Low efflorescence tile grout composition

Abstract

The present invention provides a dry mix of cement, sand, metakaolin in the amount of 5 wt % or less, based on total solids in the dry mix, and aluminum cement in a low amount (≦1 wt. %, based on total solids in the dry mix) useful as a tile grout, as well as uses thereof and to methods of using the same as a tile grout. The dry mix when made into a mortar exhibits excellent resistance to efflorescence as a tile grout.

Claims

1. A low efflorescence tile grout composition comprising a dry mix of a) Portland cement, b) sand or aggregate, c) from 0.01 to 1.0 wt. %, based on total solids in the dry mix, of an aluminum cement, d) a fatty acid or a fatty acid salt of an alkali metal, an alkaline earth metal or a divalent metal, and e) metakaolin.

2. The dry mix composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the amount of aluminum cement c) ranges from 0.4 to 0.98 wt. %, based on total solids in the dry mix composition.

3. The dry mix composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the amount of metakaolin e) ranges from 0.5 to 5.0 wt. %, based on total solids in the dry mix composition.

4. The dry mix composition as claimed in claim 3, wherein the amount of metakaolin e) ranges from 0.5 to less than 1.0 wt. %.

5. The dry mix composition as claimed in claim 1, comprising from 30 to 50 wt. % of the Portland cement a).

6. The dry mix composition as claimed in claim 5, further comprising one or more filler.

7. The dry mix composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the sand or aggregate b) has particle size range of 0.08-0.6 mm.

8. The dry mix composition as claimed in claim 1, wherein the fatty acid or fatty acid salt of an alkali metal, alkaline earth metal or a divalent metal d) comprises sodium oleate.

9. Use of the dry mix compositions as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 8 as a tile grout.

10. In a method of using a low efflorescence tile grout dry mix composition wherein two or more or a plurality of tiles are laid on and adhered to a substrate with their largest dimension lying on the substrate, and then a tile grout is applied in the spaces or gaps between the thus laid tiles, the improvement comprising combining the dry mix compositions of any one of claims 1 to 8 with water to form a mixture, allowing the mixture to sit to achieve a trowelable consistency, applying the trowelable mixture to the gaps between the two or more or the plurality of tiles that are adhered to the tile bearing substrate and drying.

Description

EXAMPLES

(1) As indicated in Table 1, below, the following materials were used:

(2) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Formulation Materials Material Description Portland cement P.W. 42.5.sup.1 Aluminum cement Ternal ™ white (Al2O3% >68.5 dry wt. %).sup.2 River sand <0.4 mm Calcium carbonate.sup.3 135 μm (100 mesh) Sodium oleate LIGA ™ Natriumoleat 90.sup.4 Metakaolin PowerPozz ™.sup.,5 Al.sub.2O.sub.3•2SiO.sub.2 Anti efflorescence ERA200 ™.sup., 6 Terpenoid, resin acid, colophony, additive terpene resin, terpene-phenol resins Hydrophobic additive Seal80 ™.sup., 6 Alkoxy alkyl silane Cellulose ether 55RT6000.sup.7 Hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose, viscosity: 4000~6000 mPa .Math. s (2% solution, Brookfield DV-III Ultra, spindle #6 at speed 20 rpm, 20 °C.) Redispersible powder 8031H.sup.8 Ethylene/vinyl laurate/vinyl chloride Calcium formate.sup.9 Ca(HCOO).sub.2 (accelerator) .sup.1Shanghai White Cement Company (Shanghai, CN); .sup.2Kerneos (China) Aluminum Technology Co., Ltd. (Tianjing, CN); .sup.3Zhejiang XingMinghua building material Co., Ltd. (Zhejiang, CN); .sup.4Peter Greven Fett Chemie GmbH & Co. (Bad Münstereifel, DE); .sup.5Shanghai TianCe Trading Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, CN); .sup.6 Elotex AG (Shanghai, CN); .sup.7ShanDong Ruitai Co., Ltd. (Shandong, CN); .sup.8Wacker Chemical (China) Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, CN); .sup.9Lanxess (Shanghai) Trading Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, CN).

(3) The following experimental test methods were used:

(4) Dry Mix Preparation:

(5) The cement, sand, and other materials used were each weighed and placed into a plastic bag which is then hand mixed for 2 minutes and allowed to sit at room temperature and standard humidity for 24 hrs to form a dry mix tile grout.

(6) Fresh Tile Grout Preparation:

(7) The dry mix tile grout is mixed with water in mixer for 2 min, water dosage is determined so as to give a desired consistency of 6-8 mm.

(8) Consistency Test:

(9) Consistency is tested with mortar consistency tester (Type SC-145, Zhejiang, China)) according to Chinese standard JGJ/T 70-2009 “Standard for test method of performance on building mortar” (Published by the Ministry of Construction of China, Beijing, Jun. 1, 2009). The consistency was tested with a cone made of stainless steel or copper, the weight is (300±2)g. The cone is mounted on a vertical slide bar that is itself fastened by a screw to a horizontal bar mounted on a laboratory stand or bracket. To test, mortar was filled into a container until the surface of mortar was 10 mm below the rim of the container and then the mortar was tamped 25 times with a round steel bar (10 mm diameter, 350 mm length) and knock the container 5-6 times to flatten the mortar surface. Then the container was put on a base mounted below the cone and the cone was moved until its tip contacted the surface of mortar. The screw was then loosened to let the cone fall into the mortar for 10 s, and the distance the cone falls into the mortar was measured and recorded in mm.

(10) Efflorescence Test:

(11) Apply the fresh tile grout on an expanded polystyrene slab to a thickness of (5±1)mm, and put the sample immediately into a curing room at (23±2° C. and (50±5)% humidity for 2 hours. Then put the sample into the refrigerator at 5° C. and 90% humidity inside, mist water onto the sample until its surface is covered with water. After 24 hours put the sample back into the curing room for 24 h, then score the efflorescence the appears on the surface of the tile grout from 1 to 5, as follows:

(12) 1 means very slight efflorescence, 5 means very strong efflorescence. Efflorescence with the score less than 2 is acceptable.

(13) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Efflorescence Test Results (all % s are wt. %, based on total solids) Material Example 1 Example 2* Example 3* Portland cemft 34.500%  34.500%  35.000%  Aluminum 0.500% 0.500% — cement River sand 52.440%  53.190%  51.32% Calcium 10.000%  10.000%  10.000%  carbonate (100 mesh) Sodium oleate 0.300% — — Metakaolin 0.800% — — Anti efflorescence — 0.150% — additive Hydrophobic — 0.200% — additive Cellulose ether 0.080% 0.080% 0.080% Redispersible — — 0.300% powder Calcium formate — — 0.300% Pigment 3.000% 3.000% 3.000% Water ratio/% 21 24 20 23 20 23 Consistency/cm 6 8 6 8 6 8 Efflorescence 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.4 4 4 Cost (RMB/t).sup.1 640 860 480 *Indicates Comparative Example; Cost is based on prevailing retail market conditions in Shanghai as of the filing date of this disclosure.

(14) The test results show the inventive formulation of Example 1 can decrease efflorescence significantly compared with a conventional tile grout formula of Example 3. In comparison to Example 2, comprising a combination of the same amount of aluminum cement as Example 1, along with ERA200™ resin and seal 80™ silane, the inventive formulation of Example 1 slightly improves efflorescence at two different water ratios but at a significantly lower formulation cost. This is so even using only 0.8% of metakaolin.

(15) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Test Results Formulations Without Aluminum Cement. Example 4* Material Wt. % (based on total solids) Portland cement 35.000% Aluminum cement — River sand 51.32% Calcium carbonate 10.000% Sodium oleate 0.300% Metakaolin 0.800% Cellulose ether 0.080% Pigment 3.000% Water ratio/% 20 Consistency/cm 6 Efflorescence 2 *— Indicates Comparative Example

(16) As shown in Table 3, above, Example 4 used as a tile grout exhibits much stronger efflorescence when compared with the inventive formula of Example 1 which contains aluminum cement. Accordingly, aluminum cement is necessary for reducing efflorescence at a low cost in accordance with the present invention.

(17) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Test Result Of Formulations with Only Sodium Oleate. Example 5* 6* Wt. % (based on Wt. % (based on Materials total solids) total solids) Portland cement 34.500% 34.500% Aluminum cement — — <River sand 52.440% 53.190% Calcium carbonate 10.000% 10.000% Sodium oleate 0.300% 0.500% Metakaolin — — Cellulose ether 0.080% 0.080% Pigment 3.000% 3.000% Water ratio/% 20 21 Consistency/cm 6 6 Efflorescence 2.5 2.5 *— Indicates Comparative Example

(18) As shown in Table 4, above, Examples 5 and 6 with sodium oleate and no aluminum cement or metakaolin have more than twice the efflorescence compared with inventive Example 1. The lower efflorescence level compared with comparative Example 3, in Table 1, above, shows that sodium oleate is effective for reducing efflorescence.

(19) TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Effect of Various Hydrophobia Agents (%s are all wt. %, based on total solids) Materials Example 7* Example 8* Portland cement 34.500% 35.000% River sand 52.440% 51.32% Calcium carbonate 10.000% 10.000% Sodium oleate 0.300% — Zinc stearate — 0.300% Cellulose ether 0.080% 0.080% Pigment 3.000% 3.000% Water ratio/% 20 21 Consistency/cm 6 6 Efflorescence 2.5 3 *— Indicates Comparative Example

(20) As shown in Table 5, above, the test results show that sodium oleate in Example 7 and zinc stearate in Example 8 have a similar effect to reduce efflorescence. Zinc stearate is thus effective in the present invention.

(21) TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Effect of Concentration (%s are all wt. %, based on total solids) Materials Example 9 Portland cement 34.500% Aluminum cement 1.000% <0.4 mm sand 46.920% Calcium carbonate 10.000% Sodium oleate 0.500% Metakaolin 4.000% 55RT6000 0.080% Pigment 3.000% Water ratio/% 23 Consistency/cm 6 Efflorescence 1.0
As shown in Table 6, above, the test results show that Example 9 with more aluminum cement, sodium oleate and metakaolin reduces efflorescence even more effectively than in Example 1 even with only 1 wt. %, based on total dry mix weight, of Aluminum cement.