7 thoughts on “Roman Concrete”

  1. The Roman engineering used slave labor the way we use internal combustion engines for all the heavy work. Considering all that, why are they celebrating this? I guess its okay because slaves don’t produce as much CO2? (Then again, many of those slaves were white central and northern Europeans, so maybe they just don’t matter…)

  2. Why wasn’t this formulation tried before?

    ““Was it possible that the Romans might have actually directly used lime in its more reactive form, known as quicklime?””

    These “experts” are stupid.

    1. Pretty much. They claim it’s not the ingredients before claiming it is. I would want to see break tests among others before specing it on a job. Along with price and availability. If I can’t get it here, or if it costs too much, it’s useless. People aren’t going to pay 3 times as much for a driveway that I claim is self healing.

      1. The Japanese and other customers in earthquake / tremor areas will be very interested in a ‘self healing’ concrete. Like everything else, such as using teak for ship hulls in warmer Teredo Worm infested waters, it all depends on the calculus of utility vs. cost.

      2. It was more how incomplete mixing of the quicklime made for a better concrete. Cracks preferentially went through the nodules and then as water entered them, calcium was released to seal the cracks.

        I would want to see break tests among others before specing it on a job.

        Someone has probably done that. And we have that this concrete is still around 1500 to 2000 years later which is a pretty interesting test of the material.

Comments are closed.