I definitely would. Email me at [log in to unmask]

 

 

Rudy,

I’d be happy to talk back-channel about analytical costs if you’re interested. 

John

 

 

Michael,

 

That last one got away unfinished. Working on my lap at the Atlanta airport desperately hoping they don’t cancel our flight to Cleveland for a third time!

 

Thank you for taking the time to read and reply. You are directly addressing a subject that concerns me greatly and I for one am willing and interested (we can argue about able later) to learn how to better effect education in the various traditional trades without making a mess. Part of the problem is that we (PTN) keep getting bounced around between different disciplines and partners and it’s often hard to tell who does or doesn’t know what they are talking about. I will be the first to admit my knowledge of lime and natural cements is limited at best. In both cases the choice, unquestioned by me, to use hydraulic lime was made by the university faculty. In 2008 it was the University of Florida and in 2009 it was Tulane. In both cases the individuals involved were not very long in the tooth.

 

Having the materials tested just makes sense. Why it was not done isn’t known to me, but I will work to make sure it happens in the future. One question would be cost. In timber frame projects and other historic wooden building projects we have been able to get wood identified by the Forest Products Lab at no cost. Is something like that available for educational programs involving historic masonry structures? If not, how do I budget for having mortar or plaster tested?

 

Rudy

 

 

Rudy,

"...the decision to use hydraulic lime was based on what the academic and trades education staff considered to be best practice.."

When I read things like this I wonder if I have stumbled in Bizzaro World. It reminds me of an old Steve Martin comedy routine where he speculated about how much fun it would be to teach your kids to talk wrong.

So 3 exasperated comments:

1. There is absolutely nothing wrong with good old $9/bag ASTM C207 Type S Hydrated Lime. We are currently restoring the old 1830's Snuff Mill at New York Botanic Gardens with a simple hydrated lime-sand mix, matching the original materials. We have had thousands of bags of this type of mortar installed in all sorts of climates on other projects as well without streaking, washouts or other nightmares. The problem with high calcium lime (often Type N) is that it is more soluble, lower in water retention and more likely to cause the grief people normally associate with lime mortar. So my suggestion is to avoid the high calcium lime putty or the Type N hydrate and use Type S.

2. "Hydraulic lime" and "traditional" is a bait-and-switch. On the one hand, the historically accurate material - ordinary, non-hydraulic lime - is embraced. Then the purveyors of hydraulic lime monger a little fear and switch you to this hydrated hydraulic lime substitute. Yes hydraulic lime was traditional in the 19th century - in EUROPE! IT IS SOMEBODY ELSE'S TRADITION - NOT OURS! While some hydraulic lime was imported to the US, it was never intentionally produced here and finding it in forensic analyses occasionally, but rarely, happens. If people are so worried that just plain lime won't kick fast enough, there is a traditional 19th century solution to this problem - they added a little natural cement to the mix.

3. This case of the argument being portland vs. hydraulic lime sounds like a case of "Dumb and Dumberer". There is plenty of experience to suggest that using portland for repair of non-portland structures can have very damaging effects on soft brick masonry.

Preservation work would take a great leap forward in this country if we stopped worrying so much about sales pitches and tried to think things through logically. I might suggest a decision tree like this:

1. Properly identify the original materials. (It astounds me how rarely this still being done, in the rush to sell something else.)

2. Did the original materials perform well, are they still commercially available, and are we confident there are no problems in using it as a restoration material as opposed to a new construction material? If the answers to these are all yes, use the original materials!

3. If any of these answers is negative, then we need to identify alternatives that will provide analagous performance properties. This is more difficult to do, so this is where all the hand-wringing should be going on. I would dare to venture that this represents an extremely small fraction of all restoration work, however.

One more comment on New Orleans:

If you Google an NPS article called "The Southern Stucco Tradition", reference is made to the use of natural cement in stuccos from Charleston to New Orleans in the 19th and early 20th Centuries. As I said, we should do the due diligence on the forensic end before anything else, and let these buildings speak for themselves.

Edison Coatings, Inc.
Michael P. Edison
President
3 Northwest Drive
Plainville, CT 06062
Phone: (860) 747-2220 or (800)341-6621
Fax: (860)747-2280
Internet: www.edisoncoatings.com
         www.rosendalecement.net
E-Mail: [log in to unmask]

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Rudy R Christian <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 10:44:34 -0500
Subject: Re: [BP] Masons in New Orleans

> Michael,

>

 

> I would be interested in your feedback to my blog http://traditional-building.com/Rudy_Christian/ Unfortunately I called Rosendale cement Roseville, but at least I didn’t call it Rosebud! Maybe some of you other Pinheads have something to say as well.

>

 

> Rudy

>

 

>

 

>

 

>
>

> From: The listserv where the buildings do the talking [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Edison Coatings
> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 3:04 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BP] Mason in Los Angeles

>

 

> OK, I will get that set up for you.
>
> Edison Coatings, Inc.
> Michael P. Edison
> President
> 3 Northwest Drive
> Plainville, CT 06062
> Phone: (860) 747-2220 or (800)341-6621
> Fax: (860)747-2280
> Internet: www.edisoncoatings.com
>          www.rosendalecement.net
> E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
>
>

-- To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09 05:58:00
> -- To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html
------- End of Original Message -------