Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No.

11, November, 845–852

doi: 10.1680/macr.2010.62.11.845

The influence of concrete substrate preparation

on overlay bond strength
H. Beushausen

University of Cape Town

Repair and strengthening of concrete structures often include the application of a concrete overlay to the existing
substrate. Sufficient bond strength between substrate and overlay is a prerequisite for the durability and service-
ability of the repaired or strengthened structure. Factors considered most important for good bond strength between
substrate and overlay are cleanliness and texture of the substrate concrete surface, as well as overlay placement
and curing techniques. In terms of substrate moisture condition prior to overlay application, a saturated, surface-
dry substrate is generally considered best practice to achieve high bond strength. In some cases, bonding agents are
specified, which may consist of commercial products or site-made cement slurries. Despite the extensive application
of bonded concrete overlays, the usefulness of bonding agents is still the subject of much debate among researchers,
specifiers and practitioners. Conflicting opinions also still exist as to whether pre-wetting the substrate concrete
can be expected to have a positive influence on bond strength. The laboratory-based research described in this
paper identified that a saturated, surface-dry substrate concrete has generally no beneficial influence on overlay
bond strength. In many instances, the use of substrate surfaces prepared to what is commonly considered the
optimum moisture condition resulted in significantly lower bond strength, compared with non-preconditioned
substrates. This phenomenon was ascribed to better mechanical interlock, which exists when the fresh overlay
material can flow into the unsaturated cavities and pores of the substrate. Bonding agents were found to enhance
bond strength only when an overlay of low workability was applied, both commercial and self-made bonding agents
performing equally well. For overlays with workability characteristics of conventional concretes (slump values
between 70 and 110 mm), bonding agents were found to have no noticeable influence on bond strength. This relates
to the circumstance that overlays of sufficient fluidity can fill the pores and cavities of the substrate without the
help of a bonding agent.

sulting from poorly designed or executed repairs may

Introduction
The need for repair and protection of concrete struc-
tures has grown considerably in recent years. Estimates
indicate that in many countries the greater part of the
national construction budget is spent on the repair of
existing infrastructure. The main reason for premature
deterioration of concrete structures is corrosion of steel
reinforcement caused by chloride ingress or carbona-
tion, often in combination with low cover depth, and
associated cracking, spalling and delamination of the
concrete. While costs associated with repair of deterior-
ating concrete structures can be substantial, costs re-
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Cape Town, Ronde-
bosch, South Africa
(MACR 900121) Paper received 7 July 2009; last revised 24 Septem-
ber 2009; accepted 12 March 2010
be even higher. This highlights the need for proper
design guidelines for concrete repair projects, including
repair material selection and material application tech-
niques.
Many concrete repair projects involve the removal of
deteriorated concrete from the existing structure and
the subsequent application of a bonded overlay. Con-
crete overlays may consist of small repair patches,
often using commercially available premixed repair
mortar, or larger repair areas that can be made from
conventional concrete. Various factors can impact on
the durability and hence the success of concrete over-
lays, such as insufficient bond strength or low crack
resistance. The latter is linked largely to material prop-
erties such as shrinkage, relaxation and tensile strength
(Beushausen and Alexander, 2005). The quality of the
bond relates mainly to the quality of workmanship for
substrate preparation and overlay application. Delami-
845

www.concrete-research.com 1751-763X (Online) 0024-9831 (Print) # 2010 Thomas Telford Ltd

Downloaded by [ Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense] on [20/11/20]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Beushausen

nation and spalling of bonded concrete overlays is fre- sorption properties, overlay material characteristics and
quently observed in practice, resulting in premature bonding agent application.
repair failure, which raises concerns about the overlay
application procedures followed on site.
Numerous factors influencing the bond strength be- Experimental investigation
tween concrete substrate and overlay have been re-
ported in the literature. The most important of these are Specimen type and bond strength test method
considered to be the substrate condition (presence of Various bond strength test methods exist for compo-
microcracks, laitance layer and cleanliness), overlay site members consisting of concrete substrate and over-
compaction, and curing procedures (Silfwerbrand and lay. Principally, bond strength methods can be divided
Beushausen, 2005). On well-prepared concrete sub- into different categories according to the type of inter-
strates, bond strength was further found to be closely face stress introduced; that is, tension, torsion or shear.
related to overlay strength (Beushausen and Alexander, In real structures, the main stress situation at the inter-
2008). face between substrate concrete and repair material is
Many engineers specify the use of bonding agents to shear, resulting from differential shrinkage and thermal
improve bond strength between substrate and overlays. deformations, and sometimes from bending stresses in
The use of bonding agents has been intensively investi- suspended slabs and beams. For this project, bond
gated by many researchers, resulting in a broad range strength was therefore measured as the shear stress
of opinions. However, it is generally accepted that required for separating substrate and overlay using a
bonding agents cannot compensate for bad substrate modification of the fib test for direct interface shear
surface preparation and may act as a bond breaker ( fib, 1978) (Figure 1). The reliability and practicality
when used inappropriately (Pigeon and Saucier, 1992; of this test method has been discussed previously
Schrader, 1992; Silfwerbrand and Beushausen, 2005). (Beushausen and Alexander, 2008). The specimens
A parameter that commonly receives special atten- consisted of a 150 3 150 3 75 mm concrete substrate
tion is the moisture condition of the substrate concrete body which received overlays of 75 mm thickness. With
prior to overlay application. Free water on the substrate these specimen dimensions, common 150 mm cube
surface can increase the water/binder (w/b) ratio of the moulds could be used for the substrate specimen manu-
repair concrete, which may lower the strength of a thin facture.
layer of repair material near the interface, and block
open pores preventing mechanical interlocking. A dry, Substrate concrete properties
‘thirsty’ surface on the other hand is often considered The properties of the concrete substrate can have a
to excessively absorb water from the repair material, significant effect on the bond strength of concrete over-
resulting in a harsh mix that will have difficulties in lays. High-strength substrates with a low w/b ratio are
creating interlock with the substrate, and depriving the relatively impervious, which could inhibit mechanical
overlay from water necessary for full cement hydration. interlock between the substrate and repair mortar. Con-
Based on the above opinions, it is commonly specified
that the concrete substrate be wetted to saturated sur-
face dry conditions prior to application of the overlay.
Few researchers have actually explored the influence
of the substrate moisture condition on overlay bond
strength. Zhu (1992) investigated the effects of moisture
condition on bond strength and found that the effects
were so small that it was difficult to differentiate be-
tween them and the variations in the test results. Silf-
werbrand (2003) tested bond strength in relation to
different substrate surface moisture conditions and con-
cluded that the moisture condition does not play a major
role as long as free water on the substrate is prevented.
These research projects indicate that the common prac-
tice of pre-wetting the substrate concrete may have little
or no beneficial effect on overlay bond strength.
To investigate the aspect of substrate surface condi-
tion in more detail, an experimental investigation into
the influence of substrate moisture condition on overlay
bond strength was carried out. The results of a preli-
minary study were reported by Letele and Beushausen
(2008). This paper discusses the completed research Figure 1. Photograph of interface bond strength test
project and addresses the influences of substrate ab- apparatus for direct shear
846 Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 11

Downloaded by [ Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense] on [20/11/20]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 The influence of concrete substrate preparation on overlay bond strength

versely, ordinary or low-strength concretes with a high

Commercial repair mortars

CemRep
w/b ratio are relatively permeable owing to their porous

n.m.
n.m.
38.9
n.a.

n.a.
0
structure and this could encourage mechanical inter-
lock. However, substrates with excessive porosity could
absorb large amounts of water from the repair mortar,
which may result in a weak overlay interface zone as

PolyRep
the water necessary for cement hydration is depleted.

n.m.
n.m.
27.8
110
n.a.

n.a.
Owing to the above considerations, sorptivity and
porosity characteristics of the substrate were of special
interest for the investigation of the influence of sub-
strate moisture condition on overlay bond strength.

CSC 2

0
0
1050
164
164

840
180

n.m.
n.m.
0.55

55.0
75
Sorptivity is a measure of the capillary pore suction
and indicates the rate of moisture ingress into the con-
crete, while porosity is a measure of the volume of
accessible pores in the concrete. The combined analysis

CSC 1

0
0
1050
225
225

740
180

n.m.
n.m.
0.40

59.5
70
Overlays
of the two parameters indicates the amount and rate of
moisture ingress into the concrete. In substrate con-
cretes that are not pre-wetted prior to overlay applica-
tion, sorptivity and porosity characteristics can be

SFC 3

n.m.
n.m.
0.55

48.0
75
1150
295

720
180
33
0

0
expected to have a noteworthy influence on the absorp-

Concrete
tion of fluids from the overlay. The different sorptivity
and porosity characteristics of the substrates used, as
well as other material properties and the mix designs,

SFC 2

n.m.
n.m.
0.40

51.5
75
0

0
1150
405

625
180
45
are presented in Table 1. Substrate 1 had the lowest
Table 1. Mix proportions and selected properties for the substrate concrete and overlays (n.m. ¼ not measured)

absorption characteristics, followed by substrate 2 and

then substrate 3.
SFC 1

n.m.
n.m.
0.46

53.6
455

808

848
225
34
0

75
Substrate surface texture
Interface texture and roughness can appreciably influ-
ence bond strength between substrate and overlay. Var-
ious methods exist for the creation of a rough substrate
PCC

n.m.
n.m.
0.46

50.8
510

940

660
235
0
0

110
surface. Sandblasting or waterjetting are commonly con-
sidered the best methods of roughening a substrate sur-
face as they remove weak and delaminated concrete and

100
20
1110
235

845

190
0
0
0

n.m.
0.81

13.1
17.8
create a rough surface without introducing microcracks
3

PCC, Portland cement concrete; SFC, silica fume concrete; CSC, Corex slag concrete
(Silfwerbrand and Beushausen, 2005). In this research,
the surfaces of the concrete substrates were prepared by
sandblasting to an average roughness of 0.3 mm, meas-
Substrates

100
20
1060
275

880

180
0
0
0

n.m.
0.65

10.1
10.4
ured with the sand-area method (Kaufmann, 1971).
2

Sandblasting to this roughness was chosen because it

has in previous projects been identified as providing
excellent conditions for high interface bond strength
90
20
350

875
175
0
0
0
1025

48.4

10.8

(Beushausen and Alexander, 2005). The overall surface

0.5

8.1
1

texture (macro-roughness) of the interface was smooth

as the interface was cast against the surface of a
150 mm cube mould (prior to sandblasting).
Unit

mm/h0 5
:

Substrate surface moisture condition

kg/m3
kg/m3
kg/m3
kg/m3
kg/m3
kg/m3
kg/m3

MPa
mm

Prior to overlay or bonding agent application, the

–

substrate surface was pre-conditioned to different

moisture conditions, as outlined below.

(a) ‘Dry’ substrate (DS) surface. The dry substrate sur-

13 mm greywacke
19 mm greywacke

face condition was a result of exposure to environ-

28-day strength
Sand 0–2 mm

mental conditions within the laboratory (for a

CEM I 42.5

Silica fume
Corex slag

Properties

Sorptivity

period of at least 4 weeks) and is representative of

w/b ratio
Material

Porosity
Slump
Water

the substrate condition as it would be found in

practice without any further effort to pre-saturate.
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 11 847

Downloaded by [ Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense] on [20/11/20]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Beushausen
Substrate sorptivity characteristics stated in Table 1
refer to specimens preconditioned in this way.
(b) ‘Saturated surface dry’ (SSD) condition. Initially,
same as above. Prior to overlay application the
specimens were immersed in water for at least 24 h
and then left to dry in the laboratory. The overlay
was applied no later than 30 min after the water
sheen had disappeared from the surface. This was
meant to simulate what is commonly considered
the ideal moisture condition of the substrate.
Bonding agent application
As stated above, conflicting opinions on the useful-
ness of bonding agents exist in the literature. In this
research the combined effect of bonding agent applica-
tion and substrate surface moisture condition on inter-
face bond strength was investigated. Specimens were
prepared with a bonding agent and the test results com-
pared with those obtained with specimens for which
the overlay was cast directly onto the substrate surface,
using both substrate moisture conditions discussed
above. Three different bonding agents were used, in-
cluding laboratory-made cement slurry and two com-
mercial products, as outlined below.
(a) Cement slurry: the cement slurries were prepared
by mixing cement (CEM I) and water at the ratio
of 0.5 (w/c). This proportion was chosen because
the resulting consistency allowed the slurries to be
applied with a paintbrush.
(b) Bonding agent ‘commercial 1’: a two-component,
medium-viscosity epoxy bonding agent, mixed ac-
cording to the product data sheet.
(c) Bonding agent ‘commercial 2’: a cement-based
epoxy-modified three-component bonding agent
that can also serve as a protective anti-corrosion
coating for reinforcing steel, mixed according to
the product data sheet.
The commercial bonding agents were applied in the
thickness recommended by the manufacturer. It should
be noted that product specifications for both commer-
cial bonding agents recommend the substrate surface to
be wetted to a saturated surface-dry condition. Approxi-
mately 10–20 min after bonding agent application, the
overlays were cast. This was within the manufacturer’s
recommendations.
Overlay concrete: materials, application and curing
A total of eight different overlays were used. Six of
these were conventional concrete mixes with w/b ratios
ranging from 0.40 to 0.55. In concrete repair projects,
overlays with a high resistance against carbonation or
chloride ingress are commonly specified, often result-
ing in the use of cement extenders. To cover a range of
common overlay concretes for such cases, three differ-
ent binder types were used in this research; that is,
plain CEM I (Portland cement concrete, PCC), silica
fume (silica fume concrete, SFC) and ground granu-
848
Downloaded by [ Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense] on [20/11/20]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
lated Corex slag (Corex slag concrete, CSC), as shown
in Table 1. Different w/b ratios were chosen to provide
different overlay strengths. The measured 28-day
strength of all conventional overlays was, however,
similar with values ranging from 48.0 to 59.9 MPa. The
slump values of the conventional overlays ranged from
70 to 110 mm (Table 1), which indicated good overlay
workability and therefore the potential to interlock well
with the substrate.
In addition, two commercial repair mortars were
used, in the following termed ‘PolyRep’ and ‘CemRep’
(a) PolyRep: cementitious polymer-modified repair
mortar with silica fume, mixed at the maximum
specified water content of 4.0 litres per 25 kg bag
(b) CemRep: non-sag cement-based repair mortar,
mixed at the maximum specified water content of
4.0 litres per 25 kg bag.
Commercial repair materials with significantly different
slump values were chosen in order to test the effective-
ness of substrate surface preparation and bonding agent
application in relation to overlay workability.
Overlays were applied by hand and compacted with
a trowel. The composite specimens were covered with
plastic sheets for 7 days and subsequently exposed to
standard laboratory conditions until they were tested at
an overlay age of 28 days.
Overview of test parameters
The combination of test parameters resulted in a total
of 24 different specimen types. An overview of the test
parameters is provided in Table 2. As discussed
above, the test parameter included substrate properties
(sorptivity, strength), overlay properties (strength,
workability, binder type) and bonding agent applica-
tion.
Substrate 1 had the lowest w/b ratio and lowest
sorptivity of all substrates used and best represented
structural substrate properties experienced in real struc-
tures. Substrate 1 was therefore used as reference sub-
strate to compare the performance of the various
overlays with or without bonding agent application.
The influence of bonding agent application was investi-
gated using overlays PCC and SFC1 and the commer-
cial repair mortars, representing overlays of three
different workabilities. Substrates 2 and 3 were used in
addition to substrate 1 to identify the influence of
substrate properties on bond strength. For this aspect,
overlays SFC2 and CSC2 were used as their low w/b
ratio was associated with overlays of high quality.
Presentation and discussion of test results
General considerations. The test results are ex-
pressed as interface shear stress at failure. For each
specimen type, at least four samples were prepared
and tested to allow for the large scatter of results
characteristic of bond strength testing. The results
reported in the following sections represent the mean
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 11
 The influence of concrete substrate preparation on overlay bond strength

Table 2. Overview on the specimens and test parameters

Overlay Without bonding agent With bonding agent (on substrate 1)

Substr. 1 Substr. 2 Substr. 3 Cement slurry Commercial 1 Commercial 2

PolyRep x – – x x x
CemRep x – – x x x
PCC x – – x x x
SFC1 x – – x x x
SFC2 x x x – – –
SFC3 x – – – – –
CSC1 x – – – – –
CSC2 x x x – – –

interface strength from all samples after exclusion of
outlier values, based on statistical evaluation. For any
group of samples (i.e. for any specimen type) no
more than one outlier was found, so that at least
three samples remained for the calculation of a mean
value. Based on the current author’s experience, the
testing of interface bond strength generally results in
a large variability of test results, compared with, for
example, concrete compressive strength testing. In the
discussion of test results the scatter of individual
values is presented (see Figures 2–7). In order to
determine if the differences between mean bond
strength values of different specimens are statistically
significant, they were analysed based on the distribu-
tion of the test results. The two-sample T-test assum-
ing unequal variances was used in connection with a
95% confidence level to apply this concept.
Location of ‘bond failure’
The understanding of bond mechanisms between
concretes of different ages must include information on
the weakest link in the composite member, which is
commonly indicated by the location of failure in bond
strength tests. In the present study, specimens made
with substrate 1 predominantly failed in the overlay or
the bonding agent very close to the interface. Based on
identical observations made in previous studies, the
concept of the ‘overlay interface zone’ was introduced,
referring to the concept of a porous layer of overlay
concrete close to the interface to the substrate, having
similar characteristics as the interface transition zone
between cement paste and aggregates in the concrete
matrix; that is, relatively lower strength compared to
the surrounding cement paste (Beushausen and
Alexander, 2008). Absorption of water from the overlay
by the substrate is a possible reason for the creation of
such a porous overlay interface zone. The identification
of the bond fracture location was therefore considered
of particular importance for this project, which aimed
at identifying the influence of the substrate moisture
condition and hence the influence of water absorption
from the overlay.
Specimens made with substrate 1 showed overlay or
bonding agent failure, commonly with a very thin
(,2 mm) layer of overlay or bonding agent still adher-
ing to the substrate. This occurred irrespective of the
substrate moisture condition, indicating that water ab-
sorption from the overlay into the substrate had no
influence on the fracture location.
For specimens made with substrates 2 and 3, failure
generally occurred very close to the interface either in
the overlay or the substrate. The occurrence of substrate
failure was expected since for these specimens the
overlay was of higher strength that the substrate. There
was, however, no noteworthy difference in bond
strength between specimens made with the three differ-
ent substrates, indicating that the influence of substrate
strength could be neglected in the analysis.

5·0
Shear bond strength: MPa

4·0

3·0

2·0

1·0

0
PolyRep CemRep PCC SFC1 SFC2 SFC3 CSC1 CSC2

Figure 2. Test results (comparison of different overlays): shear bond strength obtained on specimens prepared with substrate 1
without bonding agent. The standard deviation of the test results is indicated (
1 standard deviation). Solid symbols: dry
substrate, open symbols: saturated surface dry substrate
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 11 849

Downloaded by [ Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense] on [20/11/20]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Beushausen
Influence of the substrate moisture condition on overlay
bond strength
Comparison of different overlays. The influence of
the substrate surface moisture condition in relation to
overlay type was investigated with specimens consisting
of substrate 1 and eight different overlays. The test
results, presented in Figure 2, suggest that pre-wetting
the substrate surface to what is commonly considered
the optimum moisture condition has no positive effect
on bond strength. In all but two cases, saturated surface-
dry substrate surfaces resulted in lower bond strength
values compared to dry substrate surfaces.
With the exception of specimens made with
polymer-modified repair mortar (PolyRep) and plain
Portland cement concrete (PCC) overlays, the differ-
ence in bond strength between specimens with or with-
out moisture-preconditioning of the substrate was
generally small and can be attributed to the general
scatter of test results. This indicates that for most speci-
mens the preconditioning of the substrate had no mea-
surable effect. For the specimens made with PolyRep
and PCC overlays, preconditioning of the substrate to
the ‘optimum’ moisture condition resulted in a statisti-
cally significant decrease in bond strength. It is inter-
esting to note that both Polyrep and PCC had a slump
of 110 mm in the fresh state, which was significantly
higher than that of the other overlays. The test results
therefore seem to suggest that pre-wetting the substrate
surface may lower the bond strength if overlays of high
workability are used. A possible reason for this is that
especially overlays of high fluidity rely on open pores
and cavities on the substrate surface to create mechani-
cal interlock. However, this observation needs to be
confirmed through further testing. It is also worth noti-
cing that even with specimens made with an overlay of
very low workability in the fresh state (cementitious
repair mortar CemRep, zero slump), the effect of pre-
conditioning the substrate surface was negligible.
5·0
Shear bond strength: MPa
4·0
3·0
2·0
1·0
0 above concern specimens for which the overlay was cast
Substrate 1 Substrate 2
Figure 3. Test results (comparison of different substrates):
shear bond strength obtained on specimens prepared with
substrates 1, 2 and 3 without bonding agent, using overlay
CSC2. The standard deviation of the test results is indicated
(
1 standard deviation). Solid symbols: dry substrate, open
symbols: saturated surface dry substrate
850
Downloaded by [ Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense] on [20/11/20]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
5·0
Shear bond strength: MPa
4·0
3·0
2·0
1·0
0
Substrate 1 Substrate 2 Substrate 3
Figure 4. Test results (comparison of different substrates):
shear bond strength obtained on specimens prepared with
substrates 1, 2 and 3 without bonding agent, using overlay
SFC2. The standard deviation of the test results is indicated
(
1 standard deviation). Solid symbols: dry substrate, open
symbols: saturated surface dry substrate
Comparison of different substrates. The influence
of substrate absorption characteristics on the effect of
preconditioning the substrate surface prior to overlay
application was investigated by comparing bond
strengths obtained with specimens made with sub-
strates 1, 2, 3 in combination with two different over-
lays (CSC2 and SFC2). The test results are presented
in Figures 3 and 4. As discussed above, using sub-
strate 1, no influence of substrate moisture condition
on overlay bond strength could be established for
overlays CSC2 and SFC2. In contrast, specimens
made with substrates 2 and 3, having higher absorp-
tion that substrate 1, indicated that pre-wetting the
substrate surface can have a detrimental effect on
overlay bond strength. For these cases, a saturated
surface dry substrate surface condition resulted in
lower bond strength, compared to a dry substrate sur-
face. For all specimens, except those made with sub-
strate 3 and overlay SFC2, the difference in shear
bond strength was statistically significant.
The above observation shows that especially on sub-
strates with relatively high sorptivity the absorption of
fluid cement paste from the overlay into the substrate is
an important mechanism for the creation of bond
strength. It appears that the adsorption of overlay mate-
rial into the substrate facilitates interlock between the
two composites. In contrast, moisture-filled pores in
the substrate concrete prevent the interlocking mechan-
ism from developing to its full potential.
Substrate moisture condition in connection with
bonding agent application. The results discussed
Substrate 3 directly onto the substrate concrete. The effect of the
substrate moisture condition on bond strength was also
investigated for specimens that received a bonding agent
prior to overlay application. Specimens were cast using
substrate 1 in connection with different bonding agents
and different overlays, as discussed above. The bond
strength results are presented in Figures 5–7. Similar to
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 11
 The influence of concrete substrate preparation on overlay bond strength

the specimens discussed above, it was observed that

Bonding agent: cement slurry, substrate 1
5·0 preconditioning the substrate to what is commonly be-
lieved to be the optimum moisture condition had no
Shear bond strength: MPa

4·0 positive influence on bond strength. From the 12 types

of specimens tested, all but one showed a decrease in
3·0 bond strength as a result of prewetting the substrate
concrete. In four cases, the difference in bond strength
2·0 was statistically significant.

1·0
0 To investigate the influence that various bonding
PolyRep CemRep
Figure 5. Test results (influence of bonding agents): shear
bond strength obtained on specimens prepared with substrate
1, cement slurry as bonding agent and different overlays. The
standard deviation of the test results is indicated (
1
standard deviation). Solid symbols: dry substrate, open
symbols: saturated surface dry substrate
5·0
Shear bond strength: MPa
Influence of bonding agents on bond strength
PCC SFC1 agents have on bond strength, only specimens pre-
pared with dry substrate surfaces are considered in
the following discussion as these generally showed
superior performance, as discussed above. Figure 8
shows the bond strengths obtained for different over-
lay materials in relation to various bonding agents
used.
With the exception of overlay 2 (commercial cemen-
titious repair mortar with zero slump), the use of bond-
ing agents had no significant influence on bond
strength, independent of the type of bonding agent

4·0
used. Within the limited amount of specimens tested in
this project, this leads to conclude that overlays with
3·0
sufficient fluidity create enough contact area between
substrate and overlay, which results in high bond
2·0
strength and makes the use of bonding agents unneces-
sary. Considering further that bonding agents may act
1·0
as bond breakers when applied or used incorrectly, for
example when the bonding agent is left to dry or set
0
PolyRep CemRep PCC SFC1 before the overlay is applied, the above findings sug-
gest not to use bonding agents when a concrete overlay
Figure 6. Test results (influence of bonding agents): shear with good workability properties is used.
bond strength obtained on specimens prepared with substrate By contrast to the above, bond strength of specimens
1, bonding agent ‘commercial 1’ and different overlays. The made with cementitious repair mortar (CemRep) showed
standard deviation of the test results is indicated (
1 a significant increase in bond strength as a result of the
standard deviation). Solid symbols: dry substrate, open various bonding agents used. Stiff repair mortars cannot
symbols: saturated surface dry substrate flow into open pores and the rough surface texture of the
substrate as easily and therefore produce a smaller con-
5·0 tact area and lower bond strength. For these types of
materials, bonding agents create a bridging effect to the
4·0 substrate and increase the efficient contact area, which
Shear strength: MPa

results in increased bond strength. It is also interesting

3·0
5·0
Shear bond strength: MPa

2·0 4·0 No BA
Cement slurry
1·0 3·0
Commercial 1

2·0 Commercial 2
0
PolyRep CemRep PCC SFC1
1·0

Figure 7. Test results (influence of bonding agents): shear

0
bond strength obtained on specimens prepared with substrate PolyRep CemRep PCC SFC1
1, bonding agent ‘commercial 2’ and different overlays. The
standard deviation of the test results is indicated (
1 Figure 8. Test results (influence of bonding agents): overview
standard deviation). Solid symbols: dry substrate, open of shear bond strengths obtained on specimens prepared with
symbols: saturated surface dry substrate substrate 1, different bonding agents and different overlays
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 11 851

Downloaded by [ Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense] on [20/11/20]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Beushausen
to observe that for the stiff repair mortar the use of a
comparatively cheap cement slurry was as effective as
commercial bonding agents.
The generally higher bond strength measured on
specimens with non-commercial overlays can be attrib-
uted to higher overlay strength.
Discussion of test results
For concrete repair projects, it is commonly specified
that the substrate concrete surface is wetted prior to the
application of the repair concrete or repair mortar.
However, a saturated, surface-dry concrete substrate,
usually considered the ideal case for overlay bonding
and often referred to as best practice, was found to
result either in similar or less bond strength compared
to a non-preconditioned substrate. This was observed
independently of whether or not a bonding agent was
used on the pre-conditioned substrate. The reason for
this possibly lies in blocking of open pores on the
substrate surface as a result of pre-wetting, which re-
sults in less interlock between substrate and bonding
agent or substrate and overlay. The positive effect of
absorption of overlay material into the substrate was
especially pronounced on substrates 2 and 3, which had
relatively high absorption characteristics. For specimens
made with these substrates, wetting of the substrate
concrete often resulted in significantly lower bond
strength compared to specimens that were prepared
with a dry substrate.
The use of bonding agents did not increase interface
bond strength when cementitious overlays of good
workability (slump 70–110 mm) were used, which was
observed both for lab-made cement slurry and commer-
cial bonding agents. In contrast, bonding agents were
found to significantly increase bond strength when re-
pair mortar of low workability (zero slump) was used.
The choice of whether a bonding agent be used or not
should therefore be based on the workability properties
of the overlay. For the specimens tested, lab-made ce-
ment slurries proved to be as effective as commercial
bonding agents.
The research described in this paper can be used to
(re)open discussions on the common practice of sub-
strate pre-conditioning. Further research is needed to
conclude on a wider range of substrate concrete and
repair material properties. A wider range of overlay
materials with different workability and strength prop-
erties should be investigated.
Conclusions
(a) Pre-wetting the substrate surface to a saturated,
surface dry condition has no beneficial influence
on the bond strength between substrate and over-
lay.
852
Downloaded by [ Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense] on [20/11/20]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
(b) The absorption of overlay or bonding agent materi-
al into the substrate is an important mechanism for
the provision of bond strength. A wet substrate
surface may prevent the interlock between sub-
strate and overlay and hence lower bond strength.
(c) The use of bonding agents facilitates the bond be-
tween overlay and substrates if the fresh overlay is
of low workability.
(d ) Within the scope of this research, cement slurries
were as effective as commercial bonding agents.
(e) For overlays with relatively high workability (in
this study this refers to overlays with a slump of
70–110 mm), bonding agent application has no
beneficial effect on bond strength and should be
avoided.
Acknowledgements
Mahlomola Letele and Darren Cloethe are acknowl-
edged for their contribution to the experimental work
discussed in this paper.
References
Beushausen H and Alexander MG (2005) Crack development in
bonded concrete overlays subjected to differential shrinkage: a
parameter study. In Concrete Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofit-
ting: Proceedings of the International Conference, ICCRRR-1,
Cape Town, South Africa (Alexander M. et al.)). Routledge, Abing-
don, UK, pp. 1053–1058.
Beushausen H and Alexander MG (2008) Bond strength development
between concretes of different ages. Magazine of Concrete Re-
search 60(1): 65–74.
fib (Fédération Internationale de la Précontrainte) (1978) Shear at the
interface of precast and in-situ concrete. fib, Lausanne, Technical
report.
Kaufmann N (1971) Das Sandflächenverfahren. Strassenbau Technik
24(3): 31–50.
Letele M and Beushausen H (2008) The influence of preconditioning
the concrete substrate surface on overlay bond strength. Proceed-
ings of the 12th International Conference on Structural Faults and
Repair, Edinburgh.
Pigeon M and Saucier F (1992) Durability of repaired concrete
structures. Proceedings of an International Symposium on Ad-
vances in Concrete Technology, Athens, pp. 741–773.
Schrader EK (1992) Mistakes, misconceptions, and controversial
issues concerning concrete and concrete repairs (3-part series).
Concrete International, 14(11): 54–59.
Silfwerbrand J (2003) Shear bond strength in repaired concrete struc-
tures. Materials and Structures 36(6): 419–424.
Silfwerbrand J and Beushausen H (2005) Bonded concrete overlays –
aspects concerning bond strength. In Concrete Repair, Rehabilita-
tion and Retrofitting: Proceedings of the International Conference,
ICCRRR-1, Cape Town, South Africa (Alexander M. et al.)). Rout-
ledge, Abingdon, UK, pp. 53–61.
Zhu Y (1992) Effect of Surface Moisture Condition on Bond Strength
Between New and Old Concrete. Department of Structural Mech-
anics and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm,
Bulletin No. 159.
Discussion contributions on this paper should reach the editor by
1 May 2011
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 11