Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
[SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Type M vs Type S mortar[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaoc(--nospam--at)power.net, seaoc(--nospam--at)power.net
- Subject: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Type M vs Type S mortar
- From: David Owens <dtowens(--nospam--at)cogent.net>
- Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 07:33:36 -0700 (PDT)
At 02:40 PM 9/4/96 +0500, Bill Sherman wrote: >According to the 1993 "Masonry Designer's Guide" by The Masonry Society: "Do >not use a higher compressive strength mortar than necessary....Unless dictated >by the compressive strength requirement, avoid the selection of Type M mortar >over Type S mortar. However, when masonry is in direct contact with soil, >e.g. in retaining walls, Type M mortar should be used regardless of strength >requirements." > >According to PCA IS278.01M, "Factors affecting Bond Strength of Masonry": >"...the finding that little or no increase in bond strength is achieved by the >use of Type M mortars as compared to Type S mortars". > >Type N mortar is considered better in Colorado's dry climate since it has >holds moisture better and doesn't dry out as quickly, although Type S can be >used. Type M mortar is a harsher mortar. Bond may be more important than >compressive strength and if the mortar dries out, it may not bond well. > >I recommend specifying/ allowing Type S mortar for most structural >applications. > > >Date: 03 Sep 96 18:49:26 >From:"Mark Deardorff" <markedd(--nospam--at)ix.netcom.com> >To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org >Subject: [SEAOC] Type M vs Type S mortar >Reply-to: seaoc(--nospam--at)power.net >X-Orcl-Application: Organization: Deardorff & Deardorff, Inc. >X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99e/32.227 >X-Orcl-Application: Precedence: list >X-Loop: seaoc(--nospam--at)power.net >X-Orcl-Application: content-length: 1264 > > >We routinely specify Type M mortar on jobs. No one has ever >complained. > >We recently completed drawings for a high school in Colorado. We used >our standard specification for mortar and have received a request for >change to Type S. The contractor must not see it often. But he *did* >bid the job from plans that included the Type M spec. He will need to >credit my client. > >Aside from strength what are the relative benefits of the two types of >mortar? > >Thanks, > >Mark > > >Mark E. Deardorff, SE >Deardorff & Deardorff, Inc. >San Diego, CA >markedd(--nospam--at)ix.netcom.com This has been an interesting thread, but quite frankly it is an office discussion. Here in seismic zone 4, I have not inspected one building yet that has been specified for type M mortar. All have been type S. Also, frankly, all the compressive strength mortar cubes have broken at 4000-5000 psi. As all masonry projects are fully grouted and reinforced, all that matters is prism testing on a periodic basis. Mortar is just a way to level the blocks. > >... > > > ...
- Prev by Subject: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Truss discussion.
- Next by Subject: [SEAOC] RE: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Welded Rebar advise needed
- Previous by thread: [SEAOC] Good day !
- Next by thread: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] [SEAOC] [SEAOC] [SEAOC] RE: [SEAOC] Preventing Corrosion