Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 1 May 2001 07:50:41 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Has anyone followed the Bilboa/Guggy problem with the "bad Titanium"?
Best,
Leland
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Walter" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 7:13 AM
Subject: Re: You'll never take me unweathered, copper!
> In a message dated 4/30/2001 3:37:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> << If we were starting all over again, what would
> be the "dream material" besides copper? Titanium? Stainless? How does
ugly
> old aluminum hold up? >>
>
> Titanium would probably be nice, if anybody (including Bill Gates) could
> afford it. Stainless is damn good, but very difficult to work. Aluminum.
> despite its use as the capstone for the Washington Monument, oxidizes
badly
> (and uglyly) when bare and reacts very badly with cement; anodizing helps
a
> lot on the weathering aspect.
>
> Take it from there, Techno-nerds.
>
> Ralph
>
|
|
|