the substrates to determine the influence of
capillary suction on tensile bond strength, was
confirmed by the significant difference in water
absorption for the two different substrates.
The results of sorptivity also confirmed the influ-
ence of the presence of the roughcast on capillary
absorption. For both firing temperatures the absorption
was similar when the roughcast is applied. The
roughcast also potentiates the initial absorption,
presenting higher values at W5 and W15. However,
the presence of the roughcast does not significantly
Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53 Page 9 of 13 53

Table 3 Sorptivity test Substrate Sorptivity (mm min1/2)

results
Without roughcast With roughcast
W5 W15 W10–150 W5 W15 W10–150

B700 0.618 0.413 0.189 0.897 0.691 0.192

B950 0.719 0.534 0.211 0.878 0.621 0.225

influence subsequent absorption as can be seen in the
results at W10–150.
Application of the roughcast layer considerably
increased the sorptivity of the ceramic blocks sub-
strate, especially for B700, which exhibited lower
values. The application of the roughcast layer yielded
better performance than the increase in the firing
temperature.
4.4 Heat of hydration
The results of the heat of hydration tests for the
roughcast reference material and after roughcast
application on the ceramic blocks are shown in
Fig. 7. The heat of hydration results, before and after
mortar coating application, are shown in Fig. 8. The
lower the heat released during the test inside the
calorimeter, the higher the volume of hydrated cement
during curing in the coating.
Figure 7 shows heat of hydration over time for the
roughcast reference sample and for the samples
applied to the ceramic blocks. The results show a
significant reduction in the heat of hydration of the
roughcast after its application to the ceramic block
substrates. However, the portion of un-hydrated
roughcast is still significant and beneficial for
adhesion, since the roughcast can rehydrate after the
mortar coating is applied. Rehydration of the rough-
cast occurs in conjunction with the hydration of the
coating mortar, thereby increasing adhesion between
the layers.
It is also possible to see greater rehydration of the
roughcast applied to the B950 ceramic substrate. This
result is explained by the higher capillary absorption
of the ceramic block substrate which accelerates
drying of the roughcast, impeding hydration. This
increases the amount of un-hydrated cement in the
roughcast, increasing its rehydration potential.
Figure 8 shows the greater rehydration capacity of
the roughcast when applied to the B950 substrate for
each of the proposed combinations. It is important to
note that despite increasing the potential for rehydra-
tion, the B950 substrate continues to have greater
potential for rehydration after application of the
coating mortar. Therefore, the application of the
mortar coating does not take full advantage of the
potential rehydration from the substrate.
Regarding the coating mortar mixtures, the appli-
cation of mortar A2 also promoted an increase in
rehydration capacity of the roughcast in the calorime-
ter. The application of the A2 mortar with higher water
retention, due to the higher proportion of lime, makes

Fig. 7 Heat of hydration 1.6

results for the reference
sample and post application 1.4
of roughcast on the ceramic
Heat Flow (mW/g)

1.2 Reference
blocks
1
B950
0.8
0.6
B700
0.4
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (h)
53 Page 10 of 13 Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53

Fig. 8 Heat of hydration 0.7

results for the samples
before and after the 0.6
application of the coating
mortar B950
0.5

Heat Flow (mW/g)

B700
0.4
A1 B950
0.3 A2 B950
0.2 A1 B700

0.1 A2 B700

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (h)

it difficult for the roughcast to rehydrate when the 100

coating mortar is applied. 90

Tyoe of Rupture (%)

80
The influence of the firing temperature was more 70
significant in the hydration of the roughcast than the 60 Rupture on
Interface
type of coating mortar applied. The A1 B950 combi- 50
40
nation presented greater rehydration potential than the 30 Rupture on
A2 B700 combination. Therefore, a decrease in the 20 Mortar
10
substrate firing temperature makes hydration more 0
difficult than the increase in the addition of lime in the A1 A2 A1 A2 A1 A2 A1 A2
mortar. B700 B950 B700 B950
Without Roughcast Roughcast
4.5 Tensile bond strength
Fig. 10 Rupture type on tensile bond strength
The results of the tensile bond strength tests are shown
in Fig. 9. The rupture types identified in the tensile identified in Fig. 10 was at the mortar/substrate
bond strength tests are shown in Fig. 10. For the interface. For the coatings with roughcast, the inter-
coatings without roughcast, the interface rupture face rupture identified in Fig. 10 was at the mortar/
roughcast interface. There were no other types of
rupture that were considered valid in the test.
0.60 The incompatibility of properties which impairs
Without adhesion between the ceramic block substrate and
Tensile Bond Strenght (MPa)

0.50 Roughcast mortar was verified by the type of rupture. There was a
With Roughcast
predominant rupture at the interface between materials
0.40
for the test combination where the mortar with the
0.30 highest water retention capacity is applied to a
substrate with low absorption (A2 B700). This com-
0.20 bination impeded the transport of water from the
mortar to the substrate resulting in low microadhesion.
0.10 Likewise, in the combination with a high absorp-
tion substrate and mortar with lower water retention
0.00
A1-B700 A1-B950 A2-B700 A2-B950
capacity (A1-B950), the predominant rupture type
occurred at the interface between materials. This is
Fig. 9 Result of the tensile bond strength tests explained by the excessive transport of water between
Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53
materials and consequently mortar hydration problems
at this interface.
A predominant interface rupture also occurred in
the A1-B700 combination. The compatibility between
the properties in this combination, increasing adhesion
between the layers, was not enough to overcome the
lower mechanical strength of the A1 mortar. However,
the good adhesion strength result in this case reflects
the strong adhesion between the materials and exhib-
ited the greatest mechanical strength for the results
without roughcast. The equilibrium obtained by the
type of rupture also reflects the good performance of
this combination. The potential in both adhesion and
mechanical strength were achieved in the combina-
tion. Even if the adhesion between the materials is
increased, there is no potential for increase in the
tensile strength, since the mechanical strength of the
mortar already exhibits ruptures.
It is worth noting that the use of a ceramic block
substrate with a higher absorption capacity promoted
an improvement in the tensile bond strength of the A2
mortar. The predominant rupture type occurred in the
mortar in the A2-B950 combination. The A2-B950
combination was the only one to present predominant
rupture in the mortar without the roughcast applica-
tion. The low mechanical strength of the A2 mortar did
not allow a further increase in tensile bond strength.
The function of water absorption regularization and
the increase in the surface area provided by the
roughcast was effective. Since none of the combina-
tions with roughcast had predominant rupture type at
the interface. In all combinations with roughcast, the
rupture occurs due to lack of mechanical strength of
the mortar.
The predominant rupture type for the test combi-
nations with compatible properties between the sub-
strate and the mortar were entirely in the mortar.
The test combinations without compatible proper-
ties between the substrate and the mortar, presented
ruptures at the interface, but with predominance of
rupture in the mortar.
The results for samples with the roughcast layer,
reinforced the improvement of strength at the interface
between the substrate and the mortar, since there was a
proportional increase in mortar rupture when com-
pared to the results of the coating without roughcast.
Page 11 of 13 53
The test results indicated a declining tendency in
tensile bond strength when comparing the A2 mortar
to the A1 mortar. The decrease is explained by the
higher mechanical strength obtained by the mortar
with a higher proportion of cement. The type of
rupture predominantly in the mortar reinforces this
explanation.
Regarding the ceramic block substrates, a higher
firing temperature tends to improve adhesion when
using. The greater capillary suction capacity of the
blocks fired at 950 C improved in adhesion. The only
exception was in the test combination using A1 mortar
without roughcast, since as mentioned above, a high
absorption substrate combined with a low retention
capacity mortar exhibits lower tensile bond strength.
The application of the roughcast led to a significant
improvement in the tensile bond strength for all
combinations. The influence of the roughcast was
potentiated mainly when applied in the test combina-
tions with the A1 mortar. The predominant rupture
type in all combinations with roughcast occurred in the
mortar. Therefore, adhesion did not become the
weakest link in the tensile bond strength test. In case
of with A1 mortar, where the mechanical strength is
higher, there is a greater growth potential of the tensile
bond strength, since in the A2 mortar, the mechanical
resistance is lower.
The homogeneity of the results obtained when the
roughcast was applied is also notable. The broad
dispersion in adhesion test results is a problem cited by
several authors, however, both the variation in the
adhesion results among the combinations and the
dispersion of each individual combination decreased
with the application of the roughcast.
The A1 B950 combination with roughcast pre-
sented the best performance among all combinations.
The incompatibility between the properties, where the
excess water transport from the A1 mortar, with low
water retention capacity, to the B950 substrate, with
high water absorption, was resolved by the application
of the roughcast layer. The tensile bond strength of this
combination was only limited by the mechanical
strength of the mortar which was highest in the A1
mortar. However, the significant number of interface
ruptures exhibited by the A1-950 combination,
reflected a possible exhaustion of the strength at the
interface with the roughcast.
53 Page 12 of 13
5 Conclusions
This study supports the following conclusions:
• Higher firing temperatures lead to an increase in
capillary suction of the substrate. A higher level of
hydrated lime in the mortar improves rheology and
increases water retention, however, it also
decreases mechanical strength.
• The mortar composition and the firing temperature
of the ceramic substrate influences the hydration of
the roughcast. The higher the water retention
capability of the mortar and the lower the capillary
absorption capacity of the substrate the lower the
hydration of the roughcast. The firing temperature
of the ceramic block influences the hydration of the
roughcast more than the composition of the mortar.
• The roughcast significantly influences the tensile
bond strength mechanism, improving the water
absorption of the substrate and the mortar. This
improvement is evident when analyzing the pre-
dominant rupture type of for the mortar, making
the interface between the materials stronger than
the mechanical strength of the coating mortar.
• The mortar composition also has a significant
influence, since its mechanical strength and water
retention capacity are determinant in the tensile
bond strength results and in the type of rupture. The
mortar with 1:1:6 composition showed better
results than the 1:2:9 composition, with higher
water retention and better workability.
• Regarding the ceramic substrate, the block with the
higher firing temperature, 950 C, showed the
highest capacity for capillary suction. This higher
absorption capacity confirmed in the sorptivity
test, is directly related to the tensile bond strength
results. Higher sorptivity resulted in increased
tensile bond strength adhesion.
Acknowledgements Funding was provided by Conselho
Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientı́fico e Tecnológico (Grant
No. 2200).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no
conflict of interest in this study.
Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53
References
1. Botas S, Veiga R, Velosa A (2017) Mater Struct 50:211.
https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-017-1086-7
2. Malheiro R, Meira G, Lima M, Perazzo N (2011) Influence
of mortar rendering on chloride penetration into concrete
structures. Cement Concr Compos 33(2):233–239
3. Nogueira R, Pinto APF, Gomes A (2018) Design and
behavior of traditional lime-based plasters and renders. Rev
Crit Apprais Strengths Weaknesses Cem Concr Compos
89:192–204
4. Recena FAP (2008) Knowing mortar. Porto Alegre: EDI-
PUCRS, p 192 (in Portuguese)
5. Bertrand L, Maximilien S, Guyonnet R (2004) Wedge
splitting test: a test to measure the polysaccharide influence
on adhesion of mortar on its substrate. In: Proceedings of the
11th international congress on polymers in concrete. Berlin,
pp 569–576
6. Jenni A, Holzer L, Zurbriggen R, Herwegh M (2005)
Influence of polymers on microstructure and adhesive
strength of cementitious tile adhesive mortars. Cem Concr
Res 35:35–50
7. Govin A, Bartholin M, Biasotti B, Giudici M, Langella V,
Grosseau P (2016) Modification of water retention and
rheological properties of fresh cement-based mortars by
guar gum derivatives. Constr Build Mater 122:772–780
8. Cardoso FA, John VM, Pileggi RG, Banfill PFG (2014)
Characterization of rendering mortars by squeeze-flow and
rotational rheometry. Cem Concr Res 57:79–87
9. Stolz CM, Masuero AB (2015) Analysis of main parameters
affecting substrate/mortar contact area through tridimen-
sional laser scanner. J Colloid Interface Sci 455:16–23
10. Becker FA, Andrade JJDO (2017) The influence of concrete
substrate in adhesive strength of different types of slurry
mortar. Matéria (Rio J.), Rio de Janeiro 22(4):e-11906. (In
Portuguese)
11. Ramos NMM, Simões ML, Delgado JMPQ, de Freitas VP
(2012) Reliability of the pull-off test in situ evaluation of
adhesion strength. Constr Build Mater 31:86–93
12. Kanning RC, Portella KF, Bragança MOGP, Bonato MM,
dos Santos JCM (2014) Banana leaves ashes as pozzolan for
concrete and mortar of Portland cement. Constr Build Mater
54:460–465
13. Condeixa Karina, Haddad Assed, Boer Dieter (2014) Life
cycle impact assessment of masonry system as inner walls: a
case study in Brazil. Constr Build Mater 70:141–147
14. Abadie M, Limam K, Allard F (2001) Indoor particle pol-
lution: effect of wall textures on particle deposition. Build
Environ 36(7):821–827
15. Ji Y, Duanmu L, Li X (2017) Building air leakage analysis
for individual apartments in North China. Build Environ
122:105–115
16. Walker R, Pavı́a S (2018) Thermal and moisture monitoring
of an internally insulated historic brick wall. Build Environ
133:178–186
17. Grandes FA, Sakano VK, Rego ACA, Cardoso FA, Pileggi
RG (2018) Squeeze flow coupled with dynamic pressure
mapping for the rheological evaluation of cement-based
mortars. Cem Concr Compos 92:18–35
Materials and Structures (2019) 52:53
18. Silva BA, Ferreira Pinto AP, Gomes A (2014) Influence of
natural hydraulic lime content on the properties of aerial
lime-based mortars. Constr Build Mater 72:208–218
19. Carasek H, Japiassú P, Cascudo O, Velosa A (2014) Bond
between 19th Century lime mortars and glazed ceramic
tiles. Constr Build Mater 59:85–98
20. Azevedo ARG, França BR, Alexandre J, Marvila MT,
Zanelato EB, Xavier GC (2018) Influence of sintering
temperature of a ceramic substrate in mortar adhesion for
civil construction. J Build Eng 19:342–348
21. Hendrickx R, Roels S, Van Balen K (2010) Measuring the
water capacity and transfer properties of fresh mortar. Cem
Concr Res 40(12):1650–1655
22. Hemalatha MS, Santhanam M (2018) Characterizing sup-
plementary cementing materials in blended mortars. Constr
Build Mater 191:440–459
23. ABNT NBR 16697 (2018) Portland cement—requirements
24. ABNT NBR 7175 (2003) Hydrated lime for mortars—
requirements
25. Barros SVA, Marciano JEA, Ferreira HC, Menezes RR, de
Araújo Neves G (2016) Addition of quartzite residues on
mortars: analysis of the alkali aggregate reaction and the
mechanical behavior. Constr Build Mater 118:344–351
26. de Azevedo ARG, Alexandre J, Zanelato EB, Marvila MT
(2017) Influence of incorporation of glass waste on the
rheological properties of adhesive mortar. Constr Build
Mater 148:359–368
27. Casali JM et al (2018) Caracterização e influência do teor do
resı́duo de areia de fundição fenólica em argamassas de
revestimento. Ambient Constr [online] 18(1):261–279
28. ABNT NBR 13276 (2016) Mortars applied on walls and
ceilings—determination of the consistence index
29. Farinha C, de Brito J, Veiga R et al (2016) Mater Struct
49:1605. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-015-0598-2
30. Arizzi A, Banfill PFG (2019) Mater Struct 52:8. https://doi.
org/10.1617/s11527-019-1310-8
31. Cardoso FA, Fujii AL, Pileggi RG, Chaouche M (2015)
Parallel-plate rotational rheometry of cement paste: influ-
ence of the squeeze velocity during gap positioning. Cem
Concr Res 75:66–74
32. Mantellato S, Palacios M, Flatt RJ (2019) Mater Struct 52:5.
https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-018-1304-y
Page 13 of 13 53
33. Ramesh M, Azenha M, Lourenço PB (2019) Mater Struct
52:13. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-019-1319-z
34. ABNT NBR 13277 (2005) Mortars applied on walls and
ceilings—determination of the water retentivity
35. ASTM C1506 (2017) Standard test method for water
retention of hydraulic cement-based mortars and plasters
36. ABNT NBR 13278 (2005) Mortars applied on walls and
ceilings—determination of the specific gravity and the air
entrained content in the fresh stage
37. ABNT NBR NM 47 (2002) Concrete—determination of air
content of freshly mixed concrete—pressure method
38. ASTM C231 (2017) Standard test method for air content of
freshly mixed concrete by the pressure method
39. ABNT NBR 13279 (2005) Mortars applied on walls and
ceilings—determination of the flexural and the compressive
strength in the hardened stage
40. ASTM C348 (2018) Standard test method for flexural
strength of hydraulic-cement mortars
41. ASTM C349 (2018) Standard test method for compressive
strength of hydraulic-cement mortars (using portions of
prisms broken in flexure)
42. Bidoung JC, Pliya P, Meukam P et al (2016) Mater Struct
49:4991. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-016-0838-0
43. Pardo F, Jordan MM, Montero MA (2018) Ceramic beha-
viour of clays in Central Chile. Appl Clay Sci 157:158–164
44. Ioannou I, Charalambous C, Hall C (2017) Mater Struct
50:208. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-017-1079-6
45. ASTM C67 (2018) Standard test methods for sampling and
testing brick and structural clay tile
46. ABNT NBR 13528 (2010) Render made of inorganic
mortars applied on walls—determination of bond tensile
bond strength
47. ASTM C1702 (2017) Standard test method for measure-
ment of heat of hydration of hydraulic cementitious mate-
rials using isothermal conduction calorimetry
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.