Next Article in Journal
Research on Deformation Prediction of VMD-GRU Deep Foundation Pit Based on PSO Optimization Parameters
Previous Article in Journal
Shape–Preserved CoFeNi–MOF/NF Exhibiting Superior Performance for Overall Water Splitting across Alkaline and Neutral Conditions
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Materials
Volume 17
Issue 10
10.3390/ma17102196
materials-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Effects of Multidimensional Carbon-Based Nanomaterials on the Low-Carbon and High-Performance Cementitious Composites: A Critical Review

by
Xiumei Gao
1,
Wujun Fang
1,2,
Weiwen Li
1,*,
Peng Wang
1,*,
Kashan Khan
3,
Yihong Tang
4 and
Teng Wang
5
1
College of Civil & Transportation Engineering, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China
2
MCC Group, Central Research Institute of Building and Construction (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shenzhen 518055, China
3
Department of Civil Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
4
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong 999077, China
5
Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2024, 17(10), 2196; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17102196
Submission received: 26 March 2024 / Revised: 20 April 2024 / Accepted: 25 April 2024 / Published: 8 May 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Construction and Building Materials)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Cementitious composites are ubiquitous in construction, and more and more research is focused on improving mechanical properties and environmental effects. However, the jury is still out on which material can achieve low-carbon and high-performance cementitious composites. This article compares the mechanical and environmental performance of zero-dimensional fullerenes, one-dimensional carbon nanotubes (CNTs), two-dimensional graphene oxide (GO), and three-dimensional nano-graphite platelets (NGPs) on cementitious composites. The literature review shows that two-dimensional (2D) GO has the best mechanical and environmental performance, followed by 3D NGPs, 1D CNTs, and 0D fullerenes. Specifically, GO stands out for its lower energy consumption (120–140 MJ/kg) and CO2 emissions (0.17 kg/kg). When the optimal dosage (0.01–0.05 wt%) of GO is selected, due to its high specific surface area and strong adhesion to the matrix, the compressive strength of the cementitious composites is improved by nearly 50%. This study will help engineers and researchers better utilize carbon-based nanomaterials and provide guidance and direction for future research in related fields.

1. Introduction

Cementitious composites are composed of amorphous phases, nanocrystals to micrometer-sized crystals, and bound water [1]. These materials have excellent compressive strength and durability but often exhibit brittleness and lack sufficient tensile strength and strain capacity [2,3]. In order to overcome these limitations, researchers have been exploring the effect of reinforcing fillers to improve the toughness and strength of cementitious composites. In recent years, research has shown that as the size of fillers decreases, from macro- to micro- and even nano-levels, people are surprised to find that the addition of small fillers not only improves the mechanical properties and durability of cementitious materials but also endows them with multifunctionality [4,5]. The research indicates that by adding nano-silica particles, the compressive strength of concrete can be increased by up to 70% [6]. At the same time, the addition of only 5% nano-alumina can increase the elastic modulus of cementitious composite materials by up to 143%, indicating a significant improvement in material properties by nano-fillers [7]. In addition, the study also pointed out the potential applications of nano titanium dioxide. The addition of this nanomaterial gives concrete many additional functions, including self-cleaning, reducing air pollution, and sterilization [8].
Since 2004, with the rapid development of nanotechnology and science, graphene has received great attention at the nanoscale and has shown great potential as an additive material [9]. The preparation process of graphene can be summarized as follows: gaseous carbon sources such as methane or ethylene are used to catalyze the deposition and polymerization of carbon atoms on the surface of metal (nickel, copper, or platinum). Equations (1) and (2), respectively, indicate the chemical reaction in which methane or ethylene is used as a gaseous carbon source. Graphene is a single-layer graphite structure formed by carbon atoms arranged into a 2D lattice. It is one of the basic components of graphite materials. In addition to single-layer graphene, graphene can also form various forms, such as fullerene, carbon nanotube, and graphite [10,11] (as shown in Figure 1). The various forms of graphene and its derivatives provide rich material resources and technical means for scientific research and engineering applications in various fields.
C H 4 → C ( g r a p h e n e ) + 2 H 2
C 2 H 4 → C ( g r a p h e n e ) + 2 H 2
Nowadays, sustainable development has become one of the focal points of global attention. The selection of building materials directly affects the environmental friendliness, resource utilization efficiency, and long-term sustainability of buildings. The policies and requirements for reducing energy consumption and reducing waste generation are all aimed at achieving the sustainable development goals of the construction industry. According to previous research [13], the cement production industry not only accounts for a considerable proportion of energy consumption, accounting for approximately 7% of total energy consumption, but also plays an important role in carbon dioxide emissions, accounting for nearly 7% of total carbon dioxide emissions.
The current research urgently needs to review the existing achievements, especially emphasizing the improvement of mechanical properties and environmental effects of carbon-based nanomaterials in cementitious composites and further elucidating their mechanisms of action. The purpose of this survey is to comprehensively summarize previous research results and explore, in-depth, the performance improvement of carbon-based nanomaterials in cementitious composites. Through the summary and analysis of these studies, we can better understand the mechanism of carbon-based nanomaterials in cement-based composites. The suggested research will help engineers and researchers better utilize carbon-based nanomaterials as reinforcing materials and provide guidance and direction for future research in related fields.

2. Zero-Dimension Nanocarbon Material

2.1. Fullerenes

Fullerenes are molecules composed of carbon atoms with spherical, tubular, or other geometric shapes [14,15,16]. The discovery of fullerene opened a new chapter in the field of carbon-based nanomaterials in 1985 [17].
C60 fullerene is the most typical member of the fullerene family and was also the earliest discovered [18]. As shown in Figure 2, C60 fullerene is a spherical carbon molecule that exhibits a geometric shape like a football. C60 fullerene typically exhibits a black color [19]. Each C60 fullerene molecule is composed of 12 regular pentagons and 20 regular hexagons, and this structure is called a “pentagonal hexagonal combination” [20]. Each carbon atom forms covalent bonds with three adjacent carbon atoms [21], forming a spherical carbon molecular structure. The arrangement of these carbon atoms gives C60 fullerene a high degree of symmetry and stability [22].

2.2. Manufacturing Process

The components of cementitious composites include Portland cement, quartz sand, water, and additives. Carbon-based nanomaterials are usually mixed into the matrix as additives [23,24,25]. The preparation process of carbon nanomaterial-based cementitious composites is shown in Figure 3. Firstly, we mixed the weighed dry material at low speed in the mixer for 4 min. Then, we added water and liquid additives to the dry mixture, stirred at low speed for 1 min, and then stirred at high speed for 2 min. Subsequently, we added fibers and continued at low speed for 1 min. After the fibers were completely wrapped in the cement slurry, we mixed them at high speed for 4 min until the fibers were evenly dispersed in the cement slurry.
This article not only focuses on the preparation process of nanocarbon material-based cementitious composites but also on the energy consumption, CO2 emissions, cost, time, and water demand during this process. In the preparation process of nanocarbon material, energy consumption and CO2 emissions are closely related, which has a significant impact on the environment. The cost is mainly affected by energy consumption, raw material costs, labor costs, and time. Water demand is affected by using water as a reaction medium or cleaning agent during the preparation process, which is of great significance for resource utilization and environmental protection. When the matrix material is consistent, we should focus on carbon-based nanomaterials. According to existing literature reports and experimental data [26,27,28], producing 1 kg of C60 fullerene may require energy of 2478 MJ, emit 400 kg of carbon dioxide, and cost range from USD 150 to USD 1080. Because the preparation process of C60 fullerene is relatively complex, involving multiple steps such as carbon source pyrolysis, carbon atom polymerization, and subsequent purification and treatment, it may take several weeks to produce 1 kg of C60 fullerene [29]. However, the water requirement during the preparation process is relatively low, usually ranging from tens to hundreds of liters.

2.3. Mechanical Properties

At present, research on cementitious composite materials constructed directly from 0D fullerene is relatively scarce [30]. This may be due to some challenges of 0D fullerene in cementitious composites, especially the lack of ability to prevent microcracks, which may lead to the formation of weak regions [31]. In contrast, similar 0D carbon black (CB) particles are relatively more cost-effective, which makes people more inclined to choose CB as an additive for cementitious composites [32,33,34]. Adding CB appropriately can not only improve mechanical strength to a certain extent but also have the potential to be used for strain sensing [34,35,36]. Although 0D fullerene has great potential in structural health monitoring, its high price limits its widespread application in cementitious composite materials [37]. Therefore, future research may need to explore more cost-effective preparation methods and customized solutions for price-sensitive applications in order to promote the development and application of this field.

3. One-Dimension Nanocarbon Material

3.1. Carbon Nanotubes

CNT-based cementitious composites have been widely studied, mainly due to the specific properties and structure of carbon nanotubes [38]. CNTs are 1D nanoscale structures composed of carbon atoms, divided into single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) and multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) [39,40]. As demonstrated in Figure 4, CNTs exhibit a slender tubular structure at the macroscale, with lengths ranging from several micrometers to several centimeters and diameters typically within the nanoscale range [41]. From the perspective of molecular structure, SWCNTs are composed of a single layer of carbon atoms arranged in a continuous hexagonal structure resembling a coiled graphene sheet. MWCNTs are composed of multiple concentric carbon layers, each connected by a meta-like bond [42]. The carbon atoms of carbon nanotubes exhibit sp2. Hybridization forms a π bond network with strong conjugation [43,44,45]. This network alters the surface properties of CNTs, which results in improved adhesion characteristics and dispersion stability. Hence, carbon nanotubes have good conductivity and mechanical properties.

3.2. Manufacturing Process

Different production processes can result in varying energy consumption per kilogram of carbon nanotubes [46]. The production process of CNTs includes steps such as pyrolysis of carbon raw materials [47], gas-phase nucleation, and growth [48], all of which require a considerable amount of energy consumption. It is estimated that producing 1 kg of carbon nanotubes may require 1800 MJ of energy and emits 125 kg of carbon dioxide [26,49]. The production cost of carbon nanotubes is also relatively high, as the production process involves complex chemical reactions, high-temperature conditions, and precision instruments [50]. It is estimated that the cost of producing 1 kg of carbon nanotubes may be USD 369 [51]. The production time of 1 kg carbon nanotubes is also relatively long, requiring precise equipment and control conditions. Producing 1 kg of carbon nanotubes may take one week [29]. The water used in the production of carbon nanotubes is used for equipment cleaning and the use of some solvents. Therefore, the water requirement for producing 1 kg of carbon nanotubes may also range from tens to hundreds of liters.

3.3. Mechanical Properties

Numerous researchers have studied how to improve the performance of cementitious composites by changing the percentage of carbon-based nanomaterials in cement weight. A large number of experimental results [52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61] indicate that the compressive strength of cementitious composites with CNTs shows a trend of first increasing and then decreasing with the increase in CNT content. The cementitious composites doped with CNTs can significantly improve the conductivity, with a typical penetration threshold between 0.3 and 0.6 wt% [62,63,64]. However, in terms of the compressive strength of cementitious composites, the optimal amount of CNTs is generally 0.01–0.15 wt%, and the maximum improvement rate is generally 30%. The determination of this optimal value is related to a study that found that with the addition of 0.1 wt% CNTs, the enthalpy of cement paste is 20% lower than that of pure cement paste [59]. This indicates that CNT particles form a package around cement particles, causing some cement particles to separate during the hydration process [65]. However, at higher doses of CNTs, this effect may inhibit cement hydration, thereby reducing bonding strength [59]. Overall, the amount of CNTs added should be within a certain range, and excessive or insufficient amounts may affect the performance of cementitious composites.
In addition, some researchers have also focused on the flexural performance of cementitious composites containing CNTs. Zou et al. [66] have shown that the elastic modulus and flexural strength of cementitious composites increase at concentrations of 0.075 wt% and 0.038 wt%. Another study [67] explored the impact of incorporating long CNTs of 0.1, 0.5, and 1.0 wt% with silica fume on the properties of cementitious composites. On the 28th day, their findings indicated that the most significant enhancements in both flexural strength and stress-intensity factor were achieved through the addition of 0.5 wt% CNTs to the cement mix. As shown in Figure 5, Maria S. Konsta Gdoutos et al. [68] enhanced the strength of cementitious composites by 62.5% and 56.25%, respectively, by adding 0.08 wt% short MWCNTs and 0.048 wt% long MWCNTs.

4. Two-Dimension Nanocarbon Material

4.1. Graphene

In 2004, Novoselov and Geim et al. used a method called “mechanical exfoliation” to successfully prepare graphene monolayers by peeling graphite sheets with tape [9]. Graphene is a single-layer 2D structure material composed of carbon atoms, and its unique properties and structure make it a research hotspot in the field of nanotechnology [69]. Figure 6 depicts the macroscopic appearance, micromorphology, and molecular structure of graphene. Graphene exhibits a transparent and colorless appearance at the macroscopic scale, with a thickness of only one atom. The theoretical surface area of a single graphene sheet can reach 2600 m2/g [70,71,72,73]. The microstructure of graphene is characterized by a hexagonal lattice structure formed by covalent bonds of carbon atoms [74]. The arrangement of carbon atoms is very ordered and flat, which leads to excellent electrical, thermal, and mechanical properties in a single-layer state. The preparation methods of graphene include mechanical exfoliation [75], chemical vapor deposition [76], and liquid-phase exfoliation [77].

4.2. Manufacturing Process

The preparation methods of graphene include chemical vapor deposition (CVD), mechanical exfoliation, chemical exfoliation, reduced GO, and liquid-phase exfoliation [78]. Among them, the CVD method is a common and widely used method, which forms graphene by cracking carbon source gas at high temperatures and depositing it on a metal substrate [79]. The CVD method typically requires a high-temperature reaction environment, which consumes a significant amount of energy [80]. Specifically, the energy consumption for preparing graphene by CVD method is 120–140 MJ/kg of graphene [81,82,83]. The CVD method for preparing graphene typically uses hydrocarbon gases as a carbon source; the preparation of graphene per kilogram may result in emissions of 0.17 kg of carbon dioxide [84,85]. In the CVD method, the main sources of cost are gas, energy, and equipment maintenance. Specifically, the preparation cost of graphene per gram may be USD 35 [86]. The preparation process of graphene generally does not require a large amount of water and is mainly used for cleaning and solvent treatment. For the most part, the entire growth process from heating to cooling may take 5–48 h [87,88,89].

4.3. Mechanical Properties

Graphene is the fundamental structural unit of any size of graphite material. GO, the most researched graphene-based nanosheets in cement composites also consists of monolayer sheets with a hexagonal carbon network. The laboratory data reported in the literature, as shown in Table 1, indicate that adding a small amount of GO to cementitious composite materials will enhance their flexural, compressive, and tensile strength. Lv et al. [90,91] conducted a study focusing on the effect of GO in a cement matrix. Their research indicates that as the proportion of GO increases to 0.03%, the performance of the cement matrix is enhanced. However, it is worth noting that further increasing the proportion of GO may lead to a decrease in the strength effect. Specifically, at a ratio of 0.03 wt% GO, the tensile, bending, and compressive properties of the cement matrix were improved by 78.6%, 60.7%, and 38.9%, respectively. In addition, Duan et al. [3,92] confirmed the reinforcing effect of GO in a cement matrix. In an ordinary Portland cement (OPC) matrix, using only 0.05 wt% graphene oxide nanosheets can increase the bending and compressive strength by 41–59% and 15–33%, respectively.
Furthermore, Jiang et al. [93] investigated the effect of combined modification of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) fibers and GO on the mechanical properties of cement mortar in their experiments. The addition of PVA fibers significantly improves the toughness and fracture resistance of mortar, thereby significantly enhancing its mechanical strength [94]. Meanwhile, the cementitious matrix system containing GO improved the pore structure of the mortar, exhibiting improved mechanical and durability characteristics [95]. Jiang et al. conducted experiments to explore the effect of combined modification of PVA fiber and GO on the mechanical properties of cementitious composites. The experimental results showed that the compressive and flexural strength of mortar increased by 30.2% and 39.3%, respectively, after adding PVA fibers and graphene oxide [93].
Table 1. Effect of GO on mechanical performance of cementitious composites.
Table 1. Effect of GO on mechanical performance of cementitious composites.
Serial
Number		Compressive
Strength		Flexural
Strength		Tensile
Strength		Water/
Binder		Refs.
GO
(wt%)		Increase
(%)		GO
(wt%)		Increase
(%)		GO
(wt%)		Increase
(%)
10.015.160.0321.86--0.35[95]
20.0113.40.0151.70.01470.367[90]
30.0129--0.01260.5[96]
40.0223.2--0.0438.50.43[97]
50.02200.0232--0.5[98]
60.0227.64----0.5[99]
70.02250.02150.02150.4[100]
80.0225.90.0214.80.02180.4[101]
90.02234.10.02234--0.4[102]
100.022270.02226--0.42[103]
110.02225.6----0.29[104]
120.02225.8----0.36[104]
130.02224.6----0.45[105]
140.02514.90.02523.60.02515.20.5[106]
15--0.0313.7--0.43[107]
160.0338.90.0360.70.0378.60.367[90]
170.0320.30.0332--0.5[108]
18--0.0377.7--0.36[109]
190.0312.40.0312.08--0.4[110]
200.0345.1--0.0360.70.37[111]
210.03300.0318.7 0.45[91]
220.03310.0318 0.45[112]
230.0328----0.36[113]
240.0413.4--0.049.90.4[114]
250.0444----0.38[115]
260.0440.41----0.4[116]
270.0429.30.04150.04150.4[117]
280.0442.20.0430.50.0436.60.367[90]
290.0446.34----0.5[99]
300.0447.61----0.36[109]
310.04429.5----0.5[104]
320.0524.40.0570.5--0.37[118]
330.0532----0.5[119]
340.0543.20.05106.4--0.37[111]
350.0547.90.0530.20.0535.80.367[90]
360.0524.40.0570.5--0.37[120]
370.0532----0.5[12]
380.0511.050.0516.1--0.4[110]
390.0629.50.0630.7--0.3[121]
400.1130.0123.4--0.48[122]
410.177.70.177.70.137.50.485[123]
420.12540----0.45[124]
430.12535.1--0.125960.45[125]
440.125110----0.45[126]
450.216.40.241.3--0.66[127]
460.5126.6----0.3[128]
470.5126.6----0.3[129]
481.077.8----0.45[126]
491.063----0.45[130]
501.077.3--1.015-[131]
511.086--1.0150.45[96]
52----1.5480.4[2]
53--1.551.2--0.3[132]

5. Three-Dimension Nanocarbon Material

5.1. Graphite

Graphite is a mineral composed of carbon atoms and is one of the allotropes of non-metallic elements [94,133]. For graphite, its elastic modulus is usually around 1 TPa, which indicates that graphite has very high stiffness and bending resistance [110,134]. Figure 7 depicts the macroscopic appearance, micromorphology, and molecular structure of graphite. Graphite usually presents a black to silver-gray appearance, with luster and metallic luster [135]. It can exist in the form of flakes or powders [136], and flake graphite exhibits a typical layered structure that can be easily peeled off into thin sheets. The microstructure of graphite is composed of multiple layers of graphene sheets [137]. Each layer of graphene sheet is composed of a hexagonal lattice of carbon atoms arranged in a plane, forming a 2D structure [138]. The molecular structure of graphite is composed of carbon atoms, each of which forms three covalent bonds and is connected to the surrounding three carbon atoms, forming a hexagonal circular structure. This hexagonal structure combines with Van der Waals forces in the plane, giving graphite a layered structure [139].

5.2. Manufacturing Process

NGPS are one of the commonly used nanoscale graphite materials in cementitious composites. The thickness of NGPS is usually between a few to tens of nanometers, while the length and width can reach several micrometers [140]. Pyrolysis is one of the methods for preparing NGPS from natural graphite. This typically involves exposing natural graphite to high-temperature conditions, typically between 1000 and 3000 °C, and operating in an inert atmosphere such as nitrogen or argon [141]. This high-temperature environment can cause the graphite structure to undergo a pyrolysis reaction, decomposing into smaller graphite flakes [142]. Therefore, in the process of preparing 1 kg of NGPS, the energy consumed is between 264 and 304 MJ, and 16 kg of CO2 is emitted [143,144]. In terms of cost, the estimated cost of producing one ton of nano-graphite sheets is between USD 1500 and USD 2000 [145]. The water demand is relatively low, about 100 to 200 L per ton of production. The entire production cycle may last several days, depending on the different production equipment and processes.

5.3. Mechanical Properties

NGPS have shown significant potential. This material plays a crucial role in improving the “smart” performance of materials due to its unique structure and properties [146,147]. Sharma et al. [148] showed that the addition of NGPS (i.e., 0.01%, 0.1%, and 0.2%) significantly improved the density and mechanical properties of concrete. The research results show that the density of concrete has increased by up to 16%, while the mechanical properties have increased by an astonishing 30%. It is worth noting that, in contrast to the increase in material strength and density, the permeability of concrete significantly decreases. Liu et al. [149] studied the effect of NGPs on cement mortar and reported a 36% increase in compressive strength. Yang et al. [150] conducted a study on the effect of NGPS on the properties of cement mortar. By gradually increasing the amount of NGPs from 0.2% to 0.6%, researchers have found that when 0.2 wt% of NGPs are added to cement mortar, the compressive strength and flexural strength of cement mortar increase by about 10% and 8%, respectively. It is worth noting that research has also shown that cement mortar with the addition of NGPs has better acid resistance and durability. As shown in Figure 8, Farhan et al. [151] prepared five mixes with the intrusion of NGPs (0%, 0.5%, 1.5%, 3%, and 5% by weight of cement) to study workability and mechanical properties. The compressive strength, tensile strength, and flexural strength of the sample containing 5% NGPs increased by 38.5%, 31.6%, and 44.34%, respectively.

6. Overall Assessment

6.1. Assessment of Property

The selection of building materials has a significant impact on the environment. For cementitious composites, the improvement of strength is closely related to the hydration process of cement. However, cement production is a highly energy-consuming and high-emission activity process. Therefore, for carbon-based nanomaterials with small dosages but significant performance improvement, it is necessary to pay attention to their production process and evaluate them. Based on previous research work from the literature [26,27,28,29,46,47,48,49,50,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,140,141,142,143,144,145], a comprehensive evaluation of the environmental impact of carbon-based nanomaterials (fullerenes, CNTS, GO, and NGPS) in terms of energy consumption, CO2 emissions, cost, water demand, and time, is shown in Figure 9. From the four aspects of energy consumption, CO2 emissions, water demand, and time, GO is the worthiest of widespread promotion and use. However, the high cost limits its production. This arises from the high energy consumption, costly instrumentation, and intricate technological demands of procedures like CVD [152]. Currently, scholars [152,153] are advancing GO’s evolution through enhanced chemical treatment methodologies, the substitution of high-purity graphite with cost-effective alternatives, and the innovation of novel apparatus.
Figure 10 depicts the impact of various carbon-based nanomaterials on the mechanical characteristics of cementitious composites. It is evident that the incorporation of carbon-based nanomaterials yields positive outcomes for cementitious composites. Although the mechanical properties of fullerenes (0D carbon-based nanomaterials) and CNTs (1D carbon nanomaterials) are significantly enhanced, they come at the expense of massive energy consumption, carbon emissions, and time passing. The improvement effect of NGPs on cementitious composites is still slightly inferior to that of GO. Consequently, current research primarily focuses on the influence of GO on cementitious composites. Additionally, it has been deduced that the optimal dosage for enhancing the compressive strength of cementitious composites ranges between 0.01% and 0.05%, with an approximate maximum enhancement rate of nearly 50%.

6.2. Analyses of Mechanism

The mechanism by which multidimensional nanomaterials enhance the mechanical properties of cementitious composites can be summarized as nucleation effects and pore filling. The hydration process of cement can be divided into three stages: crystal growth, boundary reaction, and diffusion reaction [154]. Carbon-based nanomaterials can provide more nucleation centers during the crystal growth stage. On the one hand, nanomaterials can significantly accelerate the hydration reaction, thereby shortening the hardening time of cement and improving the early strength of cementitious composites. On the other hand, nanoscale hydration products can fill pores, thereby improving the density of the matrix (Figure 11).
Figure 12 shows the mechanism of zero—three dimensions of carbon-based nanomaterials on cementitious composites. Moreover, 0D fullerene is distributed in the form of points inside the cementitious composites and is relatively dispersed. Additionally, 1D CNTs grow in the form of lines inside cementitious composites or are composited with matrix materials. This will hinder the development of cracks during the stressing process of cementitious composites and take the lead in improving the tensile properties of the material. Also, 2D GO grows in the form of surfaces inside the cementitious composites, and the contact area with the matrix is greatly increased. It can comprehensively improve the mechanical properties of cementitious composites. However, 3D NGPs form a three-dimensional network of internal components in cementitious composites. As far as current research results are concerned, the improvement effect of 3D NGPs mechanical properties is almost the same as that of 2D GO. The possible reason is that 3D carbon-based nanomaterials have higher requirements for dispersion technology.

7. Conclusions

This article provides a detailed analysis of the current literature on the performance of cementitious composites reinforced with carbon-based nanomaterials. The main conclusions drawn from this research are as follows:
(1) The five-parameter system used to evaluate the environmental effects of carbon-based nanomaterials shows that 2D GO has the best performance, followed by 3D NGPs, 1D CNTs, and 0D fullerenes.
(2) GO stands out for its lower energy consumption (120–140 MJ/kg) and CO2 emissions (0.17 kg/kg).
(3) In terms of improving the mechanical properties of cementitious composites, GO exhibits excellent performance, followed by 3D NGPs, 1D CNTs, and 0D fullerenes.
(4) The optimal dosage of GO to improve the compressive strength of cementitious composites is between 0.01 and 0.05 wt%, and the maximum enhancement rate is approximately 50%. The reason why the mechanical properties of cementitious composites are improved is that the high specific surface area of GO promotes cement hydration and fills pores. More importantly, the high specific surface area of GO is beneficial to the strong adhesion between GO and the matrix and prevents cracks from expanding under load.
A comprehensive literature review has been conducted in this study. However, it is important to acknowledge its limitations. Specifically, the dispersion technology of 3D NGPS is not yet mature, resulting in the mechanical properties of cementitious composites needing to be further improved. Additionally, the high cost of 2D GO hinders its widespread application. In future work, it is necessary to further develop advanced dispersion equipment or find low-cost carbon sources to systematically address these limiting factors and delve into the untapped potential of carbon-based nanomaterials in cementitious composites, especially related to their performance improvement and environmental impact.

Author Contributions

X.G.: conceptualization, formal analysis, data curation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing. W.F.: conceptualization, formal analysis. W.L.: funding acquisition, conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis. P.W.: data curation, project administration, writing—review and editing. K.K.: writing—review and editing. Y.T.: conceptualization, writing—review and editing. T.W.: formal analysis, writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by [Shenzhen Science and Technology Innovation Committee] grant number [JCYJ20220531101415036; 20220811100052001; 20231122212907001] and [Shenzhen University Young Faculty Research Start-up Project] grant number [868-000001032148]. And The APC was funded by [20231122212907001].

Acknowledgments

Technical support was provided by the Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Durability for Marine Civil Engineering (SZU) (No. 2020B1212060074).

Conflicts of Interest

Author Wujun Fang was employed by the company Central Research Institute of Building and Construction (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Han, B.; Wang, Y.; Dong, S.; Zhang, L.; Ding, S.; Yu, X.; Ou, J. Smart concretes and structures: A review. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 2015, 26, 1303–1345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Babak, F.; Abolfazl, H.; Alimorad, R.; Parviz, G. Preparation and mechanical properties of graphene oxide: Cement nanocomposites. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 276323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Pan, Z.; He, L.; Qiu, L.; Korayem, A.H.; Li, G.; Zhu, J.W. Mechanical properties and microstructure of a graphene oxide–cement composite. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2015, 58, 140–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Han, B.; Sun, S.; Ding, S.; Zhang, L.; Yu, X.; Ou, J. Review of nanocarbon-engineered multifunctional cementitious composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2015, 70, 69–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Han, B.; Zhang, L.; Zeng, S.; Dong, S.; Yu, X.; Yang, R.; Ou, J. Nano-core effect in nano-engineered cementitious composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2017, 95, 100–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Khitab, A.; Tausif Arshad, M. Nano construction materials. Rev. Adv. Mater. Sci. 2014, 38, 181–189. [Google Scholar]
  7. Sanchez, F.; Sobolev, K. Nanotechnology in concrete—A review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2010, 24, 2060–2071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Pacheco-Torgal, F.; Jalali, S. Nanotechnology: Advantages and drawbacks in the field of construction and building materials. Constr. Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 582–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Novoselov, K.S.; Geim, A.K.; Morozov, S.V.; Jiang, D.E.; Zhang, Y.; Dubonos, S.V.; Grigorieva, I.V.; Firsov, A.A. Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films. Science 2004, 306, 666–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wan, X.; Huang, Y.; Chen, Y. Focusing on energy and optoelectronic applications: A journey for graphene and graphene oxide at large scale. Acc. Chem. Res. 2012, 45, 598–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Geim, A.K.; Novoselov, K.S. The rise of graphene. Nat. Mater. 2007, 6, 183–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Zheng, Q.; Han, B.; Cui, X.X.; Ou, J. Graphene-engineered cementitious composites: Small makes a big impact. Nanomater. Nanotechnol. 2017, 7, 1847980417742304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Costa, F.N.; Ribeiro, D.V. Reduction in CO2 emissions during production of cement, with partial replacement of traditional raw materials by civil construction waste (CCW). J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 276, 123302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Georgakilas, V.; Perman, J.A.; Tucek, J.; Zboril, R. Broad family of carbon nanoallotropes: Classification, chemistry, and applications of fullerenes, carbon dots, nanotubes, graphene, nanodiamonds, and combined superstructures. Chem. Rev. 2015, 115, 4744–4822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Yadav, B.C.; Kumar, R. Structure, properties and applications of fullerenes. Int. J. Nanotechnol. Appl. 2008, 2, 15–24. [Google Scholar]
  16. Dinadayalane, T.C.; Leszczynski, J. Remarkable diversity of carbon–carbon bonds: Structures and properties of fullerenes, carbon nanotubes, and graphene. Struct. Chem. 2010, 21, 1155–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zewail, A.H. Femtochemistry: Atomic-scale dynamics of the chemical bond using ultrafast lasers (Nobel Lecture). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2000, 39, 2586–2631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Diederich, F.; Whetten, R.L. Beyond C60: The higher fullerenes. Acc. Chem. Res. 1992, 25, 119–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Curl, R.F.; Smalley, R.E. Fullerenes. Sci. Am. 1991, 265, 54–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Schwerdtfeger, P.; Wirz, L.N.; Avery, J. The topology of fullerenes. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Mol. Sci. 2015, 5, 96–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Rao, A.M.; Dresselhaus, M.S. Nanostructured forms of carbon: An overview. Nanostructured Carbon for Advanced Applications. In Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute on Nanostructured Carbon for Advanced Applications Erice, Sicily, Italy, 19–31 July 2000; Volume 2001, pp. 3–24. [Google Scholar]
  22. Sheka, E.F.; Razbirin, B.S.; Nelson, D.K. Continuous symmetry of C60 fullerene and its derivatives. J. Phys. Chem. A 2011, 115, 3480–3490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Zhai, W.; Srikanth, N.; Kong, L.B.; Zhou, K. Carbon nanomaterials in tribology. Carbon 2017, 119, 150–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Guadagno, L.; Naddeo, C.; Raimondo, M.; Barra, G.; Vertuccio, L.; Russo, S.; Lafdi, K.; Tucci, V.; Spinelli, G.; Lamberti, P. Influence of carbon nanoparticles/epoxy matrix interaction on mechanical, electrical and transport properties of structural advanced materials. Nanotechnology 2017, 28, 094001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Araby, S.; Philips, B.; Meng, Q.; Ma, J.; Laoui, T.; Wang, C.H. Recent advances in carbon-based nanomaterials for flame retardant polymers and composites. Compos. Part B Eng. 2021, 212, 108675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kushnir, D.; Sandén, B.A. Energy requirements of carbon nanoparticle production. J. Ind. Ecol. 2008, 12, 360–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Heidari, S.M.; Lee, E.; Cecil, B.; Anctil, A. Environmental, cost, and chemical hazards of using alternative green solvents for fullerene (C60) purification. Green Chem. 2023, 25, 4350–4361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Withers, J.; Pan, C.; Loutfy, R.O. Fullerenes Prices: How Low Will They Be. In Proceedings of Symposium on Recent Advances in the Chemistry and Physics of Fullerenes and Related Materials; Electrochemical Society Inc.: Pennington NJ, USA, 1994; pp. 24–94. [Google Scholar]
  29. Charitidis, C.A.; Georgiou, P.; Koklioti, M.A.; Trompeta, A.F.; Markakis, V. Manufacturing nanomaterials: From research to industry. Manuf. Rev. 2014, 1, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Sekkal, W.; Zaoui, A. Novel properties of nano-engineered cementitious materials with fullerene buckyballs. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2021, 118, 103960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Anwar, A.; Mohammed, B.S.; Wahab, M.A.; Liew, M.S. Enhanced properties of cementitious composite tailored with graphene oxide nanomaterial—A review. Dev. Built Environ. 2020, 1, 100002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Dong, W.; Li, W.; Shen, L.; Sheng, D. Piezoresistive behaviours of carbon black cement-based sensors with layer-distributed conductive rubber fibres. Mater. Des. 2019, 182, 108012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Dong, W.; Li, W.; Wang, K.; Guo, Y.; Sheng, D.; Shah, S.P. Piezoresistivity enhancement of functional carbon black filled cement-based sensor using polypropylene fibre. Powder Technol. 2020, 373, 184–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Li, W.; Dong, W.; Shen, L.; Castel, A.; Shah, S.P. Conductivity and piezoresistivity of nano-carbon black (NCB) enhanced functional cement-based sensors using polypropylene fibres. Mater. Lett. 2020, 270, 127736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Li, H.; Xiao, H.G.; Ou, J.P. Effect of compressive strain on electrical resistivity of carbon black-filled cement-based composites. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2006, 28, 824–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Dong, W.; Li, W.; Lu, N.; Qu, F.; Vessalas, K.; Sheng, D. Piezoresistive behaviours of cement-based sensor with carbon black subjected to various temperature and water content. Compos. Part B Eng. 2019, 178, 107488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Li, W.; Qu, F.; Dong, W.; Mishra, G.; Shah, S.P. A comprehensive review on self-sensing graphene/cementitious composites: A pathway toward next-generation smart concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 331, 127284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Reales, O.A.M.; Toledo, F.R.D. A review on the chemical, mechanical and microstructural characterization of carbon nanotubes-cement based composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 154, 697–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Niyogi, S.; Hamon, M.A.; Hu, H.; Zhao, B.; Bhowmik, P.; Sen, R.; Itkis, M.E.; Haddon, R.C. Single-walled carbon nanotubes. In Springer Handbook of Nanomaterials; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 105–146. [Google Scholar]
  40. Kukovecz, Á.; Kozma, G.; Kónya, Z. Multi-walled carbon nanotubes. In Springer Handbook of Nanomaterials; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 147–188. [Google Scholar]
  41. Zheng, M.; Jagota, A.; Semke, E.D.; Diner, B.A.; McLean, R.S.; Lustig, S.R.; Richardson, R.E.; Tassi, N.G. DNA-assisted dispersion and separation of carbon nanotubes. Nat. Mater. 2003, 2, 338–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zhang, M.; Li, J. Carbon nanotube in different shapes. Mater. Today 2009, 12, 12–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Muhammad, S.; Xu, H.L.; Zhong, R.L.; Su, Z.M.; Al-Sehemi, A.G.; Irfan, A. Quantum chemical design of nonlinear optical materials by sp2-hybridized carbon nanomaterials: Issues and opportunities. J. Mater. Chem. C 2013, 1, 5439–5449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Bekyarova, E.; Sarkar, S.; Wang, F.; Itkis, M.E.; Kalinina, I.; Tian, X.; Haddon, R.C. Effect of covalent chemistry on the electronic structure and properties of carbon nanotubes and graphene. Acc. Chem. Res. 2013, 46, 65–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Umadevi, D.; Panigrahi, S.; Sastry, G.N. Noncovalent interaction of carbon nanostructures. Acc. Chem. Res. 2014, 47, 2574–2581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Healy, M.L.; Dahlben, L.J.; Isaacs, J.A. Environmental assessment of single-walled carbon nanotube processes. J. Ind. Ecol. 2008, 12, 376–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Monthioux, M.; Serp, P.; Caussat, B. Carbon nanotubes. In Springer Handbook of Nanotechnology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 193–247. [Google Scholar]
  48. Azam, M.A.; Zulkapli, N.N.; Nawi, Z.M.; Azren, N.M. Systematic review of catalyst nanoparticles synthesized by solution process: Towards efficient carbon nanotube growth. J. Sol-Gel Sci. Technol. 2015, 73, 484–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Tripathi, P.K.; Durbach, S.; Coville, N.J. Synthesis of multi-walled carbon nanotubes from plastic waste using a stainless-steel CVD reactor as catalyst. Nanomaterials 2017, 7, 284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, Q.; Huang, J.Q.; Qian, W.Z.; Zhang, Y.Y.; Wei, F. The road for nanomaterials industry: A review of carbon nanotube production, post-treatment, and bulk applications for composites and energy storage. Small 2013, 9, 1237–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Rahatwan, I.D.; Wulan, P.P.; Solahudin, M. Techno-economic analysis of pilot scale carbon nanotube production from LPG with Fe-Co-Mo/MgO catalyst in Indonesia. AIP Conf. Proc. 2020, 2230, 030013. [Google Scholar]
  52. Bharj, J.; Singh, S.; Chander, S.; Singh, R. Role of dispersion of multiwalled carbon nanotubes on compressive strength of cement paste. Int. J. Mater. Metall. Eng. 2014, 8, 340–343. [Google Scholar]
  53. Sobolkina, A.; Mechtcherine, V.; Khavrus, V.; Maier, D.; Mende, M.; Ritschel, M.; Leonhardt, A. Dispersion of carbon nanotubes and its influence on the mechanical properties of the cement matrix. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2012, 34, 1104–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Luo, J.; Duan, Z.; Li, H. The influence of surfactants on the processing of multi-walled carbon nanotubes in reinforced cement matrix composites. Phys. Status Solidi (A) 2009, 206, 2783–2790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kang, S.T.; Seo, J.Y.; Park, S.H. Microstructure and mechanical properties of carbon nanotube reinforced cementitious composites developed using a novel dispersion technique. Cem. Concr. Res. 2015, 73, 215–227. [Google Scholar]
  56. Cwirzen, A.; Habermehl-Cwirzen, K.; Penttala, V. Surface decoration of carbon nanotubes and mechanical properties of cement/carbon nanotube composites. Adv. Cem. Res. 2008, 20, 65–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Nasibulina, L.I.; Anoshkin, I.V.; Nasibulin, A.G.; Cwirzen, A.; Penttala, V.; Kauppinen, E.I. Effect of carbon nanotube aqueous dispersion quality on mechanical properties of cement composite. J. Nanomater. 2012, 2012, 169262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kang, S.T.; Seo, J.Y.; Park, S.H. The characteristics of CNT/cement composites with acid-treated MWCNTs. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2015, 2015, 308725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Morsy, M.S.; Alsayed, S.H.; Aqel, M. Hybrid effect of carbon nanotube and nano-clay on physico-mechanical properties of cement mortar. Constr. Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 145–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kumar, S.; Kolay, P.; Malla, S.; Mishra, S. Effect of multiwalled carbon nanotubes on mechanical strength of cement paste. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2012, 24, 84–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Hamzaoui, R.; Guessasma, S.; Mecheri, B.; Eshtiaghi, A.M.; Bennabi, A. Microstructure and mechanical performance of modified mortar using hemp fibres and carbon nanotubes. Mater. Des. (1980–2015) 2014, 56, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kim, G.M.; Naeem, F.; Kim, H.K.; Lee, H.K. Heating and heat-dependent mechanical characteristics of CNT-embedded cementitious composites. Compos. Struct. 2016, 136, 162–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kim, H.K.; Nam, I.W.; Lee, H.K. Enhanced effect of carbon nanotube on mechanical and electrical properties of cement composites by incorporation of silica fume. Compos. Struct. 2014, 107, 60–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Nam, I.W.; Lee, H.K.; Jang, J.H. Electromagnetic interference shielding/absorbing characteristics of CNT-embedded epoxy composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2011, 42, 1110–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Kim, G.M.; Nam, I.W.; Yang, B.; Yoon, H.N.; Lee, H.K.; Park, S. Carbon nanotube (CNT) incorporated cementitious composites for functional construction materials: The state of the art. Compos. Struct. 2019, 227, 111244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Zou, B.; Chen, S.J.; Korayem, A.H.; Collins, F.; Wang, C.M.; Duan, W.H. Effect of ultrasonication energy on engineering properties of carbon nanotube reinforced cement pastes. Carbon 2015, 85, 212–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Luo, J.L.; Duan, Z.D.; Zhao, T.J.; Li, Q.Y. Effect of multi-wall carbon nanotube on fracture mechanical property of cement-based composite. Adv. Mater. Res. 2011, 146, 581–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Konsta, M.S.; Metaxa, Z.S.; Shah, S.P. Highly dispersed carbon nanotube reinforced cement based materials. Cem. Concr. Res. 2010, 40, 1052–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Bianco, A.; Cheng, H.; Enoki, T.; Gogotsi, Y.; Hurt, R.H.; Koratkar, N.; Kyotani, T.; Monthioux, M.; Park, C.R.; Tascon, J.M.D.; et al. All in the graphene family—A recommended nomenclature for two-dimensional carbon materials. Carbon 2013, 65, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Kuilla, T.; Bhadra, S.; Yao, D.; Kim, N.H.; Bose, S.; Lee, J.H. Recent advances in graphene based polymer composites. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2010, 35, 1350–1375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Lambert, T.N.; Chavez, C.A.; ernandez-Sanchez, B.; Lu, P.; Bell, N.S.; Ambrosini, A. Synthesis and characterization of titania−graphene nanocomposites. J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 19812–19823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Stankovich, S.; Dikin, D.A.; Dommett, G.H.; Kohlhaas, K.M.; Zimney, E.J.; Stach, E.A. Graphene-based composite materials. Nature 2006, 442, 282–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Novoselov, K.S.; Colombo, L.; Gellert, P.R.; Schwab, M.G.; Kim, K.A.J.N. A roadmap for graphene. Nature 2012, 490, 192–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Huang, P.; Jing, L.; Zhu, H.; Gao, X. Diazonium functionalized graphene: Microstructure, electric, and magnetic properties. Acc. Chem. Res. 2013, 46, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Yi, M.; Shen, Z. A review on mechanical exfoliation for the scalable production of graphene. J. Mater. Chem. A 2015, 3, 11700–11715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Zhang, Y.I.; Zhang, L.; Zhou, C. Review of chemical vapor deposition of graphene and related applications. Acc. Chem. Res. 2013, 46, 2329–2339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Ciesielski, A.; Samorì, P. Graphene via sonication assisted liquid-phase exfoliation. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 381–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Singh, R.K.; Kumar, R.; Singh, D.P. Graphene oxide: Strategies for synthesis, reduction and frontier applications. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 64993–65011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Manawi, Y.M.; Ihsanullah; Samara, A.; Al-Ansari, T.; Atieh, M.A. A review of carbon nanomaterials’ synthesis via the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) method. Materials 2018, 11, 822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Choy, K.L. Chemical vapour deposition of coatings. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2003, 48, 57–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Ouyang, L.; Cao, Z.; Wang, H.; Hu, R.; Zhu, M. Application of dielectric barrier discharge plasma-assisted milling in energy storage materials—A review. J. Alloys Compd. 2017, 691, 422–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Wu, Q.; Huang, Y.; Yu, J. Cobalt phosphide nanoparticles supported by vertically grown graphene sheets on carbon black with n-doping treatment as bifunctional electrocatalysts for overall water splitting. Energy Fuels 2023, 37, 19156–19165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Li, X.; Yang, X.; Xue, H.; Pang, H.; Xu, Q. Metal–organic frameworks as a platform for clean energy applications. EnergyChem 2020, 2, 100027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. de Souza, F.B.; Yao, X.; Gao, W.; Duan, W. Graphene opens pathways to a carbon-neutral cement industry. Sci. Bull. 2022, 67, 5–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Papanikolaou, I.; Arena, N.; Al-Tabbaa, A. Graphene nanoplatelet reinforced concrete for self-sensing structures—A lifecycle assessment perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 240, 118202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Sharma, K.R. Graphene Nanomaterials; Momentum Press: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  87. Wu, T.; Zhang, X.F.; Yuan, Q.; Xue, J.; Lu, G.; Liu, Z.; Wang, H.; Wang, H.; Ding, F.; Yu, Q.; et al. Fast growth of inch-sized single-crystalline graphene from a controlled single nucleus on Cu–Ni alloys. Nat. Mater. 2016, 15, 43–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Xu, X.; Zhang, Z.; Qiu, L.; Zhuang, J.; Zhang, L.; Wang, H.; Liao, C.; Song, H.; Qiao, R.; Gao, P.; et al. Ultrafast growth of single-crystal graphene assisted by a continuous oxygen supply. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2016, 11, 930–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Wu, X.; Zhong, G.; D’Arsié, L.; Sugime, H.; Esconjauregui, S.; Robertson, A.W.; Robertson, J. Growth of continuous monolayer graphene with millimeter-sized domains using industrially safe conditions. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 21152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. 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, 121–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Lv, S.; Ting, S.; Liu, J.; Zhou, Q. Use of graphene oxide nanosheets to regulate the microstructure of hardened cement paste to increase its strength and toughness. CrystEngComm 2014, 16, 8508–8516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Pan, Z.; Wenhui, D.U.A.N.; Li, D.; Collins, F. Graphene Oxide Reinforced Cement and Concrete. WO2013096990A1, 4 July 2013. [Google Scholar]
  93. Jiang, W.; Li, X.; Lv, Y.; Zhou, M.; Liu, Z.; Ren, Z.; Yu, Z. Cement-based materials containing graphene oxide and polyvinyl alcohol fiber: Mechanical properties, durability, and microstructure. Nanomaterials 2018, 8, 638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Uygunoğlu, T.; Şimşek, B.; Ceran, Ö.B.; Eryeşil, Ö. Novel hybrid fiber reinforced mortar production using polyvinyl alcohol with a blend of graphene oxide and silver nanoparticles. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 44, 102641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Peng, H.; Ge, Y.; Cai, C.S.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Z. Mechanical properties and microstructure of graphene oxide cement-based composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 194, 102–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Anwar, A.; Liu, X.; Zhang, L. Nano-cementitious composites modified with graphene oxide—A review. Thin-Walled Struct. 2023, 183, 110326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Bhatrola, K.; Maurya, S.K.; Kothiyal, N.C. An updated review on scientometric analysis and physico-mechanical performance of nanomaterials in cementitious composites. Structures 2023, 58, 105421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Cao, M.L.; Zhang, H.X.; Zhang, C. Effect of graphene on mechanical properties of cement mortars. J. Cent. South Univ. 2016, 23, 919–925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Chintalapudi, K.; Pannem, R.M.R. The effects of graphene oxide addition on hydration process, crystal shapes, and microstructural transformation of Ordinary Portland Cement. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 32, 101551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Wang, Q.; Li, S.; Pan, S.; Cui, X.; Corr, D.J.; Shah, S.P. Effect of graphene oxide on the hydration and microstructure of fly ash-cement system. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 198, 106–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Li, X.; Lu, Z.; Chuah, S.; Li, W.; Liu, Y.; Duan, W.H.; Li, Z. Effects of graphene oxide aggregates on hydration degree, sorptivity, and tensile splitting strength of cement paste. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2017, 100, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Zhao, L.; Guo, X.; Ge, C.; Li, Q.; Guo, L.; Shu, X.; Liu, J. Mechanical behavior and toughening mechanism of polycarboxylate superplasticizer modified graphene oxide reinforced cement composites. Compos. Part B Eng. 2017, 113, 308–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Zhao, L.; Guo, X.; Ge, C.; Li, Q.; Guo, L.; Shu, X.; Liu, J. Investigation of the effectiveness of PC@GO on the reinforcement for cement composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 113, 470–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Zhao, L.; Guo, X.; Liu, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Guo, L.; Shu, X.; Liu, J. Hydration kinetics, pore structure, 3D network calcium silicate hydrate, and mechanical behavior of graphene oxide reinforced cement composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 190, 150–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Zhao, L.; Guo, X.; Liu, Y.; Ge, C.; Guo, L.; Shu, X.; Liu, J. Synergistic effects of silica nanoparticles/polycarboxylate superplasticizer modified graphene oxide on mechanical behavior and hydration process of cement composites. RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 16688–16702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Liu, J.; Fu, J.; Yang, Y.; Gu, C. Study on dispersion, mechanical and microstructure properties of cement paste incorporating graphene sheets. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 199, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Sobolev, K.; Shah, S.P. Characterization of cement-based materials modified with graphene-oxide. In Nanotechnology in Construction: Proceedings of NICOM5; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 259–264. [Google Scholar]
  108. Devi, S.C.; Khan, R.A. Effect of graphene oxide on mechanical and durability performance of concrete. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 27, 101007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Indukuri, C.S.R.; Nerella, R. Enhanced transport properties of graphene oxide based cement composite material. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 37, 102174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Liu, C.; Huang, X.; Wu, Y.Y.; Deng, X.; Zheng, Z. The effect of graphene oxide on the mechanical properties, impermeability and corrosion resistance of cement mortar containing mineral admixtures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 288, 123059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Yu, L.; Wu, R. Using graphene oxide to improve the properties of ultra-high-performance concrete with fine recycled aggregate. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 259, 120657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Abdullah, A.; Taha, M.; Rashwan, M.; Fahmy, M. Efficient use of graphene oxide and silica fume in cement-based composites. Materials 2021, 14, 6541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Kashif Ur Rehman, S.; Ibrahim, Z.; Memon, S.A.; Aunkor, M.T.H.; Faisal Javed, M.; Mehmood, K.; Shah, S.M.A. Influence of graphene nanosheets on rheology, microstructure, strength development and self-sensing properties of cement based composites. Sustainability 2018, 10, 822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Li, C.Y.; Chen, S.J.; Li, W.G.; Li, X.Y.; Ruan, D.; Duan, W.H. Dynamic increased reinforcing effect of graphene oxide on cementitious nanocomposite. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 206, 694–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Sabziparvar, A.M.; Hosseini, E.; Chiniforush, V.; Korayem, A.H. Barriers to achieving highly dispersed graphene oxide in cementitious composites: An experimental and computational study. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 199, 269–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Chintalapudi, K.; Pannem, R.M.R. Enhanced strength, microstructure, and thermal properties of portland pozzolana fly ash-based cement composites by reinforcing graphene oxide nanosheets. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 42, 102521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Lu, Z.; Hou, D.; Meng, L.; Sun, G.; Lu, C.; Li, Z. Mechanism of cement paste reinforced by graphene oxide/carbon nanotubes composites with enhanced mechanical properties. RSC Adv. 2015, 5, 100598–100605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Wang, Q.; Wang, J.; Lu, C.X.; Liu, B.W.; Zhang, K.; Li, C.Z. Influence of graphene oxide additions on the microstructure and mechanical strength of cement. New Carbon Mater. 2015, 30, 349–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Kang, D.; Seo, K.S.; Lee, H.; Chung, W. Experimental study on mechanical strength of GO-cement composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 131, 303–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Qureshi, T.S.; Panesar, D.K. Impact of graphene oxide and highly reduced graphene oxide on cement based composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 206, 71–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. 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, 231–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Abrishami, M.E.; Zahabi, V. Reinforcing graphene oxide/cement composite with NH2 functionalizing group. Bull. Mater. Sci. 2016, 39, 1073–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Gholampour, A.; Kiamahalleh, M.V.; Tran, D.N.; Ozbakkaloglu, T.; Losic, D. Revealing the dependence of the physiochemical and mechanical properties of cement composites on graphene oxide concentration. RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 55148–55156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Sharma, S.; Kothiyal, N.C. Comparative effects of pristine and ball-milled graphene oxide on physico-chemical characteristics of cement mortar nanocomposites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 115, 256–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Sharma, S.; Susan, D.; Kothiyal, N.C.; Kaur, R. Graphene oxide prepared from mechanically milled graphite: Effect on strength of novel fly-ash based cementitious matrix. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 177, 10–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Kothiyal, N.C.; Sharma, S.; Mahajan, S.; Sethi, S. Characterization of reactive graphene oxide synthesized from ball–milled graphite: Its enhanced reinforcing effects on cement nanocomposites. J. Adhes. Sci. Technol. 2016, 30, 915–933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Long, W.J.; Wei, J.J.; Ma, H.; Xing, F. Dynamic mechanical properties and microstructure of graphene oxide nanosheets reinforced cement composites. Nanomaterials 2017, 7, 407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Qin, H.; Wei, W.; Hu, Y.H. Synergistic effect of graphene-oxide-doping and microwave-curing on mechanical strength of cement. J. Phys. Chem. Solids 2017, 103, 67–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Zhao, L.; Guo, X.; Liu, Y.; Ge, C.; Chen, Z.; Guo, L.; Shu, X.; Liu, J. Investigation of dispersion behavior of GO modified by different water reducing agents in cement pore solution. Carbon 2018, 127, 255–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Sharma, S.; Kothiyal, N.C. Influence of graphene oxide as dispersed phase in cement mortar matrix in defining the crystal patterns of cement hydrates and its effect on mechanical, microstructural and crystallization properties. RSC Adv. 2015, 5, 52642–52657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Sharma, S.; Kothiyal, N.C.; 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, 103993–104009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Li, X.; Wei, W.; Qin, H.; Hu, Y.H. Co-effects of graphene oxide sheets and single wall carbon nanotubes on mechanical properties of cement. J. Phys. Chem. Solids 2015, 85, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Tamashausky, A.V. Graphite. Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 1998, 77, 102–104. [Google Scholar]
  134. García, P.G.; Ramírez-Aguilar, R.; Torres, M.; Franco-Urquiza, E.A.; May-Crespo, J.; Camacho, N. Mechanical and thermal behavior dependence on graphite and oxidized graphite content in polyester composites. Polymer 2018, 153, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Tyler, P.M.I. Graphite; Department of Commerce, Bureau of Mines: Washington, DC, USA, 1929.
  136. James, D.K.; Tour, J.M. Graphene: Powder, flakes, ribbons, and sheets. Acc. Chem. Res. 2013, 46, 2307–2318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Dhakate, S.R.; Chauhan, N.; Sharma, S.; Tawale, J.; Singh, S.; Sahare, P.D.; Mathur, R.B. An approach to produce single and double layer graphene from re-exfoliation of expanded graphite. Carbon 2011, 49, 1946–1954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Hansora, D.P.; Shimpi, N.G.; Mishra, S. Graphite to graphene via graphene oxide: An overview on synthesis, properties, and applications. JOM 2015, 67, 2855–2868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Hod, O. Graphite and hexagonal boron-nitride have the same interlayer distance. Why? J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2012, 8, 1360–1369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Coscia, U.; Palomba, M.; Ambrosone, G.; Barucca, G.; Cabibbo, M.; Mengucci, P.; De Asmundis, R.; Carotenuto, G. A new micromechanical approach for the preparation of graphene nanoplatelets deposited on polyethylene. Nanotechnology 2017, 28, 194001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Umair, A.; Raza, T.Z.; Raza, H. Ultrathin pyrolytic carbon films on a magnetic substrate. Mater. Res. Express 2016, 3, 075601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Nieto, A.; Bisht, A.; Lahiri, D.; Zhang, C.; Agarwal, A. Graphene reinforced metal and ceramic matrix composites: A review. Int. Mater. Rev. 2017, 62, 241–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Ampah, A.D.; Pagone, E.; Salonitis, K. Life cycle assessment of graphene as heating element. Sustainable Design and Manufacturing 2019. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Sustainable Design and Manufacturing (KES-SDM 19); Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 283–297. [Google Scholar]
  144. Pizza, A.; Metz, R.; Hassanzadeh, M.; Bantignies, J.L. Life cycle assessment of nanocomposites made of thermally conductive graphite nanoplatelets. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2014, 19, 1226–1237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Schulte, K. Production of CNTs and risks to health. In Carbon Nanotube Reinforced Composites: CNR Polymer Science and Technology; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; pp. 103–123. [Google Scholar]
  146. Ahmad, F.; Qureshi, M.I.; Ahmad, Z. Influence of nano graphite platelets on the behavior of concrete with E-waste plastic coarse aggregates. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 316, 125980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Sharma, S.; Kothiyal, N.C. Synergistic effect of zero-dimensional spherical carbon nanoparticles and one-dimensional carbon nanotubes on properties of cement-based ceramic matrix: Microstructural perspectives and crystallization investigations. Compos. Interfaces 2015, 22, 899–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Chougan, M.; Marotta, E.; Lamastra, F.R.; Vivio, F.; Montesperelli, G.; Ianniruberto, U.; Ghaffar, S.H.; Al-kheetan, M.J.; Bianco, A. High performance cementitious nanocomposites: The effectiveness of nano-Graphite (nG). Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 259, 119687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Liu, Q.; Xu, Q.; Yu, Q.; Gao, R.; Tong, T. Experimental investigation on mechanical and piezoresistive properties of cementitious materials containing graphene and graphene oxide nanoplatelets. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 127, 565–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Yang, M.; Chen, G.; Cao, N.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, Y. Effect of graphenene nanoplatelets on microstructure and properties of cement mortar under simulated acid rain. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 631, 022036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Ahmad, F.; Jamal, A.; Iqbal, M.; Alqurashi, M.; Almoshaogeh, M.; Al-Ahmadi, H.M.; Hussein, E.E. Performance evaluation of cementitious composites incorporating nano graphite platelets as additive carbon material. Materials 2021, 15, 290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Trikkaliotis, D.G.; Mitropoulos, A.C.; Kyzas, G.Z. Low-cost route for top-down synthesis of over-and low-oxidized graphene oxide. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2020, 600, 124928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Maduraiveeran, G.; Jin, W. Carbon nanomaterials: Synthesis, properties and applications in electrochemical sensors and energy conversion systems. Mater. Sci. Eng. B 2021, 272, 115341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Meng, T.; Hong, Y.; Wei, H.; Xu, Q. Effect of nano-SiO2 with different particle size on the hydration kinetics of cement. Thermochim. Acta 2019, 675, 127–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Materials 17 02196 g001
Figure 1. Graphene: wrapped up into 0D, rolled up into 1D, stacked into 3D [12].
Figure 1. Graphene: wrapped up into 0D, rolled up into 1D, stacked into 3D [12].
Materials 17 02196 g001
Materials 17 02196 g002
Figure 2. Properties of C60 fullerenes. (a) Macroscopic appearance; (b) SEM images; (c) molecular structure.
Figure 2. Properties of C60 fullerenes. (a) Macroscopic appearance; (b) SEM images; (c) molecular structure.
Materials 17 02196 g002
Materials 17 02196 g003
Figure 3. The mixing process of cementitious composites incorporated nanocarbon material.
Figure 3. The mixing process of cementitious composites incorporated nanocarbon material.
Materials 17 02196 g003
Materials 17 02196 g004
Figure 4. Properties of carbon nanotubes. (a) Macroscopic appearance; (b) SEM images;(c) molecular structure.
Figure 4. Properties of carbon nanotubes. (a) Macroscopic appearance; (b) SEM images;(c) molecular structure.
Materials 17 02196 g004
Materials 17 02196 g005
Figure 5. Effect of different types (short and long) of MWCNTs and concentration on the flexural strength [69].
Figure 5. Effect of different types (short and long) of MWCNTs and concentration on the flexural strength [69].
Materials 17 02196 g005
Materials 17 02196 g006
Figure 6. Properties of graphene. (a) Macroscopic appearance; (b) SEM images; (c) molecular structure.
Figure 6. Properties of graphene. (a) Macroscopic appearance; (b) SEM images; (c) molecular structure.
Materials 17 02196 g006
Materials 17 02196 g007
Figure 7. Properties of graphite. (a) Macroscopic appearance; (b) SEM images; (c) molecular structure.
Figure 7. Properties of graphite. (a) Macroscopic appearance; (b) SEM images; (c) molecular structure.
Materials 17 02196 g007
Materials 17 02196 g008
Figure 8. Effect of different contents of NGPs on mechanical strength of concrete [151].
Figure 8. Effect of different contents of NGPs on mechanical strength of concrete [151].
Materials 17 02196 g008
Materials 17 02196 g009
Figure 9. Comprehensive performance evaluation of carbon-based nanomaterials.
Figure 9. Comprehensive performance evaluation of carbon-based nanomaterials.
Materials 17 02196 g009
Materials 17 02196 g010
Figure 10. Summary of the mechanical properties of cementitious composites by different carbon-based nanomaterials.
Figure 10. Summary of the mechanical properties of cementitious composites by different carbon-based nanomaterials.
Materials 17 02196 g010
Materials 17 02196 g011
Figure 11. Schematic diagram of effect of carbon-based nanomaterials on the microstructures and cement hydration of the cementitious composites.
Figure 11. Schematic diagram of effect of carbon-based nanomaterials on the microstructures and cement hydration of the cementitious composites.
Materials 17 02196 g011
Materials 17 02196 g012
Figure 12. Mechanism of different dimensions of carbon-based nanomaterials on cementitious composites.
Figure 12. Mechanism of different dimensions of carbon-based nanomaterials on cementitious composites.
Materials 17 02196 g012
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

Gao, X.; Fang, W.; Li, W.; Wang, P.; Khan, K.; Tang, Y.; Wang, T. Effects of Multidimensional Carbon-Based Nanomaterials on the Low-Carbon and High-Performance Cementitious Composites: A Critical Review. Materials 2024, 17, 2196. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17102196

AMA Style

Gao X, Fang W, Li W, Wang P, Khan K, Tang Y, Wang T. Effects of Multidimensional Carbon-Based Nanomaterials on the Low-Carbon and High-Performance Cementitious Composites: A Critical Review. Materials. 2024; 17(10):2196. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17102196

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gao, Xiumei, Wujun Fang, Weiwen Li, Peng Wang, Kashan Khan, Yihong Tang, and Teng Wang. 2024. "Effects of Multidimensional Carbon-Based Nanomaterials on the Low-Carbon and High-Performance Cementitious Composites: A Critical Review" Materials 17, no. 10: 2196. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17102196

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