Next Article in Journal
An Overview of the Italian Roadmap for the Implementation of Circular Economy in the Energy Transition of Buildings
Previous Article in Journal
Hyperparameter Optimization of Neural Networks Using Grid Search for Predicting HVAC Heating Coil Performance
Previous Article in Special Issue
3D Concrete Printing Review: Equipment, Materials, Mix Design, and Properties
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Interfacial Shrinkage Properties and Mechanism Analysis of Light-Conductive Resin–Cement-Based Materials

1
School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, China
2
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471000, China
3
School of Civil Engineering, Lanzhou University of Technology, Lanzhou 730050, China
4
School of Engineering and Construction, Nanchang University, Nanchang 330031, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Buildings 2025, 15(15), 2754; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15152754
Submission received: 27 June 2025 / Revised: 24 July 2025 / Accepted: 31 July 2025 / Published: 5 August 2025

Abstract

To address the issue of interfacial shrinkage deformation in optical resin–cement-based composites, this study examined the effects of casting methods and coupling agent treatments on the interfacial deformation behavior and underlying mechanisms at the resin–cement interface. A self-developed interfacial shrinkage testing apparatus, combined with ABAQUS numerical simulations, was employed to facilitate this analysis. The results revealed that the interfacial shrinkage strain followed a characteristic distribution—higher at both ends and lower in the middle region—as the temperature increased. The experimental data showed a strong agreement with the simulation outcomes. A comparative analysis indicated that the pre-cast cement method reduced the interfacial shrinkage strain by 16% compared to the pre-cast resin method. Furthermore, treatment with a coupling agent resulted in a 31% reduction in the strain, while combining a serrated surface modification with a coupling agent treatment achieved a maximum reduction of 43.5%. Microscopic characterization confirmed that the synergy between the coupling agent and surface roughening significantly enhanced interfacial bonding by filling microcracks, improving adhesion, and increasing mechanical interlocking. This synergistic effect effectively suppressed the relative slippage caused by asynchronous shrinkage between dissimilar materials, thereby mitigating the interfacial cracking issue in optical resin–cement-based composites. These findings provide theoretical insights for optimizing the interface design in organic–inorganic composite systems.

1. Introduction

Driven by societal progress, global research on cement and cement-based materials has increasingly focused on the development and application of ecological and advanced cementitious systems. By emphasizing energy conservation, emission reduction, and environmental sustainability, the industry is transitioning into a sustainable development trajectory [1]. Translucent cement-based materials have emerged as advanced composites distinguished by their exceptional light-transmitting capabilities. By fully utilizing sunlight and other light sources, they significantly reduce building energy consumption while enhancing indoor light distribution [2,3,4]. In 2003, Áron Löszonczi from Hungary pioneered translucent concrete by incorporating optical fibers into concrete mixtures [5]. This innovative material enables light transmission through the concrete matrix, thereby reducing the reliance on artificial lighting and lowering the energy demand [6,7,8]. However, the complexity of achieving uniform optical fiber distribution within the concrete matrix has posed significant technical challenges and increased production costs, limiting its broader application. In 2008, a breakthrough occurred when the Italian Cement Group introduced an alternative approach by using resin as the light-transmitting medium to prepare translucent concrete [9,10,11]. The shift toward resin-based translucent systems offers a promising pathway for enhancing the practical applicability of translucent concrete while retaining its energy-saving and eco-friendly benefits.
Wang [12,13,14] developed a resin-based translucent concrete with an enhanced light-transmitting performance and conducted comprehensive research on its mechanical properties, optical transmission characteristics, bonding behavior, and micro-mechanistic insights. This finding provided valuable contributions to understanding the fundamental properties of this material system. Guo [15] explored the use of TiO/epoxy resin composite materials in preparing cement mortar, demonstrating that increasing the TiO2 content significantly improved the tensile strength. The SEM results showed that, after the addition of epoxy resin to the cement mortar, both the interfacial transition zone (ITZ) and the bond interface zone (BIZ) were denser, and the flexural toughness and bond strength both improved. This study highlights the potential of incorporating nanomaterials into cement-based systems for enhancing the mechanical performance. Shen [16] investigated the integration of methacrylic resin into concrete (RTCM) and evaluated its light transmittance and thermal conductivity using advanced measurement techniques, including the light-power method and flat-plate testing. These results confirmed that RTCM exhibits superior optical and thermal properties, making it a promising material for energy-efficient applications. Li [17] introduced a novel salt-resistant and super-absorbent resin (SRSAP) and evaluated its impact on concrete performance. They found that an appropriate addition of SRSAP could effectively mitigate late-stage shrinkage and cracking while improving the workability and durability. However, excessive incorporation might negatively influence strength development, suggesting the need for optimized dosage control. Zhou [18] applied polyurethane-acrylic resin through ultraviolet polymerization to the surface of slag concrete as an on-site coating. The compressive strength of the test blocks increased by 1.67 times, and the tensile strength increased by 1.8 times. The coating effectively inhibited the evaporation of moisture in the samples and provided a moist internal curing environment, thereby effectively alleviating the concrete shrinkage. Gong [19] reduced the drying shrinkage rate of the epoxy resin and enhanced its permeability by blending it with foam concrete. SEM images revealed that a micro-grid structure was formed within the foam concrete, with an increase in the number of internal pores, a more uniform distribution, and a reduction in the average pore diameter. Currently, research on translucent concrete primarily focuses on its preparation process [20], optical properties [21], mechanical behavior, and long-term durability [22,23,24]. Despite these advancements, challenges remain during the curing of resin-based and translucent-cement-based materials. Interface shrinkage deformation is likely to occur, leading to a reduction in the interfacial bonding strength and an increased susceptibility to stress-induced deformation, cracking, and failure at the interface between the cement matrix and the resin [25,26,27]. Addressing these issues is critical for advancing the practical application of translucent concrete systems.
To address the issue of a weak bonding force between the cement matrix and the resin, Xu [28] developed translucent concrete using basic magnesium sulfate cement. This approach significantly reduced the porosity at the interface between the cement matrix and the resin. The interfacial pull-out strength at 28 days increased by 59.2%. The SEM results showed that there were almost no cracks between the substrate and the resin, and their widths were generally quite narrow compared to that of translucent concrete prepared with ordinary cement, demonstrating a substantial improvement in the interfacial performance. Coupling agents, composed of inorganic-philic and organic-philic groups, are widely recognized for their ability to enhance the bonding strength between organic and inorganic materials [29,30,31]. Scholars [32,33,34] have explored the modification of epoxy resins with silane coupling agents to improve the interfacial bonding strength in composite systems. Peng [35] and Xiao [36] focused on the modification of asphalt concrete aggregates and the interaction forces at the interface. Through Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), the interfacial interactions between the coupling agent and the aggregates were investigated, confirming the role of the coupling agent in enhancing the interface bonding strength. Guo [37] investigated the influence of fire-resistant temperatures of different epoxy resin adhesives on the bonding performance at the resin–concrete interface. The results showed that, at 200 °C, the cracking load, bonding strength, and fracture properties of the interface were all superior to those observed at room temperature. Zhang [38] synthesized an organic-modified bentonite-based polymer composite material by combining water-based epoxy resin with a silane coupling agent. A microscopic analysis showed that the pores of the epoxy resin in the polymer matrix were filled, forming a dense structure. Hydrogen bonds formed between each material and water. Mo [39] synthesized a composite material using a silane coupling agent and water-based epoxy resin for a magnesium–aluminum–silicate-based geopolymer. The chemical shrinkage, self-shrinkage, and drying shrinkage of this material were reduced by 46.4%, 131.2%, and 25.2%, respectively. The addition of organic modifiers made the microstructure more dense and enabled it to resist shrinkage during the hardening and continuous reaction process of the geopolymer. The aforementioned research primarily focused on strategies to enhance the interfacial bonding strength in resin-based and translucent-cement-based materials. However, due to variations in material properties and environmental factors such as temperature and pressure, the interfacial bonding zone remains a critical weak link prone to shrinkage deformation and cracking [40,41]. Currently, there is limited research on test methods for the interfacial shrinkage strain of the cement matrix–transparent resin system. Systematic studies on the laws of interfacial shrinkage deformation at different temperatures are particularly scarce in the existing literature.
In this study, a custom-developed monitoring system was utilized to investigate the interfacial shrinkage deformation of organic–inorganic composite systems. This system enables the real-time detection of micro-scale strain fluctuations through integrated strain gauges. To complement the experimental observations, finite element simulations were conducted to model the shrinkage behavior of the composites. A detailed comparison between the experimental and simulated results provided valuable insights into the mechanisms governing interfacial shrinkage in resin-based light-transmitting cementitious materials. Moreover, environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM) was employed to perform a microstructural analysis, thereby elucidating the effects of casting strategies and coupling agent modifications on the shrinkage behavior at the interface between the cementitious matrix and transparent resin. Based on these findings, a systematic strategy for interfacial compatibility enhancement was proposed, offering practical guidance for improving the overall performance of composite materials.

2. Materials and Research Methods

2.1. Materials

Cement: The “Yangfang” brand P•O 42.5 ordinary silicate cement used is produced by Yadean Cement Co., Ltd. in Jiangxi Province, China. Aggregate: Ganjiang River sand with a fineness modulus of 2.5, a particle size ranging from 0.30 mm to 1.18 mm, and a reasonable gradation was selected. The water reducer used was the high-performance polycarboxylate-based water reducer produced by Nanchang Anrui Building Materials (the water reduction rate was ≥25%, and the solid content was 20%).
The cement matrix was prepared by mixing cement, aggregate, high-performance water reducer, and water. The mass ratio was as follows: 500.0 g of cement, 500.0 g of sand, 2.0 g of high-performance water reducer, and 175.0 g of water.
Transparent resin: The resin used is a type of polyesters with unsaturated groups produced by Jiangsu Nantong Mingkang Composite Materials Co., Ltd. (a colorless transparent liquid). The glass transition temperature (T g) typically ranges from 70 °C to 90 °C. The technical parameters are shown in Table 1.
Coupling agent: The coupling agent used is silane coupling agent A-151, which is vinyl triethoxy silane produced by Huai’an Huarun Chemical Co., Ltd., China. Its chemical structural formula is CH2=CHSi(OC2H5)3, with a molecular weight of 191, a content of ≥98%, a relative density of 0.904–0.918 g/cm3, a refractive index of 1.396–1.400, and a boiling point of 160 °C. It functions as both a coupling agent and a cross-linking agent.

2.2. Sample Preparation

The experimental procedures for preparing the organic–inorganic composite specimens involved three distinct methods: casting the matrix first, casting the resin first, and performing the coupling agent treatment. The fabrication process was conducted using a steel mold with dimensions of 40 mm × 40 mm × 160 mm.
The experimental preparation of the organic–inorganic composite specimens involved three distinct approaches: pre-casting the cementitious matrix, pre-casting the resin phase, and applying the coupling agent surface modification. Specimen fabrication was performed using a steel mold with standardized dimensions of 40 mm × 40 mm × 160 mm.

2.2.1. Pre-Casting of the Cementitious Matrix

First, the cement mortar was poured into the mold and allowed to cure at room temperature for 24 h. After demolding, the surface of the cement mortar was mechanically roughened and polished to enhance interfacial bonding. The surface preparation involved a three-step sanding process: initial pre-treatment using 300-mesh sandpaper, followed by intermediate polishing with 600-mesh sandpaper, and finally, finishing with 1200-mesh sandpaper. The specimen was then repositioned in the mold, and the transparent resin was cast onto the prepared surface. After an additional 24 h curing period at room temperature, the mold was removed again. Finally, the interfacial region underwent post-curing polishing to improve the bonding strength, followed by shrinkage testing.

2.2.2. Pre-Casting of the Resin

The resin was first cast into a mold of the same dimensions (40 mm × 40 mm × 160 mm). After curing at room temperature for 24 h, the mold was removed. The surface of the resin was roughened to enhance interfacial adhesion, and the specimen was then placed back into the mold for cement mortar casting. Following another 24 h room-temperature curing period, the mold was removed again. Finally, after interfacial surface roughening, the test was conducted.

2.2.3. Coupling Agent Treatment

Using the matrix-first casting method, a 40 mm × 40 mm × 160 mm steel mold was employed. The cement mortar was cast initially, and after curing at room temperature for 24 h, the mold was removed. The surface of the cement mortar was mechanically roughened to enhance its interfacial properties. Subsequently, the matrix was immersed in a silane coupling agent solution for 10 s, then air-dried at room temperature for 24 h and repositioned in the mold. Resin was poured over the treated matrix, and after curing for 12 h, the mold was removed. The specimen was then subjected to an additional 12 h curing period prior to testing.
Preparation of the A-151 silane coupling agent solution: A total of 1 g of the coupling agent was added to 20 g of a mixed solution of anhydrous ethanol and deionized water at a mass ratio of 9:1. Acetic acid was then added to adjust the pH to 4.5 (pH meter model by Lifen Technology, measurement range: 0.1–14 pH, resolution: 0.1 pH, accuracy: ±0.1 pH, working temperature: 0–50 °C). The mixture was stirred thoroughly for 10–15 min, and then an additional 100 g of the same ethanol–water mixture was added and the solution was mixed evenly to obtain a 1 wt% silane coupling agent solution.

2.2.4. Coupling Agent–Sawtooth Interface Collaborative Treatment

The serrated interface was fabricated by initially casting a silicone rubber/curing agent mixture (100:5 ratio) into a customized steel mold to form a serrated imprint template, which was cured at room temperature for 24 h. The cured template was then positioned at the base of a detachable steel mold (40 mm × 40 mm × 160 mm). Cement mortar was poured into the mold and cured for an additional 24 h to form the substrate. Subsequently, 45° uniformly spaced grooves were scribed on the serrated interface using a carving tool, followed by spray-coating with a silane coupling agent A-151 solution. Finally, transparent resin was cast into the mold and demolded after 8 h for testing.

2.2.5. Strain Monitoring

To continuously monitor the interface contraction strain, a DH3815 type static strain gauge produced by Jiangsu Donghua Testing Technology Co., Ltd. of China was adopted. In this study, high-temperature foil-type resistance strain gauges produced by China Star Oriental Co., Ltd. (model BA120-3AA and BA120-5AA) were adopted. These strain gauges feature inherent temperature compensation and a fully sealed structure with a glass-fiber-reinforced substrate. Within the operating temperature range of −30 °C to +200 °C, they exhibit a thermal drift of less than 0.15 με/°C. At 60 °C, the zero-drift error remains below 5 με—approximately one-twentieth of that observed in conventional strain gauges. Strain variations were tracked over a period of 10 consecutive days to capture the evolution of interfacial deformation behavior during the curing and hardening processes.

2.3. Test Equipment and Methods

In this paper, an online monitoring device and method were employed to measure the interfacial shrinkage of organic–inorganic composite materials. The strain measurement apparatus is shown in Figure 1.
The device is composed of five main components: the test specimen, the drying oven, the acquisition box, the controller, and the computer. The deformation strain of the specimen is transmitted to the acquisition box through a strain gauge, then passed to the controller, and finally input into the computer via a connecting cable between the controller and the computer. The strain data are ultimately output by the testing software on the computer, and the required values are obtained after correction. This apparatus incorporates a full-bridge temperature compensation technique. Within the Wheatstone bridge configuration, active strain gauges and temperature-compensating dummy gauges are strategically positioned. When measuring mortar specimens, the dummy gauges are bonded to separate compensation blocks fabricated from identical material with matching thermal properties. Strain gauges are symmetrically attached to the test specimen. A schematic diagram of the symmetric layout is shown in Figure 2.
In this experiment, all the specimens used the same strain gauge attachment method, and the actual photo is provided for illustrative purposes only. During testing, a representative specimen was selected from three samples for each experimental method. The testing cycle lasted for 10 days. Since the shrinkage process of cement mortar is relatively slow, to accelerate the experiment, the specimens were placed in a drying oven at 30 °C for 7 days after demolding and strain gauge installation. Strain data were recorded every hour. On the eighth day, the temperature was raised to 40 °C, on the ninth day to 50 °C, and on the tenth day to 60 °C. In total, 14 days were required from the beginning of casting to the completion of testing.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Comparison of Matrix-First and Resin-First Casting Methods

Figure 3a,b show schematic diagrams of the force analysis for the matrix-first and resin-first casting methods, respectively. When analyzing diagram (a), f1(t) represents the force acting on the cement mortar, while f2(t) denotes the force acting on the transparent resin. The cement mortar underwent shrinkage during curing at room temperature. Once the transparent resin was poured, it began to shrink significantly. At this point, the force f1(t) on the cement mortar in the interfacial bonding zone was tensile, while the force f2(t) on the transparent resin in the bonding zone was compressive.
F1(t) = −f2(t) = −f(t),
When analyzing diagram (b), the transparent resin was poured first and cured for 24 h, followed by the casting of cement mortar. By this time, the transparent resin had already solidified, and most of its shrinkage had been completed. Upon pouring the cement mortar, the force f3(t) on the cement mortar in the interfacial bonding zone was tensile, while the force f4(t) on the transparent resin in the bonding zone was compressive.
F3(t) = −f4(t) = −f′(t),
Figure 4a,b present the strain evolution curves at the interface-monitoring points for the matrix-first and resin-first casting methods, respectively. By comparing the two methods, it is evident that the strain evolution patterns at measuring points 1, 2, 3, 4 (cement matrix region), and 5 (transparent resin region) exhibited notable similarities and a strong correlation with temperature variations [42]. In the early stage of the experiment, the strain curves of the cement matrix points (1–4) displayed a sharp initial decline, followed by gradual stabilization. When the temperature increased abruptly, the strains at all the monitoring points rose significantly before dropping again. The behavior at measuring point 5 was markedly different from that in the matrix region: the strain remained near zero in the initial stage, then increased rapidly (positive strain) as the temperature rose, and although it slightly decreased afterward, it still exhibited a sharp increase with subsequent temperature elevations. Judging from the final shrinkage strain values, the matrix-first casting method showed a better shrinkage suppression effect. The final shrinkage strain values of measuring points 1, 2, and 3 under the two methods were −927 μ ε and −1080 μ ε , −781 μ ε and −890 μ ε , and −590 μ ε and −707 μ ε , respectively. The corresponding shrinkage strain values were reduced by 14%, 12%, and 16%, respectively. Measuring point 4 (in the matrix area) had the fastest shrinkage rate and the largest final strain value, while the values of measuring points 1, 2, and 3 decreased successively. The shrinkage rate and the final strain in the middle area of the interface were the lowest.
From this analysis, it can be inferred that, possibly due to the large performance differences between the organic resin and inorganic cement matrix, the deformation of the transparent resin during curing intensified the shrinkage strain at point 1. In contrast, in the middle region of the interface, mutual constraint between the materials effectively delayed shrinkage [43,44]. The superior shrinkage suppression observed in the matrix-first method may be attributed to its facilitation of a denser resin–matrix interfacial structure, thereby enhancing the cooperative deformation behavior of the materials [45].

3.2. Results of Coupling Agent Treatment

Figure 5a,b illustrate schematic diagrams of the interfacial force analysis for the group without the coupling agent treatment and the group with the coupling agent treatment, respectively. Based on the force analysis, the experimental results, and the analysis of the interface bonding situation in the previous section, the specimens prepared using the matrix-first method without the coupling agent treatment were designated as the control group. The interface bonding zone in the group treated with the coupling agent appeared darker in color, indicating that the interface became denser after treatment. At this stage, the force f5(t) acting on the cement mortar and transparent resin in the interfacial bonding zone was tensile, while the force f6(t) was compressive.
F5(t) = −f6(t) = −f′(t),
Figure 6a,b show the strain evolution curves at the interface-monitoring points for the control group and the coupling agent treatment group, respectively. As shown in Figure 6, the development of the strain curves at measuring points 1–4 (cement matrix region) in both groups followed a similar pattern: a sharp decline in the strain rate during the initial stage, followed by a gradual stabilization phase. When the temperature changed abruptly, an instantaneous strain spike occurred, characterized by a rapid increase followed by a quick decline. Measuring point 5 (transparent resin part) shrunk slowly at the beginning of the experiment and showed an expansion trend as the temperature rose. The final shrinkage strain values of measuring points 1, 2, and 3 in the control group and the coupling agent treatment group were −741 μ ε and −596 μ ε , −631 μ ε and −480 μ ε , and −522 μ ε and −359 μ ε , respectively. Compared to the control group, the final shrinkage strain values at measuring points 1, 2, and 3 in the coupling agent treatment group were reduced by 19%, 23%, and 31%, respectively. When the temperature remained constant, measuring point 4 (cement matrix part) had the fastest development rate of shrinkage strain and the largest shrinkage strain value. Measuring points 1, 2, and 3 decreased successively with a change in the interface position. The shrinkage behavior at the interface was closely related to both the temperature and the spatial position.
From the above analysis, it can be observed that, for the resin–cement matrix interface treated with a coupling agent, due to the pronounced material property differences between the resin and the cement matrix, the shrinkage rate and strain in the central region of the interface remained higher than those at the edges. Nevertheless, the shrinkage rate for the treated interface was slower than that of the control group, and the final shrinkage strain was also smaller. This may be attributed to the coupling agent enhancing the thickness and bonding strength of the interfacial zone, thereby improving the interfacial adhesion [46,47,48,49].

3.3. Results of Coupling Agent–Sawtooth Interface Collaborative Treatment

Figure 7a, b schematically illustrate the mechanical analysis of the untreated control group and the coupling-agent-treated serrated interface, respectively. This experimental group aimed to enhance interfacial bonding through the synergistic effects of a serrated surface morphology and coupling agent modification, while investigating interfacial shrinkage behavior, with the untreated control group serving as a reference for comparison. During the initial resin-pouring stage, f11(t) acted as a tensile force and f12(t) as a compressive force. These force directions reversed when the temperature increased following resin shrinkage.
F11(t) = −f12(t) = −f(t),
Figure 8a illustrates that all the curves displayed an initial declining trend, though with varying contraction rates among the measurement points. Notably, point 4 showed the fastest contraction rate, followed sequentially by points 1, 2, and 5, indicating spatially heterogeneous shrinkage during the early phase. From casting to 96 h (7-day age), rapid contraction occurred, while between 96 and 168 h (7–10 days), the strain trends stabilized across all points, with the contraction magnitudes ordered as point 4 > 1 > 2 > 3 > 5. At 168 h, a temperature increase of 40 °C triggered the first strain peak, followed by recurring peaks during subsequent thermal cycles.
Figure 8b presents the comparative strain curves between the control group (j) and the coupling agent-treated group (k) across five measurement points. For interfacial measurement points 1–3, all the curves exhibited a shared trend: an initial rapid decline (0–96 h) followed by temperature-dependent fluctuations. During the initial stage, the control groups exhibited significantly faster contraction rates than the treated groups (e.g., maximum contraction strains at point 1: j1 = −850 μ ε and k1 = −680 μ ε ), indicating that the coupling agent effectively mitigated early-stage contraction through interface modification. The 96–168 h phase under stable 30 °C conditions showed curve stabilization or a slight rebound, reflecting thermally induced micro-expansion. Subsequent temperature increments (40 °C, 50 °C, and 60 °C) each triggered distinct strain peaks, yet the treated groups demonstrated markedly lower strain amplification than the controls (e.g., post-third heating at point 1: j1 = −1220 μ ε and k1 = −850 μ ε , a 30% reduction).
Meanwhile, at point 2, the control group’s abrupt linear decline (j2) likely stemmed from proximal cement matrix positioning, while the treated group’s gradual contraction (k2) highlighted enhanced interfacial cohesion. Point 3 displayed spatially heterogeneous contraction, but maintained a 25% strain advantage for the treated group. The cement mortar (point 4) showed near-identical trends between the groups (final strains: j4 = −1223 μ ε , k4 = −1193 μ ε ), confirming minimal coupling agent impact on bulk matrices. Resin (point 5) displayed post-curing shrinkage (initial strain: −300 μ ε ) followed by temperature-driven anomalous expansion (final strains: j5 = 495 μ ε , k5 = 505 μ ε ). Collectively, these results demonstrate that the coupling agent treatment significantly optimized the interfacial performance, while thermal fluctuations, localized heating disparities, and measurement location variability were critical factors governing strain curve oscillations.
The analysis showed that all the measurement points initially experienced contraction strain, reflected by descending curves with varying rates. Interfacial points 1–3 followed a descending contraction sequence (point 1 > point 2 > point 3), while the cement mortar exhibited the greatest shrinkage and the transparent resin exhibited the least. Subsequent temperature variations induced strain peaks at all locations. Ultimately, the interfacial points showed reduced final shrinkage strains in the following order: point 1 > point 2 > point 3. The transparent resin transitioned to an expanded state, producing positive strain values due to thermally induced anomalous expansion.

3.4. Establishment of the Interface Bonding Region Model

Based on the mechanical characteristics of the optical resin–cementitious interface, the following assumptions were adopted in the ABAQUS simulation: (1) Both the cement mortar and the transparent resin were modeled as homogeneous and isotropic materials. (2) Shrinkage along the height direction (perpendicular to the interface) was assumed to be uniform throughout the specimen, regardless of vertical position. (3) The transparent resin initially underwent gradual contraction, followed by thermal expansion upon temperature elevation. (4) After roughening the cementitious matrix interface prior to resin casting, perfect bonding between the materials was assumed under zero external load, and interfacial bond-slip behavior was neglected. These simplifications prioritize interfacial interaction mechanisms over secondary effects in this multi-physics coupling system.
An interface model was established using the equivalent temperature difference method, which is essentially based on the initial strain method and linear thermal expansion coefficients. Shrinkage was converted into an “equivalent temperature difference” [50], which was then applied as a field load to the resin–matrix interface to simulate interfacial shrinkage [51,52,53]. The elastic modulus of the cement matrix varied with curing age, and its values—determined through empirical formulas and experimental data—are presented in Table 2.
In this section, two distinct components representing the cementitious matrix (designated as M1) and the transparent resin (designated as S1) were created, both discretized using eight-node linear brick elements with reduced integration (C3D8R). A three-dimensional finite element model was established via the direct solution method, incorporating material property definitions and mesh generation. The final model contained 70,700 elements, and Figure 9 illustrates the mesh configuration of the optical resin–cementitious material fabricated using the precast matrix method. This discretization strategy ensures computational efficiency while preserving the geometric accuracy at the resin–cement interface. Table 3 summarizes the material property parameters of both components:
For the interfacial system incorporating serrated geometry and coupling agent interactions, two discrete parts were modeled using C3D8R elements: M5 for the cement mortar and S5 for the transparent resin, with tie constraints applied at the interface. A three-dimensional finite element model was constructed using the direct solution method, integrating material property definitions and mesh-generation procedures. The final discretization produced 72,100 elements, as shown in Figure 10, which illustrates the mesh configuration of the optical resin–cementitious material featuring the serrated–coupling agent interfacial treatment. This modeling framework effectively captures interfacial coupling effects while ensuring numerical stability through targeted mesh refinement in critical regions.

3.5. Simulation Results of the Interface Bonding Zone Using the Matrix-First Pouring Method

The mechanical analysis and experimental results indicated that, compared with the resin-first pouring method, the matrix-first pouring method offers significant advantages in shrinkage control, reducing the final strain by 16%. Given that the strain evolution trends of transparent resin–cement-based composites are highly consistent under both processes, this study focused on the strain behavior at the interface midpoint in the matrix-first method for further analysis. Figure 11a,b respectively present the strain cloud diagram and the strain curve at the interface midpoint for the matrix-first pouring method.
From the evolution of the cloud diagram in Figure 11a, it can be observed that, with the progression of the simulation time and dynamic temperature variation, the chromaticity distribution in different material regions evolved systematically. As shown in the upper-left corner of the diagram, the strain in the interfacial region and the cement matrix accumulated continuously, while the transparent resin transitioned from shrinkage (negative strain) to expansion (positive strain). Figure 11b reveals that the strain at the interface midpoint dropped sharply during the initial phase and then entered a stable development stage. When the temperature increased abruptly, a steep strain spike occurred. The overall simulation process was smooth, and the final strain value was −461 μ ε .

3.6. Simulation Results of the Interface Bonding Zone Treated with the Coupling Agent

Figure 12a,b respectively present the interface strain cloud diagram and the strain curve diagram for the interface treated with the coupling agent. As shown in Figure 12a, with the extension of the simulation time and an increasing temperature, the chromatic regions in the cloud diagram changed significantly across different material zones. The shrinkage strain in the interface and cement matrix regions gradually increased, while the strain in the transparent resin region shifted from negative to positive. Figure 12b indicates that the strain curves at measurement points 1, 2, and 3 exhibited a rapid initial decline followed by a stabilization phase during the simulation.
At this time, the experimental results fluctuated greatly while the simulation results developed more stably, which may have been caused by the uneven heating of the blower in the box and instrument errors. With the sudden increase in temperature, the curve first rose sharply and then decreased. The simulation results were relatively smooth, which may have been affected by the pasting of the strain gauge or the fact that the experiment was located on the surface. The speed of the shrinkage strain at the middle position of the interface was the slowest, and the final shrinkage strain value was the smallest. The speed of the shrinkage strain at the end points was the fastest, and the final shrinkage strain value was the largest. The final shrinkage strain values of measuring points 1, 2, and 3 were −309 μ ε , −403 μ ε , and −501 μ ε , respectively.
In conclusion, the general trends of shrinkage strain at various interface locations were consistent between the experimental and simulation results. However, due to uncontrollable factors in the experimental part, the experimental results fluctuated more, while the simulation results developed more stably. The experimental shrinkage strain values were slightly larger than the simulation results, and there was a certain deviation between the two. A comprehensive comparison of the experimental and simulation outcomes revealed that the coupling agent treatment effectively reduced both the shrinkage strain rates and the final strain values at all the measured points. This demonstrates that the coupling agent enhanced the interfacial fusion between the cement matrix and the transparent resin, thereby improving the overall bonding strength.

3.7. Simulation Results of the Interface Bonding Zone Treated with the Coupling Agent–Sawtooth Interface Collaborative Treatment

Figure 13a displays the strain contour plots of the optical resin–cementitious material under the combined effects of a serrated interface geometry and the coupling agent treatment. Figure 13b presents the strain evolution curve extracted from the interfacial mid-region in the simulation.
An analysis of Figure 13b revealed a progressive redistribution of strain, indicated by distinct color transitions in the contour plots and increasing legend values across the analysis steps, in correlation with advancing thermal loading. The strain curve in Figure 13b exhibits three distinct phases: an initial rapid contraction phase with steep strain reduction (0–96 h), followed by a stabilized development period (96–168 h) and subsequent strain surges coinciding with temperature increments at 40 °C, 50 °C, and 60 °C. Notably, three characteristic strain peaks occurred during these thermal transitions, and the coupling-enhanced interface ultimately reached a final strain value of −213 μ ε . This evolution pattern quantitatively confirms the dual modulation mechanism—provided by the serrated geometry and the coupling agent treatment—in alleviating the interfacial strain concentrations under thermomechanical coupling conditions.

3.8. Mechanism Analysis and Matching Control

The optical resin–cement-based material, a composite system integrating organic resin and an inorganic cementitious matrix, exhibited inherent interfacial vulnerability due to mismatched thermomechanical properties between the constituent phases. This structural heterogeneity, when subjected to external mechanical stress and thermal fluctuations, tended to localize strain concentrations within the interfacial region, thereby promoting crack initiation and delamination [15]. As illustrated in Figure 14a,b, (a) and (b) respectively depict interfacial cracking behaviors induced by differential deformation under mechanical loading and thermal cycling. The observed fracture patterns were directly correlated with disparities in the mechanical and thermal properties of the constituent materials.
Figure 15a,b display ESEM images (magnification: 10,000×) of the interface between the transparent resin and the cement matrix, with and without coupling agent treatment, respectively. A microscopic analysis of Figure 15a revealed the presence of fine cracks between the cement matrix and the transparent resin, likely resulting from defects introduced during sample preparation. This suggests that the interfacial bonding strength between the cement matrix and the transparent resin is insufficient, and cracking failure is likely to occur under external forces. The boundary between the cement matrix and the transparent resin was extremely distinct, and the two materials could be clearly distinguished. Moreover, the two substances were merely in simple contact without any signs of mutual fusion, and defects were likely to form at the interface between the cement matrix and the transparent resin.
As shown in Figure 15b, although a boundary between the cement matrix and the transparent resin remained after the coupling agent treatment, the cracks between the two materials nearly vanished [54]. The inorganic-philic groups of the coupling agent chemically reacted with the cement matrix, while the organic-philic groups underwent cross-linking and entanglement with the transparent resin. As a result, a denser interfacial fusion was achieved, van der Waals forces were enhanced, and the overall interfacial bonding strength was significantly improved [55].
The reaction products contributed to filling microcracks and increasing interfacial contact, thereby enhancing the mechanical interlocking between the two phases. This led to a more stable interfacial connection [56,57]. In summary, the coupling agent exerted a pronounced effect on the interfacial characteristics between the cement matrix and the transparent resin. It markedly improved interfacial bonding, facilitated improved phase integration, and resulted in a smoother and more continuous interfacial transition.
In summary, a comparison of shrinkage strain results across different interface treatments indicates that the matrix-first pouring method outperforms the resin-first method. The use of a coupling agent demonstrates a more pronounced interface modification effect relative to the control group, with both the shrinkage strain rate and the final shrinkage strain value significantly reduced. The synergistic treatment combining a coupling agent application with sawtooth surface chiseling produced the most significant effect, achieving the lowest shrinkage strain and the most effective suppression of interfacial sliding and cracking (Figure 16). The coupling agent effectively enhanced the bonding performance between the cement matrix and the transparent resin, allowing for a tighter interfacial connection and a more seamless transition. These simulation results are broadly consistent with the experimental findings described above. Accordingly, the coupling agent can be considered an effective strategy for improving the interfacial performance of transparent resin–cement-based composite materials.

4. Conclusions and Recommendations

  • This study developed a custom-designed monitoring system for organic–inorganic composite interfaces, integrating real-time deformation tracking capabilities. Its key innovations include synchronized strain measurements across heterogeneous interfaces and automated data visualization for time-dependent deformation analyses.
  • By comparing the interface test results under different treatments, it was observed that the matrix-first pouring method reduced the final shrinkage strain values by up to 16% compared to the resin-first method. Treatment with a coupling agent and the combined coupling agent–sawtooth interface treatment further reduced the shrinkage by up to 31% and 43.5%, respectively, relative to the control group.
  • The experimental and ABAQUS simulation results showed a strong agreement for the overall strain evolution trends. Temperature had a significant influence on strain behavior, with measuring points 1–4 exhibiting sharp strain increases followed by declines, while point 5 displayed continuous expansion as the temperature increased.
  • The coupling agent enhanced resin–cement bonding by enabling inorganic groups to chemically react with the cement matrix and organic groups to cross-link with the resin. The resulting reaction products filled interfacial microcracks and blurred phase boundaries.
  • This dual treatment strategy—chemical grafting via silane coupling agents to enhance the interfacial compatibility, and sawtooth interface structuring to induce mechanical interlocking—effectively increased the cross-linking density and interfacial strength. Together, these modifications provide a promising solution for improving the long-term service stability of photoactive resin–cement-based composites.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.H.; methodology, S.Z.; validation, S.Z.; formal analysis, S.Z. and R.H.; data curation, Z.Y.; writing—original draft, S.Z. and Z.Y.; writing—review and editing, S.Z. and Z.Y.; supervision, J.M.; project administration, X.W.; funding acquisition, S.Z., R.H., C.H., J.Z. and S.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 52308246, 52408265, and 42202318), the Henan Province Key Research and Development Project (Nos. 241111322000 and 251111230100), and the Henan Provincial Science and Technology Research Project (Nos. 252102320018, 252300420840, and 252300421199).

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Scrivener, K.L.; John, V.M.; Gartner, E.M. Eco-efficient cements: Potential economically viable solutions for a low-CO2 cement-based materials industry. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 114, 2–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Chiew, S.M.; Ibrahim, I.S.; Mohd Ariffin, M.A.; Lee, H.-S.; Singh, J.K. Development and properties of light-transmitting concrete (LTC)–A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 284, 124780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Chiadighikaobi, P.C.; Adegoke, M.A.; Kharun, M.; Paul, V.J.; Abu Mahadi, M.I.; Finbarrs-Ezema, B. A Review of the Structural Properties of Translucent Concrete as Sustainable Material. Open Constr. Build. Technol. J. 2023, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Su, X.; Zhang, L.; Liu, Z. Daylighting and energy performance of the combination of optical fiber based translucent concrete walls and windows. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 67, 105959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Losonczi, A. Building Block Comprising Light Transmitting Fibres and a Method for Producing the Same. U.S. Patent No. 8,091,315, 16 May 2003. [Google Scholar]
  6. Han, Y.; Zhao, W. Research development of the SACM modified cementitious materials. Appl. Chem. Ind. 2021, 50, 3463–3467+3471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Li, Y.; Li, J.; Wan, Y.; Xu, Z. Experimental study of light transmitting cement-based material (LTCM). Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 96, 319–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lyu, Q.; Dai, P.; Chen, A. Mechanical strengths and optical properties of translucent concrete manufactured by mortar-extrusion 3D printing with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) fibers. Compos. Part. B: Eng. 2024, 268, 111079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mainini, A.G.; Poli, T.; Zinzi, M.; Cangiano, S. Spectral Light Transmission Measure and Radiance Model Validation of an innovative Transparent Concrete Panel for Façades. Energy Procedia 2012, 30, 1184–1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jiang, Z.; Yu, F.; Zhang, J.; Yao, M.; Xia, C.; Yang, J. Preparation method and research progress of resin light conductive concrete. New Chem. Mater. 2018, 46, 235–238. [Google Scholar]
  11. Navabi, D.; Amini, Z.; Rahmati, A. Developing light transmitting concrete for energy saving in buildings. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2023, 18, e01969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wang, X.; Ye, X.; Song, G.; Wang, R.; Xiong, J.; Hu, M.; Luo, W.; Huang, M.; Rao, C.; Huang, J.; et al. Resin light-guiding concrete and preparation method thereof. C.N. Patent ZL 201310037937.1, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  13. Wang, X.; Zhai, S.; Wang, K.; Xie, T. Modification of bonding properties and microstructure of resin-cement interface by coupling agents. Compos. Interfaces 2018, 25, 27–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wang, X.; Zhai, S.; Xie, T. Mechanism behind the improvement of coupling agent in interface bonding performance between organic transparent resin and inorganic cement matrix. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 143, 138–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Guo, S.-Y.; Zhang, X.; Ren, J.; Chen, J.-Z.; Zhao, T.-J.; Li, T.-W.; Zhang, L. Preparation of TiO2/epoxy resin composite and its effect on mechanical and bonding properties of OPC mortars. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 272, 121960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Shen, J.; Zhou, Z. Performance and Energy Savings of Resin Translucent Concrete Products. J. Energy Eng. 2020, 146, 04020007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Li, N.; Shen, K.; Zhao, Y.; Zhang, G.; Lu, T.; Lu, Y.; Zhang, X. Fundamental properties of concrete with a new type of salt-resistant super absorbent polymer. J. Railw. Sci. Eng. 2024, 21, 4543–4554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhou, F.; Huang, J.; Jian, S.; Tan, H.; Lv, Y.; Hu, H.; Wang, W.; Yang, R.; Manuka, M.; Yin, Y.; et al. Photocurable resin as rapid in-situ protective coating for slag concrete against dry shrinkage. Constr. Build. Mater. 2023, 396 (Suppl. C), 132171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gong, J.; Li, K. Minimizing Drying Shrinkage and Enhancing Impermeability of Foam Concrete Modified with Epoxy Resin. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2020, 2020, 8897687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Li, Y.; Li, J.; Guo, H. Preparation and study of light transmitting properties of sulfoaluminate cement-based materials. Mater. Des. 2015, 83, 185–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Luhar, I.; Luhar, S.; Savva, P.; Theodosiou, A.; Petrou, M.F.; Nicolaides, D. Light transmitting concrete: A review. Buildings 2021, 11, 480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Tahwia, A.M.; Abdelaziz, N.; Samy, M.; Amin, M. Mechanical and light transmittance properties of high-performance translucent concrete. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2022, 17, e01260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tahwia, A.M.; Abdel-Raheem, A.; Abdel-Aziz, N.; Amin, M. Light transmittance performance of sustainable translucent self-compacting concrete. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 38, 102178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Emanet, S.; Arda Buyuktaskin, H.A. Mechanical Properties of Light-Transmitting Concrete and Its Durability Performance under the Effects of Accelerated Aging. J. Test. Eval. 2023, 51, 3273–3293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wang, D.; Shi, C.; Wu, Z.; Xiao, J.; Huang, Z.; Fang, Z. A review on ultra high performance concrete: Part II. Hydration, microstructure and properties. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 96, 368–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Pilipenko, A.; Bazhenova, S.; Kryukova, A. Decorative light transmitting concrete based on crushed concrete fines. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  27. Jalali, H.; Yeganeh Khaksar, R.; Mohammadzadeh, S.D. Prediction of vertical displacement for a buried pipeline subjected to normal fault using a hybrid FEM-ANN approach. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2024, 18, 428–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Xu, X.; Sun, Y.; Li, Y.; Wang, Z.; You, P. Interface Bonding Mechanism of Basic Magnesium Sulfate Cement-Based Resin Light-Transmitting Concrete. Jianzhu Cailiao Xuebao/J. Build. Mater. 2024, 27, 1039–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kato, T.; Kimura, H.; Saigo, K.; Yamada, B.; Yamauchi, J.; Anraku, T. Effects of a silane coupling agent on the tensile adhesive strength between resin and titanium. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2013, 129, 2922–2930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Sharma, M.; Bishnoi, S. Influence of properties of interfacial transition zone on elastic modulus of concrete: Evidence from micromechanical modelling. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 246, 118381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yoshida, K.; Kamada, K.; Atsuta, M. Effects of two silane coupling agents, a bonding agent, and thermal cycling on the bond strength of a CAD/CAM composite material cemented with two resin luting agents. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2001, 85, 184–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Feng, Y.; Qiu, T.; Zhang, J.; Shen, C. Effects of silane coupling agent on microstructure and mechanical properties of EPDM/carbonyl iron microwave absorbing patch. J. Wuhan. Univ. Technol. Mater. Sci. Ed. 2006, 21, 78–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sharif, A.; Mohmmadi, N.; Moghbeli, M.R.; Zanjirian, E. Heterogeneity in the strength of interfacial bonds and the resultant synergism in promoting polyurethane/SBR adhesion strength. J. Adhes. Sci. Technol. 2003, 17, 1727–1739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Song, Y.; Wang, J.; Huang, Y.; Wang, J.; Weng, Y.; Ma, R.; Pang, K.S.H.; Ruan, S. Effects of varying grades/pretreatments of recycled aggregates on the development of pore structures and ITZs within reactive magnesia cement (RMC) concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 2025, 190, 107782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Peng, C.; Chen, P.; You, Z.; Lv, S.; Zhang, R.; Xu, F.; Zhang, H.; Chen, H. Effect of silane coupling agent on improving the adhesive properties between asphalt binder and aggregates. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 169, 591–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Xiao, Q.; Qian, C.; Xie, J. Experimental research on modification of asphalt concrete performance and asphalt-aggregate interface by coupling agent. J. Southeast. Univ. Nat. Sci. Ed. 2004, 34, 485–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Guo, X.; Xie, K.; Liu, Z.; Elchalakani, M.; Zhou, Y. A study on the bond strength of interface between post-fire concrete and different epoxy resin adhesives. Constr. Build. Mater. 2023, 407, 133429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zhang, M.; Xu, H.; Phalé Zeze, A.L.; Liu, X.; Tao, M. Coating performance, durability and anti-corrosion mechanism of organic modified geopolymer composite for marine concrete protection. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2022, 129 (Suppl. C), 104495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zhang, M.; Zang, Y.; Shan, L. Enhancing Volumetric Stability of Metakaolin-Based Geopolymer Composites with Organic Modifiers WER and SCA. Buildings 2024, 14, 586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Chen, H.; Sun, W.; Stroeven, P. Interfacial Transition Zone Between Aggregate and Paste in Cementitious Composites (Ⅱ): Mechanism of Formation and Degradation of Interfacial Transition Zone Microstructure, and its Influence Factors. J. Chin. Ceram. Soc. 2004, 32, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wu, N.; Wei, Q.-F.; Li, Q.; Xu, W.-Z. Preparation and characterization of organic/inorganic hybrid nanofibers. J. Donghua Univ. (Engl. Ed.) 2006, 23, 20–23. [Google Scholar]
  42. Zhou, Z.; Gao, X.; Shen, J.; Jiao, S.; Yang, M.; Yang, H. Thermal properties and thermal insulation effect evaluation of the resin translucent concrete products. Concrete 2017, 105–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Chen, W.; Wang, Q.; Huang, Z.; Du, H. Hydration mechanism and mechanical properties of a developed low-carbon and lightweight strain-hardening cementitious composites. J. Sustain. Cem. Based Mater. 2024, 13, 661–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Xu, S.; Nie, B.; Li, A. Bond properties for plain bars in frost-damaged concrete. Mag. Concr. Res. 2019, 71, 975–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhao, W.; Jiang, Y.; Yu, Y.; Liu, W. Use of digital image correlation to confirm the enhancement of concrete–epoxy resin mortar adhesion through surface precoating treatment. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 295, 123512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Feng, Y.; Feng, J.; Li, L.; Li, Z.; Chen, W.; Li, Y.; Chen, W. Multi-scale analysis and structural application of the synergistic enhancement effect of silane coupling agent on the interface between PVA/rubber and cement. J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater. 2025, 38, 209–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Feng, Y.; Qin, D.; Zhao, C. The synergistic strengthening effect of silane coupling agent on the interface between PVA/EPS and cement: Experiment and molecular simulation. Compos. Interfaces 2023, 30, 21–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Li, C.; Liao, H.; Gao, H.; Cheng, F. Enhancing interface compatibility in high-filled coal gangue/polyethylene composites through silane coupling agent-mediated interface modification. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2024, 251, 110546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhang, Z.; Sun, W.; Huang, W.; Zhu, Y.; Li, J.; Liang, C.; Gao, S. Interfacial and mechanical properties of silane coupling agent interface-modified basalt fiber reinforced thermoplastic polypropylene resin composites. Polym. Compos. 2024, 46, 6582–6593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Yi, G.-S.; Lee, H.-E. Progressive Failure Analysis of Concrete Structures Using Plasticity and Endochronic Based Models. Ksce J. Civ. Eng. 1998, 2, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Turcry, P.; Loukili, A.; Haidar, K.; Pijaudier-Cabot, G.; Belarbi, A. Cracking Tendency of Self-Compacting Concrete Subjected to Restrained Shrinkage: Experimental Study and Modeling. J. Mater. Civ. 2006, 18, 46–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Thamburaja, P.; Chau, F.; Pan, H. The evolution of microstructure during twinning: Constitutive equations, finite-element simulations and experimental verification. Int. J. Plast. 2009, 25, 2141–2168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Al-Fasih, M.Y.; Mohamad, M.E.; Ibrahim, I.S. Experimental and numerical evaluations of composite concrete-to-concrete interfacial shear strength under horizontal and normal stresses. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0252050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Dai, W.; Hu, P. Molecular dynamics simulation on structure and characteristics of cement hydration products. J. Softw. 2011, 6, 2184–2188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zhao, D.; Wang, H.; Zhao, Q.; Zhang, J.; Yuan, L. Strengthening the fiber-cement matrix interface by introducing functional groups on fiber surface. J. Build. Eng. 2024, 91, 109567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Wang, R.; Wang, X.; Xie, T. Multiscale characterization of resin-cement interface modification. Bull. Chin. Ceram. Soc. 2018, 37, 67–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Yoshihara, K.; Nagaoka, N.; Sonoda, A.; Maruo, Y.; Makita, Y.; Okihara, T.; Irie, M.; Yoshida, Y.; Van Meerbeek, B. Effectiveness and stability of silane coupling agent incorporated in ‘universal’ adhesives. Dent. Mater. 2016, 32, 1218–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Online monitoring device for interface shrinkage of organic–inorganic composite materials. Note: 1—computer, 2—connecting cable, 3—controller, 4—acquisition box, 5 and 6—acquisition cables, 7—strain gauge, 8—test specimen, 9—drying oven.
Figure 1. Online monitoring device for interface shrinkage of organic–inorganic composite materials. Note: 1—computer, 2—connecting cable, 3—controller, 4—acquisition box, 5 and 6—acquisition cables, 7—strain gauge, 8—test specimen, 9—drying oven.
Buildings 15 02754 g001
Figure 2. Test specimens and test point distribution. Note: ①, ②, ③, ④, and ⑤ represent measuring points 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively (measuring points 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are located at the interface endpoints of the specimen, at the 1/4 position, at the midpoint, in the cement matrix, and in the transparent resin, respectively).
Figure 2. Test specimens and test point distribution. Note: ①, ②, ③, ④, and ⑤ represent measuring points 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively (measuring points 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are located at the interface endpoints of the specimen, at the 1/4 position, at the midpoint, in the cement matrix, and in the transparent resin, respectively).
Buildings 15 02754 g002
Figure 3. Force analysis of matrix-first and resin-first casting methods.
Figure 3. Force analysis of matrix-first and resin-first casting methods.
Buildings 15 02754 g003
Figure 4. Strain curves at each measurement point for the matrix-first and resin-first casting method.
Figure 4. Strain curves at each measurement point for the matrix-first and resin-first casting method.
Buildings 15 02754 g004
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of the interfacial force analysis for the control group and the coupling agent treatment group.
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of the interfacial force analysis for the control group and the coupling agent treatment group.
Buildings 15 02754 g005
Figure 6. Strain evolution curves at interface-monitoring points for the control group and the coupling agent treatment group.
Figure 6. Strain evolution curves at interface-monitoring points for the control group and the coupling agent treatment group.
Buildings 15 02754 g006
Figure 7. Schematic diagram of the interfacial force analysis for the control group and the coupling agent–sawtooth interface collaborative treatment group.
Figure 7. Schematic diagram of the interfacial force analysis for the control group and the coupling agent–sawtooth interface collaborative treatment group.
Buildings 15 02754 g007
Figure 8. Strain evolution curves at interface-monitoring points for the control group and the coupling agent-sawtooth interface collaborative treatment group.
Figure 8. Strain evolution curves at interface-monitoring points for the control group and the coupling agent-sawtooth interface collaborative treatment group.
Buildings 15 02754 g008
Figure 9. Common interface meshing.
Figure 9. Common interface meshing.
Buildings 15 02754 g009
Figure 10. Interface meshing of coupling agent–sawtooth interface collaborative treatment.
Figure 10. Interface meshing of coupling agent–sawtooth interface collaborative treatment.
Buildings 15 02754 g010
Figure 11. Simulation result diagram of the interface using the matrix-first pouring method.
Figure 11. Simulation result diagram of the interface using the matrix-first pouring method.
Buildings 15 02754 g011
Figure 12. Simulation result diagram of the interface of the coupling agent treatment group.
Figure 12. Simulation result diagram of the interface of the coupling agent treatment group.
Buildings 15 02754 g012
Figure 13. Simulation result diagram of the interface in the coupling agent–sawtooth interface collaborative treatment.
Figure 13. Simulation result diagram of the interface in the coupling agent–sawtooth interface collaborative treatment.
Buildings 15 02754 g013
Figure 14. Interfacial shrinkage deformation failure in light-conductive resin–cement-based materials. (a) Cracking of weak interfacial bond under compressive loading. (b) Shrinkage cracking induced by temperature variation.
Figure 14. Interfacial shrinkage deformation failure in light-conductive resin–cement-based materials. (a) Cracking of weak interfacial bond under compressive loading. (b) Shrinkage cracking induced by temperature variation.
Buildings 15 02754 g014
Figure 15. Simulation result diagram of the interface in the coupling agent–sawtooth interface collaborative treatment. (a) Interfacial region between transparent resin and cement matrix. (b) Interfacial region between transparent resin and cement matrix subjected to collaborative treatment.
Figure 15. Simulation result diagram of the interface in the coupling agent–sawtooth interface collaborative treatment. (a) Interfacial region between transparent resin and cement matrix. (b) Interfacial region between transparent resin and cement matrix subjected to collaborative treatment.
Buildings 15 02754 g015
Figure 16. Dynamic contraction deformation diagram of light-conductive resin–cement-based materials.
Figure 16. Dynamic contraction deformation diagram of light-conductive resin–cement-based materials.
Buildings 15 02754 g016
Table 1. Technical parameters of ortho-phenylenic unsaturated polyester resin.
Table 1. Technical parameters of ortho-phenylenic unsaturated polyester resin.
Viscosity0.3~0.5 Pa.sSetting Time8~16 min
Solid content59~67%Bending strength112 MPa
Tensile strength65 MPaElongation at break3.7%
Table 2. Compressive stress, strength, and elastic modulus of cement-based materials at different ages.
Table 2. Compressive stress, strength, and elastic modulus of cement-based materials at different ages.
Age F (kN)P (MPa) E c (GPa)
1d197.9639.6020.91
2d199.5339.9221.10
3d212.3442.4822.18
4d209.8341.9821.96
5d222.7344.5623.09
6d237.2147.4624.35
7d240.7651.4126.04
Table 3. Material property parameters of unsaturated polyester resin and cement mortar.
Table 3. Material property parameters of unsaturated polyester resin and cement mortar.
UPRCement Mortar
α c (130~150) × 10−6/°C12 × 10−6/°C
γ 0.350.167
ρ1.11–1.20 g/cm32.07 g/cm3
E C 25–35 GPaAs shown in Table 1
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhai, S.; Hai, R.; Yu, Z.; Ma, J.; Hou, C.; Zhang, J.; Du, S.; Wang, X. Interfacial Shrinkage Properties and Mechanism Analysis of Light-Conductive Resin–Cement-Based Materials. Buildings 2025, 15, 2754. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15152754

AMA Style

Zhai S, Hai R, Yu Z, Ma J, Hou C, Zhang J, Du S, Wang X. Interfacial Shrinkage Properties and Mechanism Analysis of Light-Conductive Resin–Cement-Based Materials. Buildings. 2025; 15(15):2754. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15152754

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhai, Shengtian, Ran Hai, Zhihang Yu, Jianjun Ma, Chao Hou, Jiufu Zhang, Shaohua Du, and Xingang Wang. 2025. "Interfacial Shrinkage Properties and Mechanism Analysis of Light-Conductive Resin–Cement-Based Materials" Buildings 15, no. 15: 2754. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15152754

APA Style

Zhai, S., Hai, R., Yu, Z., Ma, J., Hou, C., Zhang, J., Du, S., & Wang, X. (2025). Interfacial Shrinkage Properties and Mechanism Analysis of Light-Conductive Resin–Cement-Based Materials. Buildings, 15(15), 2754. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15152754

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop