Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | BP - "Preservationists shouldn't be neat freaks." -- Mary D |
Date: | Tue, 6 Jun 2000 14:33:56 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
"Hammarberg, Eric" wrote:
> was this a BP topic? I seem to have missed it
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Follett [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 1:29 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Loose newels
>
> In a message dated 6/6/00 9:09:01 AM Central Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> > (The contractor tried bismuth - thats right, bismuth- but in a test it was
> too brittle.)
>
> Test a urethane. Find a less squeamish contractor.
>
> Bismuth fish sinkers?
>
> ][<en
Sorry, it never quite made it, seems like I mis-directed the message, so here it
is again.
Mitch (Hope I haven't screwed up the archives.)
Anyone have thoughts on setting cast-iron handrailings into stone
without using lead, but still having it be moderately reversible? A
cast iron newel in the 1840 NC capitol which was originally set in lead
came loose. The lead was neatly removed and now the contractor is
looking for a setting material to reseat the newel. Lead being LEAD,
the contractor doesn't want to mess with it, but it sure would be nice
to find something more reversible than epoxy. (The contractor tried
bismuth - thats right, bismuth- but in a test it was too brittle.)
|
|
|