論文名稱：不同性質打底調整材對接著強度影響之研究
頁數：三百五十八頁
校所別：國立成功大學 建築學系碩士班
畢業時間：一百一十一年一月
學位：碩士
研究生：劉家任
指導教授：楊詩弘 助理教授
關鍵詞：有機接著劑、瓷磚、外牆工法、下地調整材、打底層、CNS12611、CNS16064

臺灣建築瓷磚外牆常見構造由內而外分別是結構體→水泥黏著層→水泥砂漿打底層→防水劑→瓷磚黏著劑→瓷磚。瓷磚黏著劑以水泥系接著劑為大宗，在日本已使用有機系接著劑多年，也有多篇論文證明有機接著劑強度與耐候性大於傳統無機接著劑，但有機接著劑對臺灣傳統打底工法之適配還尚未有相關實驗，若直接搬運日本實驗數據過來可能也與臺灣工法有所差異，且臺灣外牆愛好施作防水層，雖然有防水層與有機接著劑之試驗，但加入打底層導致打底吸水率發生改變也會影響到相關強度。
本次試驗以臺灣打底層與日本下地層為對比，以不同打底層材料與養護天數，並加入防水材、防水養護天數、有機無機接著劑、接著劑養護天數為變因，試體再受直接拉拔、熱劣化試驗、反覆水熱試驗，比對試體強度變化與破壞情形。
試驗結果顯示在無防水層組別標準養護臺灣工法使用有機接著劑0.836 N/mm2接著強度皆大於日本工法0.688 N/mm2，但兩者皆通過合格標準；臺灣工法使用無機接著劑0.890 N/mm2、日本工法使用無機接著劑0.933 N/mm2，無機接著劑在兩種打底層中都是打底養護越久接著強度越低，判斷為下地層吸水導致；有機接著劑在日本工法中下地養護時間較短者強度越低，判斷塗佈有機接著劑後會導致日本下地無法養護，而臺灣打底使用有機接著劑則沒有相關問題。研判臺灣工法與有機接著劑之適配性沒有問題。
無防水層組別受熱劣化後臺灣工法有機接著劑0.756 N/mm2強度大於無機接著劑0.469 N/mm2、日本工法有機接著劑強度為0.670 N/mm2，也是大於無機接著劑的0.390 N/mm2，受熱劣化後臺灣工法接著強度較日本工法高。臺灣工法無機接著劑受熱劣化後為標準養護的52.7％、有機接著劑受熱劣化為標準養護的90.4％；日本工法無機接著劑受熱劣化後為標準養護的41.8％、有機接著劑受熱劣化為標準養護的97.4％。由此判斷無機接著劑受熱劣化影響劇烈，有機接著劑影響則不到10個百分點。
無防水層組別受反覆水熱後臺灣工法有機接著劑0.784 N/mm2強度大於無機接著劑0.741 N/mm2、日本工法有機接著劑強度為0.519 N/mm2、無機接著劑的0.524 N/mm2，受反覆水熱後臺灣工法接著強度較日本工法高。臺灣工法無機接著劑受反覆水熱後為標準養護的83.3％、有機接著劑受反覆水熱為標準養護的93.8％；日本工法無機接著劑受反覆水熱後為標準養護的56.2％、有機接著劑受反覆水熱為標準養護的75.4％。由此判斷無機接著劑受反覆水熱影響較有機接著劑大，日本工法受到的影響又大於臺灣工法。
兩種施工法經熱劣化後有機接著劑強度在標準養護90.4％~97.4％(差距7％)，無機接著劑則在41.8％~52.7％(差距10.9％)，可知熱劣化對兩種打底影響程度相同；經反覆水熱後有機接著劑強度在標準養護75.4％~93.8％(相差18.4％)，無機接著劑則在56.2％~83.3％(相差27.1％)，可知反覆水熱對兩種打底影響程度較受熱劣化大。
兩種打底工法塗佈防水層後對於有機、無機接著劑起到穩定的作用，無機接著劑在臺灣工法中加入防水標準養護從0.890 N/mm2→0.832 N/mm2(下降6.5％)、日本工法中加入防水標準養護從0.933 N/mm2→0.968 N/mm2(上升3.7％)，大致維持相同接著強度；有機接著劑在臺灣工法中加入防水標準養護從0.836 N/mm2→1.221 N/mm2(上升46.0％)、日本工法中加入防水標準養護從0.688 N/mm2→1.247 N/mm2(上升81.2％)，加入防水讓有機接著劑強度大幅提升。
加入防水受熱劣化後臺灣工法無機接著劑從0.469 N/mm2→0.696 N/mm2(上升48.4％)、有機接著劑從0.756 N/mm2→1.107 N/mm2(上升46.4％)；日本工法無機接著劑從0.390 N/mm2→0.894 N/mm2(上升129.2％)、有機接著劑從0.670 N/mm2→1.370 N/mm2(上升104.4％)，臺灣工法塗佈防水搭配無機接著劑、有機接著劑比起未使用防水提升46.4％~48.4％；日本工法塗佈防水搭配無機接著劑、有機接著劑比起未使用防水提升104.4％~129.2％，強度提升顯著。研判是塗佈防水材可以養護打底層與防止打底層吸收接著劑水分，並在熱劣化試驗時保護打底層性能。日本工法使用防水材料受熱劣化拉拔強度較無施作防水層增加1倍。
加入防水受反覆水熱臺灣工法無機接著劑從0.741 N/mm2→0.657 N/mm2(下降11.3％)、有機接著劑從0.784 N/mm2→1.029 N/mm2(上升31.2％)；日本工法無機接著劑從0.524 N/mm2→0.822 N/mm2(上升56.8％)、有機接著劑從0.519 N/mm2→1.308 N/mm2(上升152.0％)，臺灣工法塗佈防水搭配無機接著劑比起未使用防水下降11.3％、塗佈防水搭配有機接著劑比起未使用防水上升31.2％；日本工法塗佈防水搭配無機接著劑比起未使用防水提升56.8％、塗佈防水搭配有機接著劑比起未使用防水提升152.0％，提升幅度是未塗防水的1.5倍。
無機、有機接著劑與防水層受劣化後強度只有些微下降，對比未施作防水的試體在塗佈防水後接著強度普遍大幅增加，根據破壞斷面分析在有機接著劑受劣化失去彈性材料本身變硬強度反而越高，導致破壞界面改成下地層、結構體打底層黏著層或防水層接著劑之界面破壞。塗佈防水層使打底層強度變高，防水層也使無機接著劑免於打底材吸水，綜合來看使用防水材對外牆瓷磚張貼強度起到正面影響。

The common structure of the exterior wall of building tiles in Taiwan is from the inside to the outside: structure → cement adhesives layer → cement base layer → waterproof agent → tile adhesives → tile, tile adhesives are mainly cement adhesives. Low modulus adhesives have been used in Japan for many years, there are also many papers proving that the strength and weather resistance of low modulus adhesives are greater than those of cement adhesives. The adaptation has not yet been tested, If the Japanese experimental data is directly transferred, it may be different from the Taiwanese construction method, and Taiwan likes to use a waterproof layer on the outer wall, changes in base water absorption can also affect relative strength.
In this experiment, the sublayer in Taiwan and the subterranean formation in Japan are compared, and different sublayer materials and curing days are used, and waterproof materials, waterproof curing days, low modulus and cement adhesives, and adhesive curing days are used as variables. Drawing, thermal deterioration test, and repeated hydrothermal test, compare the strength change and failure situation of the specimen.
The test results show that in the non-waterproof layer group, the standard curing method in Taiwan uses low modulus adhesives of 0.836 N/mm2, and the bonding strength is greater than that of the Japanese method of 0.688 N/mm2, but both pass the qualified standard; the Taiwan method uses cement adhesives of 0.890 N/mm2, the Japanese construction method uses cement adhesives of 0.933 N/mm2. In the two types of primers, the cement adhesives are used for primer curing for a long time, and the bonding strength decreases, which is judged to be caused by the water absorption of the underlying formation; the low modulus adhesives in the Japanese construction method has a longer curing time, the shorter the strength, the lower the strength. It is judged that the application of the low modulus adhesives will lead to the failure of maintenance in Japan, while the use of low modulus adhesives as a primer in Taiwan has no related problems, there is no problem in judging the compatibility of Taiwanese construction method and low modulus adhesives.
The strength of the Taiwan-based low modulus adhesives 0.756 N/mm2 is greater than that of the cement adhesives 0.469 N/mm2, and the strength of the Japanese-based low modulus adhesives is 0.670 N/mm2, which is also greater than the 0.390 N/mm2 of the cement adhesives. After thermal deterioration, the bonding strength of the Taiwan method is higher than that of the Japanese method. The thermal deterioration of cement adhesives in Taiwan method is 52.7% of standard curing, and the thermal deterioration of low modulus adhesives is 90.4% of standard curing; the thermal deterioration of cement adhesives in Japanese method is 41.8% of standard curing, and the thermal deterioration of low modulus adhesives is standard curing 97.4%. From this, it is judged that the cement adhesives are greatly affected by thermal degradation, and the low modulus adhesives is affected by less than 10 percentage points.
For the group without waterproof layer, after repeated hydrothermal treatment, the strength of Taiwanese low modulus adhesives 0.784 N/mm2 is greater than that of cement adhesives 0.741 N/mm2, the strength of Japanese low modulus adhesives is 0.519 N/mm2, and the strength of cement adhesives is 0.524 N/mm2. After repeated hydrothermal treatment, the adhesion strength of the Taiwan method is higher than that of the Japanese method. The cement adhesives of Taiwan method are 83.3% of the standard curing after repeated water heating, the low modulus adhesives is 93.8% of the standard curing after repeated water heating; the cement adhesives of the Japanese method is 56.2% of the standard curing after repeated water heating, and the low modulus adhesives is 56.2% of the standard curing. The agent was subjected to repeated hydrothermal treatment for 75.4% of the standard curing. Therefore, it can be judged that the cement adhesives are more affected by repeated hydrothermal treatment than the low modulus adhesives, and the Japanese method is more affected than the Taiwan method.
After thermal deterioration of the two construction methods, the strength of low modulus adhesives is 90.4%~97.4% (gap 7%) in standard curing, and the strength of cement adhesives is 41.8%~52.7% (gap 10.9%). The degree of influence is the same, after repeated hydrothermal treatment, the strength of low modulus adhesives is 75.4%~93.8% (difference 18.4%) in standard curing, and that of cement adhesives is 56.2%~83.3% (difference 27.1%), the effect of primer is greater than that of thermal deterioration.
After the two primer methods are coated with the waterproof layer, the low modulus and cement adhesives are play a stable role. The cement adhesives is added to the Taiwan method adds waterproof standard curing from 0.890 N/mm2→0.832 N/mm2 (down 6.5%), the Japanese construction method adds waterproof standard curing from 0.933 N/mm2→0.968 N/mm2 (up 3.7%), and maintains roughly the same bonding strength; the low modulus adhesives are added to the Taiwan construction method, waterproof standard curing from 0.836 N/mm2→1.221 N /mm2 (up 46.0%), adding waterproof standard curing from 0.688 N/mm2 → 1.247 N/mm2 (up 81.2%) in the Japanese construction method, adding waterproofing greatly improves the strength of the low modulus adhesives.
After adding waterproof and thermal deterioration, the cement adhesives of Taiwan construction method is from 0.469 N/mm2→0.696 N/mm2 (up 48.4%), the low modulus adhesives is from 0.756 N/mm2→1.107 N/mm2 (up 46.4%); the cement adhesives of Japanese construction method From 0.390 N/mm2→0.894 N/mm2 (increase by 129.2%), low modulus adhesives from 0.670 N/mm2→1.370 N/mm2 (increase by 104.4%), Taiwan construction method coating waterproof with cement adhesives, compared with low modulus adhesives. Unused waterproofing increased by 46.4%~48.4%; Japanese construction method coating waterproofing with cement adhesives and low modulus adhesives increased by 104.4%~129.2% compared with no waterproofing, and the strength improved significantly. It is judged that coating the waterproof material can maintain the primer layer and prevent the primer layer from absorbing the moisture of the adhesive, and protect the primer layer performance during the thermal deterioration test. The Japanese construction method uses a waterproof material that is degraded by heat and the tensile strength is doubled compared to that without a waterproof layer.
Add water-proof and repeated hydrothermal Taiwan construction method cement adhesives from 0.741 N/mm2→0.657 N/mm2 (down 11.3%), low modulus adhesives from 0.784 N/mm2→1.029 N/mm2 (up 31.2%); Japanese construction method cement adhesives agent from 0.524 N/mm2→0.822 N/mm2 (up 56.8%), low modulus adhesives from 0.519 N/mm2→1.308 N/mm2 (up 152.0%), Taiwanese method coating waterproofing with cement adhesives is more waterproof than not using It decreased by 11.3%, and the coating with waterproof and low modulus adhesives increased by 31.2% compared with that without waterproofing; the Japanese method of coating waterproofing with cement adhesives increased by 56.8% compared with that without waterproofing, and coating waterproofing with low modulus adhesives compared with no waterproofing. An increase of 152.0%, which is 1.5 times that of unpainted waterproofing.
The strength of the cement and low modulus adhesives and the waterproof layer is only slightly decreased after being deteriorated. In contrast, the strength of the non-waterproof specimens generally increases significantly after being coated with waterproofing. According to the analysis of the failure cross-section, the low modulus adhesives loses its elasticity when the low modulus adhesives is deteriorated. On the contrary, the hardening strength is higher, which leads to the failure of the interface to the interface of the substratum, the adhesive layer of the structure bottom layer or the adhesive layer of the waterproof layer. Coating the waterproof layer increases the strength of the base layer, and the waterproof layer also prevents the cement adhesives from absorbing water on the base material. On the whole, the use of the waterproof material has a positive impact on the strength of the external wall tiles.

[1] 陳瑞鈴，「磁磚水泥質黏著劑性能相關國家標準研究」，內政部建築研究所協同研究報告，2015。
[2] 陳暳陵，「建築外牆瓷磚防水層與有機、無機接著劑接著強度影響之研究-以市售防水材為例」，國立臺北科技大學，2020。
[3] 李仲誼，「各類磁磚對黏著劑效能影響之研究」，國立臺北科技大學，2013。
[4] 孫綺晨，「有機與無機瓷磚接著劑之強度比較研究-以不同瓷磚為例」，國立臺北科技大學，2020。
[5] 宋怡青，「建築外牆磁磚用接著劑強度比較與分析之研究」，國立臺北科技大學，2018。
[6] JASS 19 建築工事標準仕様書 陶磁器質タイル張り工事，日本建築學會。
[7] 林禮德，「集合住宅外牆磁磚劣化評估工具建立之研究」，國立臺北科技大學，2011。
[8] 李文田，「面磚工程粘著材料之試驗與研究」，國立臺北科技大學，2005。
[9] 高蔡義，「建築物外牆面磚劣化原因與對策之研究-以大學學校建築為例」，國立成功大學，2000。
[10] 洪偉修，「高層建築外牆磁磚打底層與防水層對黏著強度影響之研究」，國立高雄大學，2016。
[11] 吳柏叡，「外牆瓷磚黏著強度與黏著層空鼓比例關聯性之研究」，國立高雄大學，2018。
[12] 梁若暉，「建築磁磚工程現況調查及發展課題之研究」，內政部建築研究所，1999。
[13] 黃克翊，「既有R.C.建築瓷磚外牆劣化及改修工法調查研究以高雄市透天厝為例」，國立成功大學，2009。
[14] 野野瀨響，「建築外牆磁磚診斷方法之比較研究」，國立台北科技大學，2015年。
[15] 翁佳樑、楊詩弘，「建築外牆飾面材料安全檢查機制建立之研究」，內政部建築研究所協同研究報告，2016。
[16] 高健章，「建築材料與構材檢測基準之調查與研究規劃(一) 外牆材料與構材」，1997。
[17] 游智硯，「防水材料應用於R.C結構體上與粉刷層之黏著力研究」，中原大學，2010。
[18] 盧珽瑞，「高層集合住宅外牆瓷磚剝落原因與解決對策探討(一)」，內政部建築研究所，2010。
[19] 盧珽瑞，「高層集合住宅外牆瓷磚剝落原因與解決對策探討(2/2)-水泥砂漿硬底壓貼工法之實驗研究」，內政部建築研究所，2011。
[20] 片岡弘安、小川晴果，「外装タイル張り用有機系接着剤の耐久性に関する研究」，大林組技術研究所，2015。
[21] 陳瑞鈴、黃然，「外牆瓷磚接著施工技術手冊研擬」，內政部建築研究所，2016。
[22] 水上卓也、小川晴果、竹中賢治、三谷一房，「弾性を有するタイル張付けモルタルに関する実験的検討」，日本建築仕上学会，2014。
[23] 「外牆瓷磚及批盪黏合技術研究」，建造業議會，2013。
[24] 蔡長益，「外牆磁磚飾面工程成本與抗拉接著強度之研究」，國立高雄第一科技大學，2018。
[25] 吳文政，接著劑的原理，南寶樹脂。
[26] 郭尚鑫，「化學接著劑業原物料耗用通常水準」，2009。
[27] 公共工程施工綱要規範第09310章-瓷磚
[28] 公共工程施工綱要規範第03310章-結構用混凝土
[29] 公共工程施工綱要規範第09220章-水泥砂漿粉刷
[30] 中華民國國家標準CNS 9737 R1018 陶瓷面磚
[31] 中華民國國家標準CNS12611 A2239 陶瓷面磚用接著劑
[32] 中華民國國家標準CNS16064 A2312 外裝壁專用低模數接著劑
[33] 美國國家標準協會ANSI A108.5-硬底卜特蘭水泥砂漿或乳膠/卜特蘭水泥砂漿瓷磚安裝法
[34] 美國國家標準協會ANSI A118.4-乳膠卜特蘭水泥砂漿/面磚黏著劑試驗
[35] 美國國家標準協會ANSI A137.1-美國國家瓷磚標準規範
[36] 日本工業標準JIS A5209-瓷磚
[37] 日本工業標準JIS A5557-外牆瓷磚張貼有機接著劑
[38] 國際標準化組織ISO 13006-瓷磚
[39] 國際標準化組織ISO 13007-瓷磚
[40] 陳亮宇，「不同型式之黏著材料對磁磚接著效能之影響」，國立宜蘭大學，2017。