Waterproofing Concrete

[elspruSubscriber]

Carl wrote:

I don’t see why not. Open source stuff is great, but there is no reason to get fanatical about it if there are commercial products that work and are cost-effective.

As long as it lasts for the design life of whatever you are building, that’s a long term solution.

you’re on the ocean, and you need to make some concrete right now. how do you?

gotta have the ingredients and the recipe for how to make your concrete.

And leaving all the issues with intellectual property aside, it is still often worth paying professionals to make stuff, simply because they are better at it than amateurs.

but then you don’t know how to make it,

in case you have to when you’re afloat seasteading.

so as to have replcable skill on seastead,

people must be willing to train other seastead members,

can of course have members of your seastead that are professionals,

being well practiced in a certan facet of the seastead,

sources of wisdom for the seasteads growth.

In terms of making waterproof concrete,

I’ve mentioned before we could use oils,

as they aren’t soluable with water so can displace it,

and can be mixed with plasticizers to become solid admixtures.

[J.L.-FrushaSubscriber]

Using a deeper section, to increase the distance of the rebar, from the surface, has limited value, since salt is so chemically activeand it begins to add unnecessary weight, reducing the overall capacity… Plastics are of less use, since they don’t bond as well. Oil, as an add-mixture is of even less value, since it weakens the cementation, by not bonding with the cement at all.

So far, for ferrocement structures, the best ideas have been Hot-Dip-Galvanized rebar and sealing all of the surfaces.

Fiber reinforcement works primarily by friction, same with any plastic admixture. It’s totally embedded, so, in order to deform this area, it has to pull and deform adjacent areas. Same with rebar EXCEPT that it has a better surface adhesion and is stronger than the cement it is embedded in.

Ferrocement is a… composit! It is a compromise between the strength of steel and the lighter, cheaper, more readily available cement (which has its’ own strengths).

The reason for this thread is to extend the useful life of a ferrocement hull. I want educated ideas that apply, to that end.

Fiber admixture helps, but has issues… How do you insure that all of the fiber is evenly distributed AND fully embedded? You cannot! It WILL have exposed fibers, making for a poor finishing surface and WILL make micro-channels for chemical penetration… Which leads back to HDG rebar and a surface treatment.

ONE thing that is certain, given good design and maintenance, the ferrocement hull has the potential to out-last several generations. Slower setting cement makes for a stronger micro-structure. The cement also has to be plastic enough to form, using minimal water… Ferrocement isn’t just a ‘slap-it-together’ process, if you want it to last. There are people that study cement all of their lives, coming up with the commercial additives and applications.

Later,

J.L.F.

Never be afraid to try something new…

Remember, amateurs built the ark, professionals built the Titanic.

[Carl-PålssonSubscriber]

Fire up the concrete mixer and pour in the ingredients (portland cement, ballast, fresh water, waterproofing admixtures), all of which must be purchased, produced, aquired and stockpiled beforehand if you want to have it ready for spur-of the moment building projects or emergencies.

You can’t produce all these things on the fly. Most of them you can’t realistically produce at all, because you will do it ten times worse and a hundred times slower than the professionals.

elspru wrote:

you’re on the ocean, and you need to make some concrete right now. how do you?

gotta have the ingredients and the recipe for how to make your concrete.

[tusavisionSubscriber]

Well: one advantage of seacrete is that you CAN pull it out your butt in the middle of the ocean given nothing but electricity and rebar.

Realistically speaking: complete autonomy is incremental, and until we have fired all our other suppliers: keeping the ground beneath our feet from rusting away is an acceptable application to make exceptions to idealogical purity.

I’d like to thank the sales rep for taking time to make themselves known. They may be selling something, but then again: we’re buying! It’s nice for someone to step up to the plate and say: “Yes, we’re in the business of selling you the exact product you’re looking for. We’re confident enough in it’s effectiveness that we recommend it for a life support mission.”

DIY’s such as myself can make their seasteads out of tin can’s if we want to.

When you’re in the business of selling boats: your suppliers saying “this product can do what you want it to” is valuable. No one can say you were negligent in deciding to use that product.

[elspruSubscriber]

steveaustin wrote:

This method uses a catalytic reaction to seal the pores, capillaries and shrinkage cracks that occur naturally in concrete. Crystalline waterproofing penetrates into the concrete.

So what is the catalyst?

calm aware desire choice love express intuit move

[waterproofconcreteSubscriber]

Well without giving away any trade or manufactures proprietary chemistry secrets (because I don’t have any) the catalyst is a blend of organic and inorganic material that react with un-hydrated cement particles to form millions of needle-like crystals. Over a period of weeks and months, these crystals grow, filling the naturally occurring pores and voids in concrete, and permanently blocking the pathways for water and waterborne contaminants. Later, if cracks form due to settling or shrinkage, incoming water triggers the crystallization process and additional crystals begin to grow. The crystals fill the cracks and ensure that the structure’s waterproofing barrier is maintained and protected even years later, to self-seal hair-line cracks before they turn into costly cracks in your structure.

I am a rep and distributor for a product such as this, without getting to boastful or link pushy, I’ll just ask that you message me or ask for more information and I’ll get it to you.

[R-B-WoodSubscriber]

If the crystals are activated by water, what keeps them from growing on the outside of the hull? Will they keep growing and increasing the mass and thickness of the hull until it can’t support it’s own weight? Self healing is great! It’s what I’ve been looking for, but if it continues growing beyond the original boundaries of the concrete then it becomes a problem. I think most people here are looking for something that needs no more than a bottom scraping every so many years. Personally, I’d like something that doesn’t even need that, but I don’t know how realistic that is. Every ocean structure needs some form of maintenance.

Thank you for stating your interest in the product. Do you know of any other products that are similar to yours?

waterproofconcrete wrote:

Well without giving away any trade or manufactures proprietary chemistry secrets (because I don’t have any) the catalyst is a blend of organic and inorganic material that react with un-hydrated cement particles to form millions of needle-like crystals. Over a period of weeks and months, these crystals grow, filling the naturally occurring pores and voids in concrete, and permanently blocking the pathways for water and waterborne contaminants. Later, if cracks form due to settling or shrinkage, incoming water triggers the crystallization process and additional crystals begin to grow. The crystals fill the cracks and ensure that the structure’s waterproofing barrier is maintained and protected even years later, to self-seal hair-line cracks before they turn into costly cracks in your structure.

I am a rep and distributor for a product such as this, without getting to boastful or link pushy, I’ll just ask that you message me or ask for more information and I’ll get it to you.

[Pastor_JasonSubscriber]

The crystals that would be on the outside of the structure would likely have been triggered during the original creation of the concrete item. Since the crystals seem to activate when cracks on still on the micro fissure level, the relative weight of the concrete structure shouldn’t increase dramatically, even in the event of a critical failure sized crack you’re still looking at only a small increase in weight. Compared to the weight you’d gain from taking on vast amounts of water, I think this technology has some merit.

There seem to be a few companies pushing this same kind of tech. I saw one demonstration last year where the concrete actually bent and flexed at more than 90 degree angles on a 6′ sheet while maintaining integrity. Amazing feats of engineering.

Live Well!

-Jason

[R-B-WoodSubscriber]

@ waterproofconcrete – Is that correct that the crystals will only grow when a crack forms and that they will only grow to fill the crack and not continue expanding beyond the original dimensions (more than a couple percentage points anyway)? Even after decades?

Pastor_Jason wrote:

The crystals that would be on the outside of the structure would likely have been triggered during the original creation of the concrete item. Since the crystals seem to activate when cracks on still on the micro fissure level, the relative weight of the concrete structure shouldn’t increase dramatically, even in the event of a critical failure sized crack you’re still looking at only a small increase in weight. Compared to the weight you’d gain from taking on vast amounts of water, I think this technology has some merit.

There seem to be a few companies pushing this same kind of tech. I saw one demonstration last year where the concrete actually bent and flexed at more than 90 degree angles on a 6′ sheet while maintaining integrity. Amazing feats of engineering.

Live Well!

-Jason

[Ken SimsKey Master]

R wrote:

@ waterproofconcrete – Is that correct that the crystals will only grow when a crack forms and that they will only grow to fill the crack and not continue expanding beyond the original dimensions (more than a couple percentage points anyway)? Even after decades?

FYI, waterproofconcrete hasn’t logged on in nearly four months, so you’re not real likely to get an answer.

[R-B-WoodSubscriber]

Where do you find when their last login was?

I guess I’ll have to write to the company itself and see what they say on the subject.

Looking at their website, it doesn’t really look like it was designed for continuously submerged structures.

Ken wrote:

FYI, waterproofconcrete hasn’t logged on in nearly four months, so you’re not real likely to get an answer.

[Ken SimsKey Master]

R wrote:

Where do you find when their last login was?

As a regular user, I guess you could find it here:
http://seasteading.org/registered-users-long

I use a different method not accessible to regular users. As TSI’s volunteer primary spamfighter, I’ve been given sooper sekrit powers.

[Distorted-HumorSubscriber]

To make cement watertight is a simple task, but can be goofed up if you do not do it correctly. What you do is have a single pour, or if the structure is too large, a constant pour so that the cement has no seams. For example, large pylons have a moving form that cement is constantly being poured into, and the form slowly moves so that new cement can be placed. It was developed IIRC for Grain Silos, but has a long history of use in water. as long as your pouring on non-cured cement, it will not form a seam to let water in. For example, the Troll A took a year to build, and while it was being built, it was growing at a rate of something in the range of 1 inch per hour or something like that.

[AlanSubscriber]

I just saw this:

http://www.monolithic.com/stories/monolithic-ecoshell-built-with-basalt-roving

While I agree with those who say that traditional rebar is not a problem if the concrete is poured correctly, I have simply worked on too many construction projects to believe that all the concrete for a seastead would be likely to be poured correctly most of the time. It appears that the use of basalt would also greatly reduce the amount of concrete required.

With this material I would not be terribly concerned even if there were a slow leak, as bilge pumps are routine equipments on ships anyway – for good reason.

[shredder7753Subscriber]

Alan wrote:

I just saw this:

http://www.monolithic.com/stories/monolithic-ecoshell-built-with-basalt-roving

While I agree with those who say that traditional rebar is not a problem if the concrete is poured correctly, I have simply worked on too many construction projects to believe that all the concrete for a seastead would be likely to be poured correctly most of the time. It appears that the use of basalt would also greatly reduce the amount of concrete required.

With this material I would not be terribly concerned even if there were a slow leak, as bilge pumps are routine equipments on ships anyway – for good reason.

rebar is thich and solid to provide structure to the concrete. how does the flexible basalt offer the same strength? the stead could knocked around quite a lot on the open ocean.

to me it looked like the basalt was just used as a mesh to help form the concrete, and maybe enhance the strength to a degree, but doesnt seem as strong as rebar. the fact that the dome was able to hold 4 tons is remarkable but how much did the basalt have to do with it other than providing material for the concrete to stick to before drying/curing?

the video is as much a testament to the precision of their dome-shaped inflatable form.

[Author]

Posts