Skip to content
BY 4.0 license Open Access Published by De Gruyter May 30, 2020

Advances of graphene- and graphene oxide-modified cementitious materials

  • Juan Wang , Yaoqun Xu EMAIL logo , Xiaopeng Wu , Peng Zhang and Shaowei Hu
From the journal Nanotechnology Reviews

Abstract

Emerging nanomaterials provide an invaluable opportunity for the development of cementitious materials. Many scholars have explored the influence of graphene (GP) and graphene oxide (GO) on the performance of the cementitious materials. This article reviews the previous research on the effect of GP and GO on the properties of cementitious materials. Detailed review of the mechanical properties and durability of cementitious materials containing GP or GO nanofilms is presented, and the mechanism is discussed. The mechanical properties of GO-cementitious materials are significantly enhanced. The optimal improvement of GO-modified compressive, flexural, and tensile strengths is 77.3%, 78.3%, and 78.6%, respectively. The durability of GO- and GP-modified cementitious material is compared with the control group. The incorporation of GP or GO significantly improves the sulfate attack resistance, and the transport properties can be decreased, while the frost resistance of GO- and GP-modified cementitious materials needs further research. This literature review shows that the microstructure of GO- and GP-modified cementitious material is improved in three aspects: accelerating the cement hydration, refining the pore structure, and hindering the crack propagation.

1 Introduction

Cementitious materials have been generally used in the world and will still be one of the main building materials in the twenty-first century. With the advancement of society and technology, traditional cementitious materials cannot meet the requirements of special engineering under arduous conditions [1]. The development of novel high-performance cementitious materials with low energy consumption and comprehensive cost during infrastructure service life is of great significance for protecting the ecological environment and promoting sustainable development [2,3]. The existence of cracks and pores in the cementitious materials affects the strength and durability. Enhancing toughness and reducing porosity have been research hotspots in this field [4,5]. The addition of mineral admixtures and fibers can be mixed in the cementitious materials to achieve high performance and functionalization [6,7,8,9]. At the end of the last century, the emergence of nanomaterials has revolutionized the human traditional understanding of materials [10].

Nanomaterials consisted of ultrafine particles with the size ranging from 1 to 100 nm and can be divided into 0-dimensional nanoparticles, 1-dimensional nanofibers, and 2-dimensional nanofilms [11,12,13]. Ultrafine particles have a series of excellent physical and chemical properties [14,15]. The addition of nanomaterials into the cementitious materials not only greatly improve the mechanical performance but also lead to better durability and microstructure of the cementitious materials [16,17]. Nanoparticles with most extensive applications in cementitious materials [18,19,20] and high reactivity can accelerate hydration and can fill microscopic pores in the matrix to increase the compactness of the cementitious materials [21,22,23,24]. For example, carbon nanotubes (CNTs) as a microscopic fiber can significantly enhance the strength [25], toughness [26], and durability [27] of cementitious materials and will affect the electrical [28] and thermal [29] conductivity, making cementitious materials multifunctional and smart [30,31,32,33].

Graphene (GP) is a type of carbonaceous nanomaterial discovered recently, and it is a significant new material with the lightest, thinnest, highest strength, and the best electrical and thermal conductivity [34]. As a reinforcing material, the GP aluminum alloy developed in China can reach 100 times the strength of steel [35]. Graphene oxide (GO) is more reactive than graphene, easy to functionalize, and controllable [36,37,38]. The atomistic model of GP is shown in Figure 1(a), and the atomistic model of GO is shown in Figure 1(b). In this figure, main functional groups of GO are hydroxyl (C–OH, blue elements) and epoxy (C–O–C, green elements) [39,40,41,42]. The results of the previous research have shown that GO can regulate the hydration reaction [43], and GO and GP nanoplatelets can give functions and intelligence to cementitious materials [38,44,45,46], so the study of the GP- and GO-modified cementitious materials are of great significance and have attracted the attention of scholars.

Figure 1 
               The microstructure of GP and GO [47]: (a) GP and (b) GO.
Figure 1

The microstructure of GP and GO [47]: (a) GP and (b) GO.

The first research of GO-modified cementitious materials was carried out by Peyvandi et al. [48] in 2013, and it was found that GP at a low dosage of 0.05% can significantly improve the acid attack resistance of concrete and significantly reduced water permeability. Parallelly, in China, Lv et al. [44,49] studied the mechanism of GO-modified cementitious materials and proposed that GO can regulate cement hydration. In addition, for the application of new cementitious materials, cost is an important factor affecting its popularization, and the development of the GP manufacturing process has promoted the reduction of GP production costs. For example, in 2015, it is reported that the cost of GP can be reduced by 100 times [50], and thus, industrialization of GP- or GO-modified cementitious materials is feasible.

This article reviews recent studies on GP- and GO-modified cementitious materials, focuses on the mechanical and durability properties of GP- and GO-modified cementitious materials, and discusses the related mechanism.

2 Mechanical performance of GP- and GO-modified cementitious materials

Most studies indicate that the mechanical performance of GP- and GO-modified cementitious materials are improved. The improvement effects of GO and GP in strength are different corresponding to compressive, flexural, and tensile strength, and these three strengths are discussed. In this article, the effects of nanoplatelets on the cementitious material strengths have been analyzed by calculating the relative strength ratio. The relative strength ratio refers to the strength ratio between GO- or GP-modified and unmodified in the research literature, and when calculating the ratio, the mix ratio of the modified and the unmodified group in the literature must be consistent, and the dosage in this paper is the percentage of cement mass.

2.1 Compressive strength

Based on the research results, the effects of the compressive strength in the literature are normalized and presented in Table 1, and GO significantly improves the cementitious material’s compressive strength, and the most effective increase is the relative strength rate of 177.3% obtained at 1% GO in the study by Lv et al. [51]. Sharma et al. [52] observed that the mortar compression strength was enhanced to 151.08% with the addition of 0.02% GO. The effect of GO on improving the ultra-high strength concrete (UHSC) is poor, the compressive strength of UHSC containing 0.01–0.03% GO was increased to 104.59–107.82% [53], and this is the lowest compressive strength improvement effect.

Table 1

Compressive strength of GO-modified cementitious materials

Scholar Dosage (%) Relative strength ratio (%) Cementitious materials
Lv et al. [49] 0.05 147.90 Mortar
0.04 142.20
0.03 138.90
Sharma et al. [52] 1 177.30 Mortar
0.5 165.30
0.2 140.60
0.1 123.00
Liu et al. [54] 0.03 115.80 Cement paste
Lu and Dong [53] 0.01 107.82 UHSC
0.03 104.59
Lv et al. [51] 0.02 151.08 Mortar
Long et al. [55] 0.2 119.20 Mortar (recycled fine aggregates)
Lu et al. [56] 0.05 111.05 Cement paste
Zhu et al. [57] 0.05 133.00 Cement paste

The compressive strength of GP-modified cementitious materials in the literature is normalized and presented in Table 2. The compressive strength of GP-modified cementitious materials is not significantly improved, and the most effective improvement is 122.86% relative strength rate obtained at 0.1% GP in the examination by Sharma and Arora [58]. In the study by Bai et al. [59], adding 0.1–2% GP to the cement paste results in the reduced compressive strength. The improvement effect in the studies is mostly within 15%.

Table 2

Compressive strength of GP-modified cementitious materials

Scholar Dosage (%) Relative strength ratio (%) Cementitious materials
Tragazikis et al. [60] 0.2 110.45 Mortar
0.4 113.43
Sharma and Arora [58] 0.05 108.00 Mortar
0.1 122.86
Bai et al. [59] 0.1 93.00 Cement paste
2 69.00
Wang et al. [61] 0.05 103.00 Cement paste
Jiang and Wang [62] 0.05 107.50 Cement paste

In summary, GO is superior to GP in improving the compressive strength. According to the modification mechanism, the functional groups on the GO surface play an important role, which is not available in the GP-modified cementitious materials. However, Liu et al. [63] found that the concrete compression strength was enhanced by 36.8% with the addition of 0.8% GP and enhanced by 40.1% with the addition of 1.6% GO, and GP modification may also have better impact.

The influence of GO and GP dosage on cementitious material’s compressive strength is significant for the application of modified cementitious materials. The dosages and the compressive strength effect in the literatures are shown in Figure 2. As the GO dosage increases, the effect of the increasing compressive strength increases [49,52]. The GO dosage of 1% significantly improved the compressive strength. It can be known from the previous mechanism that GP does not show high reactivity, and this is reflected in the compressive test results. Insufficient dispersion of GP in cement materials may be the cause of the decrease in the strength when the content is 2% [59].

Figure 2 
                  The dosages and the compressive strength effect.
Figure 2

The dosages and the compressive strength effect.

2.2 Flexural strength

The flexural strength of GO-modified cementitious materials in the literature is shown in Table 3. In the existing research, 0.02% GO increases the flexural strength by 85.11%, which shows the best effect of GO-modified cementitious materials [51]. The improvement of GO-modified cementitious material’s flexural resistance is mostly above 30%, and the improvement effect is significant. The improvement of the flexural strength shows significance to the toughness of cementitious materials.

Table 3

Flexural strength of GO-modified cementitious materials

Scholar Dosage (%) Relative strength ratio (%) Cementitious materials
Jiang et al. [64] 0.08 131.62 UHSC
Qian et al. [65] 0.01 109.30 Cement pastes
0.03 109.30
0.04 104.65
Li et al. [66] 0.02 133.33 Cement paste
0.04 178.33
Long et al. [67] 0.05 115.90 Mortar (recycled fine aggregates)
0.1 127.00
0.2 141.30
Lv et al. [49] 0.01 151.70 Mortar
0.02 132.90
0.03 160.70
0.04 130.50
0.05 130.20
Murugan et al. [68] 0.02 123.00 Cement paste
Li et al. [69] 0.022 122.55 Cement paste
Chuah et al. [70] 0.03 126.55 Cement paste
Zhu et al. [57] 0.05 159.00 Cement paste
Lu et al. [56] 0.05 116.20 Cement paste
Long et al. [55] 0.2 147.50 Mortar (recycled fine aggregates)
Lv et al. [51] 0.02 185.11 Mortar
Lu and Dong [53] 0.01 111.88 Ultra-high strength concrete
0.03 106.95
Liu et al. [54] 0.03 135.50 Cement paste
Long et al. [71] 0.06 119.00 Mortar (recycled fine aggregates)

As presented in Table 4, the effect of GP on improving the flexural strength is lower than GO modified. The flexural strength of the GP-modified mortar is significantly reduced in the study by Tragazikis et al. [60]. For the GP-modified cement paste, Wang et al. [61] and Jiang and Wang [62] used the same dosage of 0.05%, and the obtained flexural strength improvement effect was the same, with a relative compressive strength of 121.2–123.5%. In the researches by Long et al. [55,67,71], GO-modified recycled fine aggregate mortar was studied, and the mortar strength is significantly improved.

Table 4

Flexural strength of GP-modified cementitious materials

Scholar Dosage (%) Relative strength ratio (%) Cementitious materials
Tragazikis et al. [60] 0.2 66.1 Mortar
0.4 78.6
Sharma and Arora [58] 0.05 113.0 Mortar
0.1 115.0
Bai et al. [59] 0.1 103.0 Cement paste
2 77.0
Wang et al. [61] 0.05 123.5 Cement paste
Jiang and Wang [62] 0.05 121.2 Cement paste

The effect of GO and GP dosage on cementitious materials flexural strength is shown in Figure 3. As the GO dosage increases, the GO-modified cementitious material’s flexural strength increases first and then decreases. When the GO dosage is 0.02–0.04%, the cementitious material’s flexural strength can be significantly improved. When the GP dosage is 0.05%, the relative strength ratio is 113–123.5%; when the GP dosage is 0.1%, the relative strength ratio is 103–115%; and when the GP dosage is 0.2–2%, the relative strength ratio is 66.1–78.6%.

Figure 3 
                  The effect of dosages and the flexural strength.
Figure 3

The effect of dosages and the flexural strength.

2.3 Tensile strength

Currently, there are few studies on the tensile strength of GO-modified cementitious materials, while the research on GP-modified cementitious materials tensile test was not found. The influence of GO on improving the tensile strength is presented in Table 5. GO-modified cementitious materials have shown excellent tensile properties in the study by Lv et al. [43], where 0.03% of GO increases the tensile strength by 78.6%. Babak et al. [72] found that 2% GO decreases the tensile strength, and the excessive addition of GO-modified cementitious materials is disadvantageous. Li et al. [73] compared the tensile strength of GO-mortar and GO-cement paste, and the influences of GO on mortar and cement paste are consistent.

Table 5

Tensile strength of GO-modified cementitious materials

Scholar Dosage (%) Relative strength ratio (%) Cementitious materials
Lv et al. [49] 0.01 147.0 Mortar
0.02 159.5
0.03 178.6
0.04 136.6
0.05 135.8
Li et al. [73] 0.01 109.5 Cement paste
0.02 140.5
0.03 159.5
0.04 161.9
Sharma et al. [52] 0.1 132.5 Cement paste
0.2 137.5
0.5 120.0
1 115.0
Li et al. [74] 0.02 115.1 Mortar
0.04 116.6
0.02 114.8 Cement paste
0.04 115.0
Babak et al. [72] 0.1 102.2 Mortar
0.3 112.6
0.5 127.0
1 138.9
1.5 147.8
2 83.7

The influence of GO dosage on cementitious material’s tensile strength is shown in Figure 4. When the GO dosage is 0.02–0.05%, the cementitious materials tensile strength can be significantly improved. Statistical results on the literature indicate that as the GO dosage increases, the tensile strength of GO-modified cementitious materials increases first and then decreases.

Figure 4 
                  The GO dosages and the tensile strength effect.
Figure 4

The GO dosages and the tensile strength effect.

In the research literature, the maximum relative compressive strength ratio is 177.3% [62]; the maximum relative flexural strength ratio is 178.3% [73]; the maximum relative tensile strength ratio is 178.6% [38]; and the optimal improvement of GO on compressive, flexura, and tensile strengths is 77.3%, 78.3%, and 78.6%, respectively. It can be concluded that GO has greatly improved the mechanical performance of cementitious materials.

3 Durability properties of GP- and GO-modified cementitious materials

The current research on the cementitious material’s durability of GO- or GP-modified is insufficient. Scholars’ research on the durability modified by GO and GP has mainly focused on three aspects: frost resistance, acid attack, and transport properties.

3.1 Frost resistance

Scholars have discussed the frost resistance of GO-modified cementitious materials, and the test results are very different. Zhou [75] observed the effect of GP and GO on the frost resistance of cementitious materials, and it was found that the weight loss of the GO-modified mortar is lower than the GP-modified mortar and control mortar. The length change percentage of it is the smallest among all the groups, and the results show that GO is effective to improve the frost resistance. After 540 freeze–thaw cycles, the weight loss of the modified cement paste with 0.06% and GO dosage was 0.25%, which is far lower than those of 0.8% in the unmodified cement paste [76]. Bin et al. [77] studied the improvement of GO on the durability of recycled concrete, when the GO dosages is within 0.02%. With the increase of the GO dosages, the frost resistance gradually decreases, and when the GO content is between 0.02% and 0.06%, the frost resistance of the recycled concrete gradually increases. Teng et al. [47] comparatively studied the effects of GP and GO on the frost resistance of cementitious composites, and the addition of GO will slightly reduce the frost resistance of mortar specimens and the reduction is approximately 0.2%. There is no unified result on the influence of GO on the frost resistance. Researches on the effects of GP on frost resistance have not been identified. Therefore, whether GO and GP are effective in improving the frost resistance remains to be studied.

3.2 Sulfate attack

The service area of concrete or mortar for water pipelines and dam is typical saline-alkali environment, containing a lot of corrosive attack such as sulfuric acid. The nanosheet-modified cement material provides a new method to solve this problem. Sharma and Arora [58] studied the sulfate attack resistance of GP-cement mortar, and 0.05% GP modified mortar can achieve excellent resistance to sulfate attack. The relationship between the sulfate exposure time and the percentage decrease of the compressive strength is shown in Figure 5. The microstructure analysis indicates that well-aligned hydrates is a key to improving resistance to the sulfuric acid attack.

Figure 5 
                  GP-modified mortar resistance to sulfate attack [58].
Figure 5

GP-modified mortar resistance to sulfate attack [58].

The improvement of GO-modified cementitious materials resistance to the sulfate attack has also attracted scholars’ attention. In the study by Muthu and Santhanam [78], the GO-modified and nanoalumina-modified cement pastes were soaked in the acidic solution, and when compared with the unmodified sample, the porosity of the cement pastes was reduced by 46% and 51%, respectively. The study by Jiang et al. [64] showed that under the condition of sulfate corrosion for 135 days, the compressive strength improvement rate of GO to cementitious materials is 12.3%. The results of the research on the sulfate attack by GO-modified cementitious materials are basically consistent, and scholars have proven the effectiveness of GO to enhance the resistance of cementitious materials to the sulfate attack. GO refined the pore structure of the cementitious materials, and this is the reason for the improvement of sulfate attack resistance [78].

3.3 Transport properties

Transport properties of cementitious materials are an important aspect affecting the durability. GO was dispersed in cement mortar, and the chloride penetration of the mortar was tested [79]. The results show that 0.01% GO can effectively prevent the entry of chloride, and 0.03% GO can effectively reduce water absorption. The chloride penetration depth and water sorptivity depth of the mortar are significantly reduced as shown in Figure 6. GO is effective in improving the transport properties. Jiang et al. [64] showed that the chloride migration coefficient of GO-modified cementitious materials at day 28 was reduced from 7.3 to 4.3 × 10−12 m2/s. Du and Pang [80,81] studied the transport properties of GP-modified cement mortar, and when the GP dosage is 1.5%, water penetration depth, chloride diffusion, and migration coefficients were reduced by 80%, 50%, and 37%; when the GP dosage is 2.5%, these three data were reduced by 64%, 70%, and 31%, respectively. The pore structure analysis shows a 30% reduction in the pore size, which is believed to be the mechanism that improves transport properties. The study by Wang et al. [82] confirmed that the GP modification can improve the pore structure and reduce the chloride migration coefficient.

Figure 6 
                  Chloride penetration depth and water sorptivity depth of the GO-modified mortar: G0 without GO, G1 with 0.01% GO, G2 with 0.03% GO, and G3 with 0.06% GO [79].
Figure 6

Chloride penetration depth and water sorptivity depth of the GO-modified mortar: G0 without GO, G1 with 0.01% GO, G2 with 0.03% GO, and G3 with 0.06% GO [79].

GO-modified cementitious materials also has better resistance to the carbon dioxide attack. In the study by Mohammed et al. [83,84], tests for monitoring carbonation progress showed the low carbonation depth for the GO-modified mortars, as shown in Figure 7. The carbonization depth of the GO-modified mortars is only 3 mm after carbonation for 18 months, which is 18% of the control group.

Figure 7 
                  Carbonation depth of the GO-modified mortars [83].
Figure 7

Carbonation depth of the GO-modified mortars [83].

Most of the studies have reported that the beneficial effects of GP and GO improved the durability in cementitious materials as the references cited earlier. However, researches on the effects of GP on frost resistance have no definite conclusion. While GO-modified cementitious material has improved the sulfate attack resistance, transport properties has been reduced by the GO and GP nanofilms.

4 Mechanism of GP- and GO-modified cementitious materials

With the inclusion of GP or GO, the microstructure of cement hydration products can be affected by the template effect to accelerate cement hydration [49,85], refine pore structure [74], and hinder cracks propagation [61]. The following sections review the mechanism from the effect on hydration, pore structure, and crack propagation.

4.1 Effect on hydration of cementitious materials

The hydration reaction is accelerated in the GO-cement composite [85], and the hydration products can form ordered microstructures [51]. The hydration effect mechanism is mainly divided into two stages: GO adsorbed on cement particles and ordered hydration product formation. Wang et al. [86] studied the adsorption phenomenon and morphological distribution, considered that the adsorption ability of GO on the cement is strong, and calculated that the thickness of the adsorption layer is about 10.16 nm. Compared with GP, the interface adhesion between GO and cement is stronger [87]. Lin et al. [85] considered that the adsorption phenomenon can accelerate the hydration reaction and the believed that this is a catalytic behavior.

GO exhibited the template effect and contributed to the formation of ordered hydration product. Lv et al. [49,51,88] observed that the GO regulate the cement hydration products forming polyhedron crystals and “flower-like crystals,” resulting in a large-scale ordered structure as shown in Figure 8. The composition of the hydration product crystals was tested by XRD [89], and the results show that GO modification cement hydration products still contain C–S–H, CH, and AFt as main components, indicating that GO only changed the shape of cement hydration products. Scholars call this a “template effect,” which is conducive to the formation of ordered microstructures [43,90,91]. The ordered structure is found only in the GO-modified cement and does not appear in the GP-modified cement [62]. Kudzma’s [92] study found that the strength of hydration products with the GO-modified cement increased. Lu et al. [93] wrapped GO on the carbon fiber surface, and the high reactivity of GO promoted the hydration of the cement between the fiber and the mortar matrix. Currently, most scholars believe that the crystal is formed by hydration products, while in the article by Cui et al. [94], they consider that the flower-like crystals are calcium carbonate crystals.

Figure 8 
                  Template effect of GO and flower-like crystals [49].
Figure 8

Template effect of GO and flower-like crystals [49].

From the aforementioned research, we can conclude that GO has the effect of promoting the hydration reaction of cement, while GP does not have. This mainly depends on the oxygen functional group of GO, which adsorbs on cement and affects hydration.

4.2 Effect on pore structure of cementitious materials

The microstructure analysis shows that the GO-modified cement matrix has a dense structure and the GO in the cement matrix can optimize the pore structure and reduce the porosity. The mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) test results are shown in Figure 9 [67], and with the increase of the GO content, the porosity decreased significantly. Due to the nanosize of GO and GP nanosheets, these nanomaterials can fill micron or nanoscale pores in the porous materials [95]. This refinement of the microstructure by the GP and GO was validated by the MIP results [80]. The study by Chu et al. [96] showed that the incorporation of GP sulfonate nanosheets reduces the porosity of concrete by 2–6%. Liu et al. [54] considered that the template effect of GO promotes cements the hydration products tightly and improving the pore structure of the cement matrix. The addition of 0.02% GP in cement will reduce the number of transitional pores (size ranges from 10 to 100 nm) [97].

Figure 9 
                  Mercury intrusion porosimetry test results of GO-modified cementitious materials [67].
Figure 9

Mercury intrusion porosimetry test results of GO-modified cementitious materials [67].

4.3 Effect on crack propagation of cementitious materials

The introduction of GP and GO nanosheets hinders the propagation of cracks in cementitious materials and reduces the density of microcracks. The scanning electron microscopic (SEM) image shows fine cracks and few branches in GO-modified cementitious materials, indicating that the 2D nanosheet structure of GO may be a hindrance to crack propagation [57]. Min et al. believed that GO monomers can be connected to each other through chemical reactions to form a 3D network structure in matrix. Moreover, the adsorption between GO and hydration products makes the GO-3D network structure tightly connected to the hydration products [98,99], as shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10 
                  SEM images of GO nanosheet-modified cement.
Figure 10

SEM images of GO nanosheet-modified cement.

This 3D network structure can prevent crack propagation. The microstructure of this GP-reinforced cement matrix was also observed [61] and believed that the plicate morphology and the tortuous behavior of GP hindered the development of cracks. Yanturina et al. [100] found that the nanoadditive of GP contributes to the formation of a dense structure of the cement stone. Horszczaruk et al. [101] found that GO interacts well with the hydration products of cement.

The impact of the microstructure in the form of GP and GO on cementitious materials has been reviewed. When GO is added to cementitious materials, the hydration reaction of cement is accelerated and the hydration products can form ordered microstructures and reduce pores and cracks in the cement matrix. The 3D network structure is formed by nanosheets and cement matrix to hinder the propagation of cracks.

5 Conclusions

The mechanical properties, durability, and mechanism of GO- and GP-modified cementitious materials was reviewed through the literature. Based on the literature research, the main conclusions are as follows:

  1. The strength of GO-modified cementitious materials is significantly improved, and GP is less than GO in improving the strength of cementitious materials. The optimal improvement of the GO-modified compressive, flexural, and tensile strengths are 77.3%, 78.3%, and 78.6%, respectively. The effect on the strength is affected by the dosages of GO and GP.

  2. GO- and GP-modified research on the durability of cementitious materials focuses on three aspects, frost resistance, acid attack, and transport properties. Whether GO and GP can be used to improve the frost resistance remains to be studied, and GO-modified cementitious material has improved the sulfate attack resistance, and transport properties can be decreased by the addition of GO and GP nanofilms.

  3. When GO is added to cementitious materials, the hydration reaction of cement is accelerated and the hydration products can form ordered microstructures and reduce pores and cracks in the cement matrix. The 3D network structure formed by GO and GP nanosheets and cement matrix plays an important role in hindering the propagation of cracks.

In summary, there are multiple other themes that need further exploration, such as the micromechanical properties of GO-modified cementitious materials. In terms of durability of GO-modified cementitious materials, the study on frost resistance have not been identified, and the effects of temperature, load, and dry–wet cycle on early cracking inhibitor of GO-modified concrete have not been covered. In addition, the study of the functional characteristics of GO- and GP-modified cementitious composites is not systematic and need more research.



Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support received from National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 51309203, 51678534, and 51879244), State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin China, Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research (IWHR-SKL-201512), the Opening Foundation of Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute of China (Grant No. CKWV2017517/KY), the Program for Innovative Research Team (in Science and Technology) at the University of Henan Province (GrantNo.20IRTSTHN009), and Foundation for University Key Teacher by Henan Province of China (2019GGJS009).

  1. Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

[1] Peng Z, Jinyi W, Kejin W, Qingfu L. Influence of nano-SiO2 on properties of fresh and hardened high performance concrete: a state-of-the-art review. Constr Build Mater. 2017;148:648–58.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.05.059Search in Google Scholar

[2] Aı̈Tcin PC. The durability characteristics of high performance concrete: a review. Cem Concr Compos. 2003;25(4):409–20.10.1016/S0958-9465(02)00081-1Search in Google Scholar

[3] Afroughsabet V, Biolzi L, Ozbakkaloglu T. High-performance fiber-reinforced concrete: a review. J Mater Sci. 2016;51(14):6517–51.10.1007/s10853-016-9917-4Search in Google Scholar

[4] Bordallo HN, Aldridge LP, Wuttke J, Fernando K, Bertram WK, Pardo LC. Cracks and pores–their roles in the transmission of water confined in cementitious materials. Eur Phys J-Spec Top. 2010;189(1):197–203.10.1140/epjst/e2010-01323-ySearch in Google Scholar

[5] Chindaprasirt P, Jaturapitakkul C, Sinsiri T. Effect of fly ash fineness on compressive strength and pore size of blended cement paste. Cem Concr Compos. 2005;27(4):425–8.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2004.07.003Search in Google Scholar

[6] Li QF, Zhang P, Shen J. Research on crack resistance of cement stabilized macadam reinforced with polypropylene fiber. J Build Mater. 2008;11(3):368–74.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Ferraris CF, Obla KH, Hill R. The influence of mineral admixtures on the rheology of cement paste and concrete. Cem Concr Res. 2001;31(2):245–55.10.1016/S0008-8846(00)00454-3Search in Google Scholar

[8] Shao H, Chen B, Li B, Tang S, Li Z. Influence of dispersants on the properties of CNTs reinforced cement-based materials. Constr Build Mater. 2015;131:186–94.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.11.053Search in Google Scholar

[9] Karapati S, Giannakopoulou T, Todorova N, Boukos N, Antiohos S, Papageorgiou D, et al. TiO2 functionalization for efficient NOx removal in photoactive cement. Appl Surf Sci. 2014;319(1):29–36.10.1016/j.apsusc.2014.07.162Search in Google Scholar

[10] Hui L, Xiao HG, Jie Y, Ou J. Microstructure of cement mortar with nano-particles. Compos Part B. 2004;35(2):185–9.10.1016/S1359-8368(03)00052-0Search in Google Scholar

[11] Lu X, Wang C, Wei Y. One-dimensional composite nanomaterials: synthesis by electrospinning and their applications. Small. 2009;5(21):2349–70.10.1002/smll.200900445Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[12] Kittelson DB. Engines and nanoparticles. J Aerosol Sci. 1998;29:5–6.10.1016/S0021-8502(97)10037-4Search in Google Scholar

[13] Zhang L. Nanomaterials and nanotechnology in china:current status of application and opportunities for commercialization. Mater Rev. 2001;15(7):188–201.Search in Google Scholar

[14] Hui D, Chipara M, Sankar J, Lau Kt. Mechanical properties of carbon nanotubes composites. J Comput Theor Nanosci. 2004;1:204–15.10.1166/jctn.2004.018Search in Google Scholar

[15] Ogloblya OV, Hui D, Strzhemechny YM, Prylutskyy YI. Optical polarizability of zigzag single-walled carbon nanotubes fullerene-capped at one end and covalently bonded with benzene rings at the other end. J Nanomater. 2007;2007:1–3.10.1155/2007/13617Search in Google Scholar

[16] Li Z, Wang H, He S, Lu Y, Wang M. Investigations on the preparation and mechanical properties of the nano-alumina reinforced cement composite. Mater Lett. 2006;60(3):356–9.10.1016/j.matlet.2005.08.061Search in Google Scholar

[17] Manzur T, Yazdani N. Effect of different parameters on properties of multiwalled carbon nanotube-reinforced cement composites. Arab J Sci Eng. 2016;41(12):4835–45.10.1007/s13369-016-2181-8Search in Google Scholar

[18] Aly M, Hashmi MSJ, Olabi AG, Messeiry M, Abadir EF, Hussain AI. Effect of colloidal nano-silica on the mechanical and physical behaviour of waste-glass cement mortar. Mater Des. 2012;33(1):127–35.10.1016/j.matdes.2011.07.008Search in Google Scholar

[19] Hou P, Kawashima S, Kong D, Corr DJ, Qian J, Shah SP. Modification effects of colloidal nano-SiO2 on cement hydration and its gel property. Compos Part B. 2013;45(1):440–8.10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.05.056Search in Google Scholar

[20] Chithra S, Senthil Kumar SRR, Chinnaraju K. The effect of colloidal nano-silica on workability, mechanical and durability properties of high performance concrete with copper slag as partial fine aggregate. Constr Build Mater. 2016;113:794–804.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.119Search in Google Scholar

[21] Zhidan R, Guang J, Wei S. Effects of nano-SiO2 and nano-CaCO3 on properties of ultra-high performance cementitious composites. J Southeast Univ (Nat Sci Ed). 2015;45(2):393–8.Search in Google Scholar

[22] Zhuang CL, Chen Y. The effect of nano-SiO2 on concrete properties: a review. Nanotechnol Rev. 2019;8(1):562–72.10.1515/ntrev-2019-0050Search in Google Scholar

[23] Zhang P, Ling YF, Wang J, Shi Y. Bending resistance of PVA fiber reinforced cementitious composites containing nano-SiO2. Nanotechnol Rev. 2019;8(1):690–8.10.1515/ntrev-2019-0060Search in Google Scholar

[24] Power AC, Gorey B, Chandra S, Chapman J. Carbon nanomaterials and their application to electrochemical sensors: a review. Nanotechnol Rev. 2018;7(1):19–41.10.1515/ntrev-2017-0160Search in Google Scholar

[25] Xu S, Liu J, Li Q. Mechanical properties and microstructure of multi-walled carbon nanotube-reinforced cement paste. Constr Build Mater. 2015;76:16–23.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.11.049Search in Google Scholar

[26] Qinghua L, Songjie X, Shilang X, Yao L, Jintao K, Yuxing W. Improvement of the initial fracture toughness of fiber mortar by carbon nanotubes. J Build Mater. 2017;20(2):185–90.Search in Google Scholar

[27] Li WW, Wei-Ming J, Yao-Cheng W, Yi L, Ruo-Xu S, Feng X. Investigation on the mechanical properties of a cement-based material containing carbon nanotube under drying and freeze-thaw conditions. Materials. 2015;8(12):8780–92.10.3390/ma8125491Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[28] Coppola L, Buoso A, Corazza F. Electrical properties of carbon nanotubes cement composites for monitoring stress conditions in concrete structures. Appl Mech Mater. 2011;82:118–23.10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.82.118Search in Google Scholar

[29] Hassanzadeh-Aghdam MK, Ansari R, Mahmoodi MJ, Darvizeh A, Hajati-Modaraei A. A comprehensive study on thermal conductivities of wavy carbon nanotube-reinforced cementitious nanocomposites. Cem Concr Compos. 2018;90:108–18.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.09.021Search in Google Scholar

[30] Han B, Yu X, Ou J. Multifunctional and smart carbon nanotube reinforced cement-based materials. Nanotechnology in civil infrastructure. 2011. p. 1–47.10.1007/978-3-642-16657-0_1Search in Google Scholar

[31] Zuo J, Wu Y, Wu K. Seebeck effect and mechanical properties of carbon nanotube-carbon fiber/cement nanocomposites. Fuller Sci Technol. 2014;23(5):383–91.10.1080/1536383X.2013.863760Search in Google Scholar

[32] Li GY, Wang PM, Zhao X. Pressure-sensitive properties and microstructure of carbon nanotube reinforced cement composites. Cem Concr Compos. 2007;29(5):377–82.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2006.12.011Search in Google Scholar

[33] Lurie SA, Hui D, Kireitseu MV, Zubov VI, Tomlinson G, Bochkareva L, et al. Computational mechanics modelling of nanoparticle-reinforced composite materials across the length scales. Int J Comput Mater Sci Eng. 2006;2(3/4):228.10.1504/IJCSE.2006.012777Search in Google Scholar

[34] Stankovich S, Dikin DA, Dommett GHB, Kohlhaas KM, Zimney EJ, Stach EA, et al. Graphene-based composite materials. Nature. 2006;442(2):282–6.10.1038/nature04969Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[35] Yan SJ, Dai SL, Zhang XY, Yang C, Hong QH, Chen JZ, et al. Investigating aluminum alloy reinforced by graphene nanoflakes. Mater Sci Eng A. 2014;612:440–4.10.1016/j.msea.2014.06.077Search in Google Scholar

[36] Zhu Y, Murali S, Cai W, Li X, Ji WS, Potts JR, et al. Graphene and graphene oxide: synthesis, properties, and applications. Cheminform. 2010;22(46):3906–24.Search in Google Scholar

[37] Compton OC, Nguyen ST. Graphene oxide, highly reduced graphene oxide, and graphene: versatile building blocks for carbon-based materials. Small. 2010;6(6):711–23.10.1002/smll.200901934Search in Google Scholar

[38] Kireitseu M, Hui D, Tomlinson G. Advanced shock-resistant and vibration damping of nanoparticle-reinforced composite material. Compos Part B. 2008;39(1):128–38.10.1016/j.compositesb.2007.03.004Search in Google Scholar

[39] Chen Y, Yang RT, Tsamatsoulis D, Papayannakos N, Lerf A. A new structural model for graphite oxide. Chem Phys Lett. 1998;287(1):53–6.10.1016/S0009-2614(98)00144-4Search in Google Scholar

[40] Lerf A, He H, Forster M, Klinowski J. Structure of Graphite Oxide Revisited. J Phys Chem B. 1998;102(23):4477–82.10.1021/jp9731821Search in Google Scholar

[41] Bandaru PR, Yamada H, Narayanan R, Hoefer M. The role of defects and dimensionality in influencing the charge, capacitance, and energy storage of graphene and 2D materials. Nanotechnol Rev. 2017;6(5):421–33.10.1515/ntrev-2016-0099Search in Google Scholar

[42] Walter A, Garofalo A, Parat A, Martinez H, Felder-Flesch D, Begin-Colin S. Functionalization strategies and dendronization of iron oxide nanoparticles. Nanotechnol Rev. 2015;4(6):581–93.10.1515/ntrev-2015-0014Search in Google Scholar

[43] Lv S, Liu J, Sun T, Ma Y, Zhou Q. Effect of GO nanosheets on shapes of cement hydration crystals and their formation process. Constr Build Mater. 2014;64:231–9.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.04.061Search in Google Scholar

[44] Le JL, Du H, Pang SD. Use of 2D graphene nanoplatelets (GNP) in cement composites for structural health evaluation. Compos Part B. 2014;67:555–63.10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.08.005Search in Google Scholar

[45] Chen B, Wu Q, Zhu H, Wang S. Preparation and properties of graphene cement-based composite materials. J Mater Sci Eng. 2018;36(4):650–5.Search in Google Scholar

[46] Rao R, Wang H, Wang H, Tuan CY, Ye M. Models for estimating the thermal properties of electric heating concrete containing steel fiber and graphite. Compos Part B. 2019;164:116–20.10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.11.053Search in Google Scholar

[47] Teng T, Zhou F, Qiong L, Sen W, Susheng T, Qiang Y. Investigation of the effects of graphene and graphene oxide nanoplatelets on the micro- and macro-properties of cementitious materials. Constr Build Mater. 2016;106:102–14.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.12.092Search in Google Scholar

[48] Peyvandi A, Soroushian P, Balachandra AM, Sobolev K. Enhancement of the durability characteristics of concrete nanocomposite pipes with modified graphite nanoplatelets. Constr Build Mater. 2013;47:111–7.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.05.002Search in Google Scholar

[49] Lv S, Ma Y, Qiu C, Sun T, Liu J, Zhou Q. Effect of graphene oxide nanosheets of microstructure and mechanical properties of cement composites. Constr Build Mater. 2013;49:121–7.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.08.022Search in Google Scholar

[50] Polat EO, Balci O, Kakenov N, Uzlu HB, Kocabas C, Dahiya R. Synthesis of large area graphene for high performance in flexible optoelectronic devices. Sci Rep. 2015;5:16744. 10.1038/srep16744.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[51] Lv S, Jia Z, Linlin Z, Chunmao J. Preparation of cement composites with ordered microstructures via doping with graphene oxide nanosheets and an investigation of their strength and durability. Materials. 2016;9(924):1–12.10.3390/ma9110924Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[52] Sharma S, Kothiyal NC, Chitkara M. Enhanced mechanical performance of cement nanocomposite reinforced with graphene oxide synthesized from mechanically milled graphite and its comparison with carbon nanotubes reinforced nanocomposite. RSC Adv. 2016;6(106):103993–4009.10.1039/C6RA23421FSearch in Google Scholar

[53] Lu L, Dong O. Properties of cement mortar and ultra-high strength concrete incorporating graphene oxide nanosheets. Nanomaterials. 2017;7(187):1–14.10.3390/nano7070187Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[54] Hui TL, Jian ZJ, Yong JY, Liu SQ. The mechanical properties and micro-structure of oil well cement enhanced by graphene oxide. Mater Sci Forum. 2018;916:200–4.10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.916.200Search in Google Scholar

[55] Long WJ, Zheng D, Duan H-b, Han N, Xing F. Performance enhancement and environmental impact of cement composites containing graphene oxide with recycled fine aggregates. J Clean Prod. 2018;194:192–202.10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.108Search in Google Scholar

[56] Lu Z, Hou D, Meng L, Sun G, Li Z. Mechanism of cement paste reinforced by graphene oxide/carbon nanotubes composites with enhanced mechanical properties. RSC Adv. 2015;5(5):100598–605.10.1039/C5RA18602ASearch in Google Scholar

[57] Pan Z, He L, Qiu L, Korayem AH, Li G, Zhu JW, et al. Mechanical properties and microstructure of a graphene oxide–cement composite. Cem Concr Compos. 2015;58:140–7.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2015.02.001Search in Google Scholar

[58] Sharma S, Arora S. Economical graphene reinforced fly ash cement composite made with recycled aggregates for improved sulphate resistance and mechanical performance. Constr Build Mater. 2018;162:608–12.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.12.027Search in Google Scholar

[59] Bai S, Jiang L, Xu N, Jin M, Jiang S. Enhancement of mechanical and electrical properties of graphene/cement composite due to improved dispersion of graphene by addition of silica fume. Constr Build Mater. 2018;164:433–41.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.12.176Search in Google Scholar

[60] Tragazikis IK, Dassios KG, Dalla PT, Exarchos DA, Matikas TE. Acoustic emission investigation of the effect of graphene on the fracture behavior of cement mortars. Eng Fract Mech. 2018;210:444–51.10.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.01.004Search in Google Scholar

[61] Wang B, Ruishuang J, Zhenlin W. Investigation of the mechanical properties and microstructure of graphene nanoplatelet-cement composite. Nanomaterials. 2016;6(11):295–300.10.3390/nano6110200Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[62] Jiang RS, Wang BM. Mechanical properties and microstructure of graphene-cement composites. Key Eng Mater. 2017;748:295–300.10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.748.295Search in Google Scholar

[63] Qiong L, Qingfeng X, Qiang Y, Rundong G, Teng T. Experimental investigation on mechanical and piezoresistive properties of cementitious materials containing graphene and graphene oxide nanoplatelets. Constr Build Mater. 2016;127:565–76.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.10.024Search in Google Scholar

[64] Jiang W, Xiangguo L, Yang L, Mingkai Z, Zhuolin L, Zhaofeng R, et al. Cement-based materials containing graphene oxide and polyvinyl alcohol fiber: mechanical properties, durability, and microstructure. Nanomaterials. 2018;8(9):638–54.10.3390/nano8090638Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[65] Qian Y, Abdallah MY, Kawashima S. Characterization of cement-based materials modified with graphene-oxide. Nanotechnol Construction. 2015. p. 259–64.10.1007/978-3-319-17088-6_33Search in Google Scholar

[66] Li X, Linhao W, Yuqing L, Wengui L, Biqin D, Hui DW. Dispersion of graphene oxide agglomerates in cement paste and its effects on electrical resistivity and flexural strength. Cem Concr Compos. 2018;92:145–54.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2018.06.008Search in Google Scholar

[67] Long WJ, Jing-Jie W, Hongyan M, Feng X. Dynamic mechanical properties and microstructure of graphene oxide nanosheets reinforced cement composites. Nanomaterials. 2017;7(407):1–19.10.3390/nano7120407Search in Google Scholar

[68] Mururgan M, Manu S, Soujit S, Gupta T, Pradeep S. Influence of 2D rGO nanosheets on the properties of OPC paste. Cem Concr Compos. 2016;70:48–59.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2016.03.005Search in Google Scholar

[69] Zhao L, Guo X, Ge C, Li Q, Guo L, Shu X, et al. Investigation of the effectiveness of PC@GO on the reinforcement for cement composites. Constr Build Mater. 2015;113:470–8.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.090Search in Google Scholar

[70] Chuah S, Li W, Chen S, et al. Investigation on dispersion of graphene oxide in cement composite using different surfactant treatments. Constr Build Mater. 2018;161:519–27.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.154Search in Google Scholar

[71] Long WJ, Li HD, Fang CL, Xing F. Uniformly dispersed and re-agglomerated graphene oxide-based cement pastes: a comparison of rheological properties, mechanical properties and microstructure. Nanomaterials. 2017;8(1):31.10.3390/nano8010031Search in Google Scholar

[72] Babak F, Abolfazl H, Alimorad R, Parviz G. Preparation and mechanical properties of graphene oxide: cement nanocomposites. Sci World J. 2014;2014(4):276323.10.1155/2014/276323Search in Google Scholar

[73] Li X, Lu Z, Chuah S, Li W, Li Z. Effects of graphene oxide aggregates on hydration degree, sorptivity, and tensile splitting strength of cement paste. Composites Part A. 100, 2017. p. 1–8.10.1016/j.compositesa.2017.05.002Search in Google Scholar

[74] Li X, Li C, Liu Y, Chen SJ, Wang CM, Sanjayan JG, et al. Improvement of mechanical properties by incorporating graphene oxide into cement mortar. Mech Adv Mater Struct. 2018;25(15–16):1313–22.10.1080/15376494.2016.1218226Search in Google Scholar

[75] Zhou F. Investigation on properties of cementitious materials reinforced by graphene. Biol Control. 2014;75(4):39–47.Search in Google Scholar

[76] Mohammed A, Sanjayan JG, Duan WH, Nazari A. Graphene oxide impact on hardened cement expressed in enhanced freeze-thaw resistance. J Mater Civ Eng. 2016;28(9):04016072.10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001586Search in Google Scholar

[77] Bin L, Jun Z, Chunhua R, Mingfu F, Jingang X, Xingang W. Experimental study on modification of recycled concrete with graphene oxide. J Build Struct. 2016;37:103–8.Search in Google Scholar

[78] Muthu M, Santhanam M. Effect of reduced graphene oxide, alumina and silica nanoparticles on the deterioration characteristics of Portland cement paste exposed to acidic environment. Cem Concr Compos. 2018;91:118–37.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2018.05.005Search in Google Scholar

[79] Mohammed A, Sanjayan JG, Duan WH, Nazari A. Incorporating graphene oxide in cement composites: a study of transport properties. Constr Build Mater. 2015;84:341–7.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.01.083Search in Google Scholar

[80] Du H, Pang SD. Enhancement of barrier properties of cement mortar with graphene nanoplatelet. Cem Concr Res. 2015;76:10–9.10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.05.007Search in Google Scholar

[81] Du HJ, Pang SD. Transport of water and chloride ion in cement composites modified with graphene nanoplatelet. Key Eng Mater. 2015;629(3):162–7.10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.629-630.162Search in Google Scholar

[82] Wang B, Ruying Z, Tingting Z. Pore structure and durability of cement-based composites doped with graphene nanoplatelets. Mater Express. 2018;8(2):149–56.10.1166/mex.2018.1421Search in Google Scholar

[83] Mohammed A, Sanjayan JG, Nazari A, Al-Saadi NTK. The role of graphene oxide in limited long-term carbonation of cement-based matrix. Constr Build Mater. 2018;168:858–66.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.02.082Search in Google Scholar

[84] Mohammed A, Sanjayan JG, Nazari A, Al-Saadi NTK. Inhibition of carbonation attack in cement-based matrix due to adding graphene oxide. Australian J Civ Eng. 2017;15(1):1–12.10.1080/14488353.2017.1367252Search in Google Scholar

[85] Lin C, Wei W, Hu YH. Catalytic behavior of graphene oxide for cement hydration process. J Phys Chem Solids. 2016;89:128–33.10.1016/j.jpcs.2015.11.002Search in Google Scholar

[86] Wang M, Wang R, Yao H, Wang Z, Zheng S. Adsorption characteristics of graphene oxide nanosheets on cement. RSC Adv. 2016;6(68):63365. 10.1039.C6RA10902K.Search in Google Scholar

[87] Paz E, Forriol F, del Real JC, Dunne N. Graphene oxide versus graphene for optimisation of PMMA bone cement for orthopaedic applications. Mater Sci Eng C. 2015;77:1003–11.10.1016/j.msec.2017.03.269Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[88] Lv S, Luo X, Zhang J, Gao D. Graphene oxide controlled cement materials formation of large-scale ordered structure and its properties characterization. Mater Rep. 2017;32(12):10–3.Search in Google Scholar

[89] Lv S, Zhang J, Luo X, Zhu L, Ni C. Microstructure and properties for composites of graphene oxide/cement. Chin J Mater Res. 2018;32(3):233–40.Search in Google Scholar

[90] Lv SH, Deng LJ, Yang WQ, Zhou QF, Cui YY. Fabrication of polycarboxylate/graphene oxide nanosheet composites by copolymerization for reinforcing and toughening cement composites. Cem Concr Compos. 2016;66:1–9.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2015.11.007Search in Google Scholar

[91] Ossai CI, Raghavan N. Nanostructure and nanomaterial characterization, growth mechanisms, and applications. Nanotechnol Rev. 2018;7(2):209–31.10.1515/ntrev-2017-0156Search in Google Scholar

[92] Kudzma A. Influence of nanographene oxide on calcium aluminate cement hydration. Interceram. 2019;68(1–2):30–4.10.1007/s42411-018-0062-8Search in Google Scholar

[93] Lu Z, Ahanif A, Sun G, Liang R, Parthasarathy P, Li Z. Highly dispersed graphene oxide electrodeposited carbon fiber reinforced cement-based materials with enhanced mechanical properties. Cem Concr Compos. 2018;87:220–8.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2018.01.006Search in Google Scholar

[94] Cui H, Yan X, Tang L, Xing F. Possible pitfall in sample preparation for SEM analysis–a discussion of the paper “Fabrication of polycarboxylate/graphene oxide nanosheet composites by copolymerization for reinforcing and toughening cement composites” by Lv et al. Cem Concr Compos. 2016;77:81–5.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2016.12.007Search in Google Scholar

[95] Saafi M, Tang L, Fung J, Rahman M, Liggat J. Enhanced properties of graphene/fly ash geopolymeric composite cement. Cem Concr Res. 2015;67:292–9.10.1016/j.cemconres.2014.08.011Search in Google Scholar

[96] Chu HY, Jiang J-y, Sun W, Bai Y, Zhang M. Effects of graphene sulfonate nanosheets on mechanical and thermal properties of sacrificial concrete during high temperature exposure. Cem Concr Compos. 2017;82:252–64.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.06.007Search in Google Scholar

[97] Mokhtar M, Abd-El-Aziz MA, Hassaan MY, Morsy M, Khalil MH. Mechanical performance, pore structure and micro-structural characteristics of graphene oxide nano platelets reinforced cement. Constr Build Mater. 2017;138C:333–9.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.02.021Search in Google Scholar

[98] Min W, Wang R, Hao Y, Farhan S, Zheng S, Du C. Study on the three dimensional mechanism of graphene oxide nanosheets modified cement. Constr Build Mater. 2016;126:730–9.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.09.092Search in Google Scholar

[99] Lin M, Wang ZL, Yang PW, Li P. Micro-structure and rheological properties of graphene oxide rubber asphalt. Nanotechnol Rev. 2019;8(1):227–35.10.1515/ntrev-2019-0021Search in Google Scholar

[100] Yanturina RA, Trofimov BY, Ahmedjanov RM. Structuring in cement systems with introduction of graphene nano-additives. Mater Sci Eng. 2017;262:12–7.10.1088/1757-899X/262/1/012017Search in Google Scholar

[101] Horszczaruk E, Mijowska E, Kalenczuk RJ, Aleksandrzak M, Mijowska S. Nanocomposite of cement/graphene oxide–impact on hydration kinetics and Young’s modulus. Constr Build Mater. 2015;78:234–42.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.12.009Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2020-03-21
Accepted: 2020-04-01
Published Online: 2020-05-30

© 2020 Juan Wang et al., published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Downloaded on 28.3.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/ntrev-2020-0041/html
Scroll to top button