Abstract
Lime-based mortars are now widely acknowledged as generally superior to cement-based mortars in the repair of appropriate historic infrastructure. Increasingly the benefits of hydraulic lime mortars are also being realized in new masonry construction. In order to standardize the expected performance of mortars, designers will specify the type of lime, the type of filler (aggregate), the proportions of each and quantity of water or the required workability. Limes can be non-hydraulic (calcium or dolomitic) or hydraulic (natural or artificial). This paper reports on results of tests conducted on non-hydraulic lime conservation repair mortars at early stages of curing. Results to date show that the type of both non-hydraulic lime and filler used have a significant effect on the early (up to 28 days) mechanical performance of a lime mortar. The mortars in the study were made using five non-hydraulic lime binders: dry hydrate; 4 month-old lime putty; 20 year-old lime putty; ‘hot’ lime; and dispersed hydrated lime. The fillers were silicate sand, crushed bioclastic limestone, and crushed oolitic limestone. No pozzolanic material was added to the mortars. Compressive strengths at 14 days ranged from 0.3 MPa to 2.5 MPa. Comparisons are made between the structural performance and rates of carbonation up to 28 days of each binder:aggregate combination. In conclusion, observations are made on factors to be considered when specifying non-hydraulic lime mortar mixes for repair work.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.