Can be installed over existing urethane waterproofing membranes
Minimal micro-cracking due to mixing errors
Low odor due to the use of natural materials
High impact resistance due to shock absorption properties
Adhesive Type | Urethane Adhesive | Epoxy Adhesive | Inorganic Adhesive | Silicone Adhesive |
Adhesion Strength | Good | Good | Good | Excellent |
Hardness | Good | Good | Good | Excellent |
Eco-friendliness | Theoretically good | High | Good | Good |
Cost | Low | Medium-low | High | Low |
Drawbacks | - Quality imbalance due to on-site mixing | - Significant curing shrinkage (proportional to solid content) | - Main component is powder, making on-site work difficult | - Mainly imported products, leading to high cost |
|
| - Weak against impacts after curing | - Lacks elasticity, transmits impact noise directly | - Long curing time due to moisture curing |
|
| - Quality imbalance due to on-site mixing |
|
|
|
| - Low capability for floor slope correction |
|
|
|
| - Receives lightweight impact noise as is |
|
|
Advantages | Low cost | - Lower cost compared to imported products | - No on-site mixing required, easy application | Environmentally friendly |
| Theoretically eco-friendly | - Provides elasticity, reduces lightweight impact noise | - Provides elasticity, reduces lightweight impact noise | - High functionality even with high modulus |
|
| - Environmentally friendly | - Environmentally friendly | - Minimal odor |
|
| - Minimal shrinkage phenomenon in curing | - Minimal odor |
|
|
| - Minimal odor | - Excellent water resistance |
|
|
| - Excellent water resistance | - High surface leveling capability |
|
|
| - High surface leveling capability |
|
|
|
| - Does not stain natural stone |
|
|
| Attachment Surface | Epoxy Lining | Tile Backside | Non-toluene | Remarks | |||
Polyurethane Adhesive
(Attachment Strength) |
| Field Value |
| Field Value |
| Field Value |
|
|
#1 | 1710 | 1.1N/mm² | 2120 | 1.3N/mm² | 2120 | 1.3N/mm² |
| |
#2 | 1800 | 1.1N/mm² | 2160 | 1.3N/mm² | 2255 | 1.4N/mm² |
| |
#3 | 2060 | 1.3N/mm² | 2255 | 1.4N/mm² | 2190 | 1.4N/mm² |
| |
Average | 1856 |
| 2178 |
| 2222 |
|
| |
| Epoxy adhesion failure | Tile damage | Polyurethane (non-peel) surface delamination |
| ||||
Category | Polyurethane Adhesive | Epoxy Adhesive | Notes | |
Environmental | Good | Good |
| |
Elasticity | Excellent elasticity | No elasticity |
| |
Bonding Strength | polyurethane | Excellent (Can be applied directly on polyurethane waterproofing surfaces) | Poor |
|
concrete | Good | Good |
| |
gypsum board | Good | Good |
| |
tiles | Good | Good |
| |
composite insulation materials | Good | Poor |
| |
Workability | mixing capability | Requires mechanical mixing | Requires both mechanical mixing and manual stirring |
|
Spreadability | Applicable for adhesion and pressing during installation. | Only applicable for adhesion |
| |
weather resistance | Good | Moderate |
| |
Pot Life | Approximately 1 hour | Approximately 30 minutes |
| |
Initial Cure Time | Approximately 10 hours | Approximately 5 hours |
| |
Full Cure Time | Approximately 24 hours | Approximately 24 hours |
| |
Advantages | Prevents incomplete curing with accurate measuring and mixing |
|
| |
Prevents incomplete curing with accurate measuring and mixing |
|
| ||
Environmental satisfaction |
|
| ||
Minimal contraction during curing |
|
| ||
Nearly odorless |
|
| ||
seismic resistance |
|
| ||
Excellent waterproofing |
|
| ||
Disadvantages | Inconvenient due to need for mixing equipment | Vulnerable to impacts due to lack of elasticity |
| |
| Crystallizes in winter |
| ||
| Strong odor if uncured due to worker error (especially in bathrooms) |
| ||
| Potential incomplete curing due to improper mixing ratios |
| ||
