ArticlePolymers2024
Study on Bonding Characteristics of Polymer Grouted Concrete-Soil Interface.
Article in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The issue of interfacial shear damage has been a significant challenge in the field of geotechnical engineering, particularly in the context of diaphragm walls and surrounding soils. Polymer grouting is a more commonly used repair and reinforcement method but its application to interface repair and reinforcement in the field of geotechnical engineering is still relatively rare. Consequently, this paper presents a new polymer grouting material for use in grouting reinforcement at the interface between concrete and soils. The bonding characteristics and shear damage mode of the interface after grouting were investigated by the direct shear test, and the whole process of interface shear damage was investigated by digital image correlation (DIC) technology. Finally, the reinforcement mechanism was analyzed by microscopic analysis. The results demonstrate that the permeable polymer is capable of effectively filling the pores of soil particles and penetrating into the concrete-soil interface. Through a chemical reaction with water in the soil, the polymer cements the soil particles together, forming chemical adhesion at the interface and thereby achieving the desired reinforcement and repair effect. In the shear process, as the normal stress increased, the horizontal displacement and horizontal compressive strain at the distal end of the loading end decreased, while the maximum vertical displacement and maximum vertical strain of the cured soil also decreased. The results of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) demonstrated that the four groups of test polymers exhibited a reduction in soil porosity of 53.47%, 58.79%, 52.71%, and 54.12%, respectively. Additionally, the form of concrete-soil interfacial bonding was observed in the concrete-cohesive layer-cured soil mode. The findings of this study provide a foundation for further research on diaphragm wall repair and reinforcement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.