Received: from PCH.mit.edu (18.7.21.50) by mail.efplus.com (192.168.0.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.485.1; Wed, 26 May 2021 22:10:51 -0700 Received: from PCH.MIT.EDU (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 14R51aa1013518; Thu, 27 May 2021 01:01:45 -0400 Received: from outgoing-exchange-1.mit.edu (OUTGOING-EXCHANGE-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.15]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 14R51Zir013508 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 01:01:35 -0400 Received: from w92exedge4.exchange.mit.edu (W92EXEDGE4.EXCHANGE.MIT.EDU [18.7.73.16]) by outgoing-exchange-1.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 14R51Y4g026530 for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 01:01:35 -0400 Received: from w92expo27.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.33) by w92exedge4.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.73.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.18; Thu, 27 May 2021 01:00:38 -0400 Received: from oc11exhyb6.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.111) by w92expo27.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 27 May 2021 01:01:34 -0400 Received: from NAM11-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.56.171) by oc11exhyb6.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.18 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 27 May 2021 01:01:34 -0400 Received: from DM5PR2001CA0002.namprd20.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:16::12) by DM6PR01MB4649.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:5:6e::11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4150.27; Thu, 27 May 2021 05:01:33 +0000 Received: from DM6NAM11FT020.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:16:cafe::8d) by DM5PR2001CA0002.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:4:16::12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4173.20 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 27 May 2021 05:01:33 +0000 Received: from mail-ed1-f54.google.com (209.85.208.54) by DM6NAM11FT020.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.13.172.224) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4129.25 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 27 May 2021 05:01:33 +0000 Received: by mail-ed1-f54.google.com with SMTP id y7so4218756eda.2 for ; Wed, 26 May 2021 22:01:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Ryan O'Connor To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Sender: "piclist-bounces@mit.edu" Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 22:01:13 -0700 Subject: Re: [OT]:: Salt Water Concrete Thread-Topic: [OT]:: Salt Water Concrete Thread-Index: AddStqo3p0+G014wRj2iqEJXdDFJgQ== Message-ID: References: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , In-Reply-To: Reply-To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthSource: TS500.efplus4.local X-MS-Has-Attach: X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SenderIdResult: Pass X-MS-Exchange-Organization-PRD: mit.edu X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: received-spf: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.208.54 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=209.85.208.54; helo=mail-ed1-f54.google.com; dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Wiyb5xHeQ9PsKdL2qTBEuN9zeA0ywoNcdqq2qhtFqDI=; b=PBqzV3cx+43q3HuvUQP1uWRYzbvFyUaCtj5I37vAuKHsya5mz/vRtYw+vWYplIdqB/ ZnSZHvIqAz16Jz9E+bKfnTbRlPLKAYzSe/V4gDIYwJe4Ml1+kAvmFkhhr9djBZGDJtab X82sROm+Rl2D6BKChveJ3I9Hk2r4rvc+2hquJ1cpfCzqVj7alxndAEV14fy5LvF4vH64 M3J7YQODW/Ke8vhGRx/PsV0Q6HECMVHN/EXuFDtMuiEjcBl+/SpCOuKjG6bX7BEacGT7 PeyNNMCrzRVytBr2R5sBEhTQKi4bG8OEX9rCtAUuq3qQCoAKqP1b7xwi4Qhr7tB0h3s1 0wyA== authentication-results: spf=pass (sender IP is 209.85.208.54) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; mit.edu; dkim=pass (signature was verified) header.d=gmail.com; mit.edu; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=gmail.com; errors-to: piclist-bounces@mit.edu list-id: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." list-post: x-beenthere: piclist@mit.edu x-mailman-version: 2.1.6 x-received: by 2002:a05:6402:524b:: with SMTP id t11mr2037299edd.139.1622091691712; Wed, 26 May 2021 22:01:31 -0700 (PDT) x-topics: [OT] x-content-filtered-by: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Epoxy coated steel wouldn't help too much, the epoxy would crack with movement and allow moisture in. And galvanizing is a sacrificial coating so it wears out as it oxidises. So I agree with your statement that no modern steel reinforced building would last 2000 years. But with a roman cement mix and those basalt epoxy rebars they might have a chance. On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 16:53, RussellMc wrote: > On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 14:44, Ryan O'Connor wrote: > > > Neither. That could be a game changer for tunnels and bridges though? > > Things are hell expensive to maintain because of the rusting steel > > long-term. > > > > Things like eg the wharf at Tolaga Bay would last about forever :-) > > The Pantheon and the Parthenon are built of unreinforced concrete. > ~=3D 2000 years on they are doing quite well. > > NONE of our modern conventionally steel reinforced structures will last > anywhere near that long. > eg epoxy coated steel may. Add heavy galvanising for extra points. > > > Russell > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.monolithic.org/blogs/presidents-sphere/salt-water-concrete-a-= reality?fbclid=3DIwAR2vtnDzySzzy2OHGm_fM09dgswB9YuuwMSOUOHE00I-peMRrWiLFvI7= jk8 > > > > > > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .