Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Industrial and commercial flooring systems are multifunctional engineered systems exposed to mechanical, thermal, chemical, and environmental actions. This critical review compares cementitious, epoxy, polyurethane (PU), polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), polyaspartic polyurea, and hybrid PU–cement technologies with respect to material configuration, curing, mechanical performance, durability, installation constraints, and sustainability. Evidence is interpreted according to formulation, thickness, substrate, test method, curing, and exposure conditions. Abrasion, interfacial debonding, moisture-related deterioration, thermal and ultraviolet ageing, chemical attack, and application-specific selection are examined. Emerging smart, self-healing, and digital approaches are presented as research directions whose flooring-specific validation remains limited. No technology is universally superior; selection must be based on service-specific loading, exposure, substrate condition, downtime, maintenance, and life-cycle requirements.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kontiza et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: