BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives

The listserv where the buildings do the talking

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show HTML 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:
Edison Coatings <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The Listserv that makes holes in Manhattan schist for free! <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 4 May 2007 12:15:41 -0400
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2261 bytes) , text/html (3109 bytes)
The use of portland cement repointing/rebuilding mortar on masonry construction originally built with lime or natural cement is problematic because:

1. Portland mortars are typically harder and more rigid than natural cement and lime mortars. If you replace the outer 1/2" of mortar with something harder, then as the structure expands and contracts, all the stress is concentrated at the outer 1/2" of surface, and this can lead to spalling of the brick.

2. Lime and natural cement structures were usually built without expansion joints because the mortars were flexible enough to accommodate movement related to thermal cycling. Portland needs expansion joints, and if you don't provide them, the structure may crack, thereby providing its own joints.

3. If portland mortars are proportioned to be fairly dense, as modern mortars tend to be, they will be slower to release moisture than their traditional counterparts. That tends to force the moisture to seek alternate routes of escape, i.e., through the masonry units themselves. The masonry suffers for it. So does the older back-up mortar.

4. If portland mortars require repointing more frequently than natural cement mortars, then portland represents a less sustainable approach, as every round of repointing induces damage and loss of fabric to the original structure.

Mike E
---------- Original Message -----------
From: [log in to unmask] 
To: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Fri, 4 May 2007 10:37:32 EDT 
Subject: Re: [BP] Pulaski Still Being Pounded

> In a message dated 5/4/2007 8:52:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask] writes:

The portland work is bad, everyone knows it's bad, yet it continues.
> Mike, educate me ... how is it bad?   Christopher 
> 
> 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
See what's free at AOL.com. -- 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 -------
 

--
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