If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by on September 13, 2006, 4:35 pm
What are the pros and cons of using a product like this for large-scale
8x8x16 CMU construction? Specifically, would it indeed reduce or
eliminate the need for steel reinforcement?
Here's the low down:
ITW TACC site:
http://www.itwtacc.com/masonry.html
Masonry Magazine article:
http://www.masonrymagazine.com/1-05/altmortar.html
Looks promising but it's relatively new so I'm somewhat skeptical.
|
|
Posted by M&S on September 13, 2006, 6:21 pm
kevinfishburne@gmail.com wrote:
> What are the pros and cons of using a product like this for large-scale
> 8x8x16 CMU construction? Specifically, would it indeed reduce or
> eliminate the need for steel reinforcement?
>
> Here's the low down:
>
> ITW TACC site:
> http://www.itwtacc.com/masonry.html
> Masonry Magazine article:
> http://www.masonrymagazine.com/1-05/altmortar.html
>
> Looks promising but it's relatively new so I'm somewhat skeptical.
>
Boy, that stuff is pricey. I would think the industry will have several
problems with it with regards to block construction in that it doesnt
leave a very attractive wall surface. For bonding decorative stone and
block it would be feasible but most masons we use are simply bonding cap
stones and such with construction adhesive which is a hell of a lot
cheaper than 22.00 a tube. On their site you dont even get case quantity
discounts. 22.00 across the board.
Depending on the construction details of your project you may look into
surface bonded dry stack construction instead. Surface bonded block
results in a wall with far more lateral strength though it has slightly
less compressive strength so it requires cores to be grouted at given
intervals. It offers the same features as this product in that there is
less skilled labor required and speed is increased. They both suffer
from masons squauking about all your measures being thrown off as you
are eliminating the mortar joints.
Given that using the above product would more than likely require the
wall to be parged for appearance sake, I would go surface bonded any day
of the week over this stuff.
Mark
|
|
Posted by Bob Morrison on September 13, 2006, 6:43 pm
In a previous post kevinfishburne@gmail.com wrote...
> What are the pros and cons of using a product like this for large-scale
> 8x8x16 CMU construction? Specifically, would it indeed reduce or
> eliminate the need for steel reinforcement?
>
In a word, NO!
The steel provides ductility, which is required in seismic zones.
--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com
|
|
Posted by Italian Mason on September 14, 2006, 3:05 am
dude....give it a rest, you would be farther ahead using this energy
looking for a way to do this by talking to the building dept and or an
engineer. Besides even if you do find some alternative method it still
has to be approved by the City or County which means you are going to
have to hire an engineer to review the specs and how they would apply
to your project... these are steps that are unavoidable regardless of
the material and or method you use. Do you really want to build a
project with something that has not been proven over hundreds of years
like block, mortar, steel and concrete? With your project and the
height of the walls there are NO ways around you needing STEEL in the
blocks and NO way around needing the cells to be grouted with
concrete.... Im not trying to be a jerk but you have to go to these
people first then you can spend the energy finding materials that will
work with what you need or can use. There are plenty of cool cutting
edge building products out there but if the city or county has not used
them before they are not going to take the liabilty of approviing
something built with them..
kevinfishburne@gmail.com wrote:
> What are the pros and cons of using a product like this for large-scale
> 8x8x16 CMU construction? Specifically, would it indeed reduce or
> eliminate the need for steel reinforcement?
> Here's the low down:
> ITW TACC site:
> http://www.itwtacc.com/masonry.html
> Masonry Magazine article:
> http://www.masonrymagazine.com/1-05/altmortar.html
>
> Looks promising but it's relatively new so I'm somewhat skeptical.
|
|
Posted by on September 14, 2006, 12:08 pm
Italian Mason wrote:
> dude....give it a rest, you would be farther ahead using this energy
> looking for a way to do this by talking to the building dept and or an
> engineer. Besides even if you do find some alternative method it still
Will do, but as far as giving it a rest I'm pretty sure my post was on
topic and useful to other people reading it.
> has to be approved by the City or County which means you are going to
> have to hire an engineer to review the specs and how they would apply
> to your project... these are steps that are unavoidable regardless of
> the material and or method you use. Do you really want to build a
> project with something that has not been proven over hundreds of years
> like block, mortar, steel and concrete? With your project and the
I'm aware of that, and to answer your question, potentially yes. That's
how technology moves forward and gains acceptance, by people adopting
it.
> height of the walls there are NO ways around you needing STEEL in the
> blocks and NO way around needing the cells to be grouted with
> concrete.... Im not trying to be a jerk but you have to go to these
> people first then you can spend the energy finding materials that will
> work with what you need or can use. There are plenty of cool cutting
Do you know anyone I could talk to or is there another forum for
engineers? Thought a few may peruse this group. Also, do you know of
any good books, web sites, etc., that cover the basics of reinforced
concrete construction, wood frame construction, or the legal logistics
of building a home? If so you could be spared countless future posts.
> edge building products out there but if the city or county has not used
> them before they are not going to take the liabilty of approviing
> something built with them..
I'm well aware of that too, but thanks.
|
Page 1 of 2 1 2 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Bond beam | November 15, 2006, 5:55 pm |
| concrete bond beam over brick wall | August 17, 2007, 9:35 pm |
| Shower bed mortar | September 11, 2007, 8:55 pm |
| Mortar repointing question | August 27, 2006, 2:21 pm |
| Water content for mortar | February 6, 2007, 11:21 pm |
| Thinset mortar bed thickness | April 2, 2008, 2:10 pm |
| chemical difference between cement and mortar | December 20, 2006, 5:49 pm |
| Is stucco material simply mortar mix? | September 19, 2007, 10:07 am |
| REPOINTING USING LIME TO REPLACE PORTLAND MORTAR | March 18, 2007, 5:06 pm |
| suitable mortar mixes for hard burnt facing bricks and lightweight aerated concrete blocks | January 6, 2007, 10:52 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
> 8x8x16 CMU construction? Specifically, would it indeed reduce or
> eliminate the need for steel reinforcement?
>
> Here's the low down:
>
> ITW TACC site:
> http://www.itwtacc.com/masonry.html
> Masonry Magazine article:
> http://www.masonrymagazine.com/1-05/altmortar.html
>
> Looks promising but it's relatively new so I'm somewhat skeptical.
>