Live data from Hacker News

Why was Roman concrete so durable?

news.mit.edu

11–20 of 299 posts

Re: Why was Roman concrete so durable?

#11

Chemistry might be important, but we don't necessarily need that deep of an analysis. Romans didn't mind over-engineering with massive, inefficient structures. They didn't worry about complex/thin shapes, or any tensile elements. No rebar, no "piping" cement, etc. And they could put up with extremely long cure times. The end result is very, very dense concrete. We could probably recreate the durability of their concr…

Sounds like the chemistry is important

> Previously disregarded as merely evidence of sloppy mixing practices, or poor-quality raw materials, the new study suggests that these tiny lime clasts gave the concrete a previously unrecognized self-healing capability.

> As soon as tiny cracks start to form within the concrete, they can preferentially travel through the high-surface-area lime clasts. This material can then react with water, creating a calcium-saturated solution, which can recrystallize as calcium carbonate and quickly fill the crack, or react with pozzolanic materials to further strengthen the composite material.

Re: Why was Roman concrete so durable?

#13
very exciting! and I imagine there will be follow-on work delivering even greater results.

There's also an interesting finance project here, to integrate the impact of this material into projects budgets, so that designers and investors can justify this material over cheaper alternatives. In particular, different construction projects have very different expected lifespans.

Re: Why was Roman concrete so durable?

#15

the article talks about evidence which has always been present in evaluations of Roman concrete which was "disregarded as merely evidence of sloppy mixing practices, or poor-quality raw materials," and this kind of thing REALLY infuriates me, as a layman. if you don't know how to make Roman concrete, don't assume anything about what you see in Roman concrete while you're trying to figure out how it was made. The mode…

An extremely good example of Chesterton’s fence?

Re: Why was Roman concrete so durable?

#16
post #6
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Please don’t do this, it’s against the rules: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that".

In this case, the original poster went on a complete tangent without addressing the topic of the article at all.

So my vote is for the person who pointed this out as he's most likely right in his deduction.

Re: Why was Roman concrete so durable?

#17

the article talks about evidence which has always been present in evaluations of Roman concrete which was "disregarded as merely evidence of sloppy mixing practices, or poor-quality raw materials," and this kind of thing REALLY infuriates me, as a layman. if you don't know how to make Roman concrete, don't assume anything about what you see in Roman concrete while you're trying to figure out how it was made. The mode…

That depends on the what you mean by smarter. At least some component of what we consider intelligence is cultural.

Just one example is that the ability to write/draw allows you to solve problems that are impossible without it.

Re: Why was Roman concrete so durable?

#18

Chemistry might be important, but we don't necessarily need that deep of an analysis. Romans didn't mind over-engineering with massive, inefficient structures. They didn't worry about complex/thin shapes, or any tensile elements. No rebar, no "piping" cement, etc. And they could put up with extremely long cure times. The end result is very, very dense concrete. We could probably recreate the durability of their concr…

[deleted]

Re: Why was Roman concrete so durable?

#20
post #6
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Please don’t do this, it’s against the rules: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that".

Please don’t do this it’s also against the rules:

Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead.

Live by the sword die by the sword

Post reply on HN