Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Q: Methods of Injection of Cracks in Concrete: Which Is Preferred?

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Using Sonneborne's NP2 caulk suggests that it is an 'active' crack and
non-structural, thus the proposed flexible sealant suggested by the contractor.

If the engineer specifies an injected epoxy designed to bond hardened concrete
to hardened concrete (probably a type IV, grade-1), the contractor should
assume a structural application for a non-moving crack.
The estimating contractor's spec seems to me inappropriate.

Steven A.
Los Angeles



Bill Polhemus wrote:

> As I believe I've mentioned before, I find myself more and more doing
> consulting for concrete structure renovations. I have some questions for
> those who might have some experience with this (especially the plant
> engineering people, where you're having to use innovative methods using
> technology beyond "spit and bailing wire" to maintain tank foundations,
> etc.)
>
> My client sent out an Invitation to Bid based on some specifications I had
> written. Since I'm more comfortable in the world of crack injection using
> epoxy or urethane, that's the way I went with my spec. However, one bidder
> replied with an alternate system including "chasing" or "routing out" the
> cracks, applying a Sonneborn 733 Primer in the routed crack, and then
> Sonneborn NP2 Sealant. Now, I have used NP2 before, but only as the final
> component of a joint seal. It has essentially no structural properties
> (though to be sure the urethane isn't exactly holding up the world). My
> feeling is that the crack injection is more sure, but the bidder disagrees,
> saying it is too expensive for the results you get (unbeknownst to him,
> though, his argument is somewhat overshadowed by the fact that the
> next-lowest bidder, only 8% higher than the lowest bid, DID submit my
> procedure to the letter).
>
> I'd love to hear input from those who have an opinion and any other wisdom
> you'd care to share on this topic.
>
> William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.
> Polhemus Engineering Company
> Katy, TX, USA
> Phone (281) 492-2251
> FAX (281) 492-8203
> email bill(--nospam--at)polhemus.cc
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> *   site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********