Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

Research Article

Numerical Analysis of the Energy Improvement of Plastering Mortars with Phase Change Materials

Table 2

Mix proportions of formulations A to L and REFM and surface appearance of samples A to L.
SampleFormulation % Surface appearance Comments
ACement40.00582536.tab.002aAppearance: fissuring/cracking without evident direction (aprox. ).
Causes: high cement dosage induces low ductility. A narrow particle sizes distribution with high percentage of fines due to the presence of PCM.
PCM50.00
Sand (filler)10.00
BCement40.00582536.tab.002b Appearance: fissuring/cracking without evident direction (aprox. ).
Causes: high cement dosage induces low ductility. A narrow particle sizes distribution with high percentage of fines.
PCM50.00
Sand (filler)9.90
Cellulose ether0.10
CCement25.00582536.tab.002c Appearance: fissuring/cracking without evident direction (aprox. ).
Causes: a narrow particle sizes distribution with high percentage of fines.
PCM50.00
Sand (filler)24.92
Cellulose ether0.08
DCement25.00582536.tab.002d Appearance: better appearance with less fissuring.
Causes: better particle size distribution. Reduction on fines content.
PCM25.00
Sand (filler)49.92
Cellulose ether0.08
ECement25.00582536.tab.002e Appearance: better appearance with less fissuring.
Causes: use of industrial filler. Better particle size distribution. Reduction on fines content.
PCM25.00
Sand (filler)29.92
Industrial filler20.00
Cellulose ether0.08
FCement25.00582536.tab.002f Appearance: fissuring/cracking without evident direction (aprox. ).
Causes: the addition of a water repellent could have affected relaxation and shrinkage.
PCM25.00
Industrial filler49.87
Cellulose ether0.05
Calcium stearate0.08 
GCement25.00582536.tab.002g Appearance: fissuring/cracking without evident direction.
Causes: the addition of a water repellent could have affected relaxation and shrinkage.
PCM25.00
Industrial filler49.85
Cellulose ether0.05
Calcium stearate0.08
Resins (VAE)0.02
HCement10.00582536.tab.002h Appearance: better appearance with less fissuring.
Causes: higher ductility mainly due to the addition of lime. The use of dispersed fibers and resins that improves cracking susceptibility.
Lime20.00
PCM25.00
Industrial filler42.80
Resins (VAE)2.00
Fibres (PAN)0.20
ICement10.00582536.tab.002i Appearance: better performance concerning cracking.
Causes: higher ductility mainly due to the addition of lime. The use of dispersed fibers and resins that improves cracking susceptibility.
Lime20.00
PCM25.00
Industrial filler42.70
Resins (VAE)2.00
Fibres (PAN)0.20
Aluminium powder0.10
JCement10.00582536.tab.002j Appearance: adequate behavior
(i.e., absence of drying cracks).
Results: very low tensile resistance:
≪ 1500 MPa.
Causes: higher ductility mainly due to the addition of lime.
Lime10.00
PCM25.00
Industrial filler52.80
Resins (VAE)2.00
Fibres (PAN)0.20 
KCement10.00582536.tab.002k Appearance: adequate behavior
(i.e., absence of drying cracks).
Results: very low tensile resistance:
≪ 1500 MPa.
Causes: higher ductility mainly due to the addition of lime.
Lime10.00
PCM25.00
Industrial filler52.65
Resins (VAE)2.00
Fibres (PAN)0.20
Aluminium powder0.10
Cellulose ether0.05
LCement10.00582536.tab.002l Appearance: adequate behavior
(i.e., absence of drying cracks).
Results: satisfactory (Table 3).
Lime5.00
PCM25.00
Industrial filler57.65
Resins (VAE)2.00
Fibres (PAN)0.20
Aluminium powder0.10
Cellulose ether0.05
REFMCement12.00—Table 3.
Lime2.48
Sand65.00
Industrial filler20.00
Fibres (PAN)0.05
Aluminium powder0.09
Cellulose ether0.09
Calcium stearate0.29
EN 998-1 [5].