BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives

The listserv where the buildings do the talking

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
David West <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The listserv that doubts.
Date:
Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:44:56 +1100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (89 lines)
John

I think that every way of categorising helps.  Some of us 'get'
different ways of explanation.

I like your categorisation.

Cheers

David West
Executive Director
internationalconservationservices
T:   +61 (2) 9417 3311
M:   +61 (411) 692 696
conservation&managementofculturalmaterial
 

-----Original Message-----
From: The listserv that doubts.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Walsh
Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2007 12:37 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BP] Puzzledana

Hi Leland and thanks for the welcome,
I'm going to answer this one at the same time responding to Mike
Edison's last 
response on pozzolans.  The simpified answer to your question is no
difference 
at all.  Pozzolans are the general class of materials that (to quote
Mike) react 
with lime to form calcium silicate hydrates (i.e.; cementitious
products).  Many 
volcanics (ash, earth, tuff, crushed rock) are a subset provided they
have the 
right chemistry and structure.  The difference between ash, tuff, and
rock is 
really just a geologic one and probably of little concern to most.  So
pozzolan 
is the general term that includes all sorts of silica-rich, generally
"glassy" 
materials including certain volcanics (including Dutch trass), brick
dust, rice 
husk ash, coal ash, and steel slag.  

And onto Mike's response...I worry about common usage.  But if the
definition 
of pozzolan is "anything that reacts with lime to form calcium silicate 
hydrates, then I agree and it's not a redefinition at all.  At the risk
of 
unbelievably lumpy oversimplification, I'd like to group binder
components into 
three categories...acidic stuff, alkaline stuff, and neutral stuff.  We
can 
dismiss neutral stuff including pigments, animal hair, and chopped up
labor 
organizers as chemically uninteresting (again, gross
oversimplification).  The 
alkaline stuff includes portland cement, natural cement, hydraulic lime,
and 
lime.  What all these have in common is that they are composed of
calcium 
hydroxide or make calcium hydroxide upon hydration.  (Yes, technically 
cements make their own lime when water is added but it is in a differnet

form).  So all these materials are caustic, are saturated with respect
to lime, 
and are very stable in its presence (which is why cement mortars are
best 
cured in lime water).  The acidic stuff are unstable in caustic
environments 
and breakdown to form more stable components.  These are the pozzolans 
and include most sorts of silica-rich material that have poor
crystallinity.  Gee, 
I'm not doing such a great job at simplifying this.  I'll leave it at
that.

John

--
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>

--
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>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2