# Mortar mixing ratio



## wbsbadboy

Ok dumb question time. As some of you may know Im still new to the brick laying trade. So far I have only done some small projects and heve been using the premixed morter. I now have a project that would be better using some sand and cement and mixing my own morter. 
What I need to know is what is the best mix ratio. I have looked around the internet and found a few charts that only confuse me. So I figure that I had better consult the all knowing wise masters on this one. 
Thanks in advance 
Smitty


----------



## Tscarborough

Ahh, mortar mix design, my favorite subject. The answer is that you have to use the proper mix for what you are laying, where you are laying it and when.

The mix that you can't usually go wrong with is 1-1-3, portland-type S lime-masonry sand. Workable, good bond strength and enough lime to promote autogenous healing.

The important thing to remember is that the proportions are by volume. Portland cement is bagged in a 1 CuFt bag (94#), as is lime (50#). A five gallon bucket filled to the top ring (not the top of the bucket) is also 1 CuFt.


----------



## wbsbadboy

ok ...Standard red brick - on top of concrete - and today (winter/spring. Wet no freeze)
correct me if I misunderstand this ...
one bag (1 cu ft.) 94# portland type 'S' cement
one bag (1 cu ft.) 50# lime
3 cu ft masonry sand (3 buckets filled to first ring)
OR (?)
1 shovel cement 
1 shovel lime
3 shovels sand
(My mixer is only a 2 cu ft.)
Correct???


----------



## stacker

*mix*

i tell my hands to mix it:10 shovels(square point and full)sand, one bag mason cement,8 shovels of sand.so you end up with 18 sands and one bag of mason.if i am laying artifical stone i use 1 or 2 less sands and add one shovel portland.
if we are mixing grout 18 sands,bag of portland,18 sands.
if the miz is too wet,on mason you can add 3 shovels sand to one shovel mason.4 sand to 1 portland.


----------



## Tscarborough

Well, a shovel is not a precise measuring device, but it is the most commonly used.


----------



## 6stringmason

Tscarborough said:


> Well, a shovel is not a precise measuring device, but it is the most commonly used.


What do you want.. a measuring cup?  

And type S is for high compression strenght and has a high bond. I usually dont use type S for normal home construction. And Im only assuming thats what your doing. I usually use type N. I mix it generally add water, 10 sand, the bag of mortar, then generally I add anywhere from 8-10 more sand and adjust the water to get consistancy as needed. Different companies seem to take different amounts of water to get the same constistancy mud you get from the bag of mortar and 18-20 shovels of sand. ( I use a spade in my sandpiles)

And like stacker said for fake stone. I usually go less sand while lickin em and stickin em to get it "tackier".


----------



## Tscarborough

1 gallon or 5 gallon buckets work fine. Type N is fine for pretty much anything, even structural CMU, but I still prefer Type S for everything but soft stone and wood fired brick.

It doesn't take a lot of difference in the amount of sand to change the color, even without integral color.


----------



## Peladu

6stringmason said:


> What do you want.. a measuring cup?


The best response of the day! :thumbsup:


----------



## jvcstone

Have tried to stay out of this, but do want to add a few thoughts.

I have seen masons use all sorts of mixes---any thing from heavy lime to portland ratios to pure portland and sand. Worked on one job where they used a triple beam analytical scale to proportion everything, but then that entire job was kind of strange 

Over a 30 year time frame I found that type n , no lime, and a little portland worked well for me. Then when the type s started showing up, I began to use it without adding that little bit of portland. A nice workable mix . Sand would always be in a 3-1 ratio more or less, but again, I found that different sand sources would effect that too. Home owner got us some "sugar sand" to work with over in east Texas once, and it took a bag of type s, 1/2 bag portland, and about 40 shovels of sand just to make a decent wheelbarrow of mud. My normal sand source would give me two decent wheelbarrows from a bag of type s and around 20 shovels sand. I only use lime and portland if there isn't any masonry cement available.

Now having said all that-- the ratio is generally in the 3 sand to 1 cement range, but in my opinion, it's the feel of the mud on the trowel that is the most critical component of any mix, and that is where a good mud man can make a crew, or a poor one will keep the masons aggravated all day long.

Just my 2 cents about mud.

JVC


----------



## 6stringmason

Well said JVC. Worth alot more than 2 cents. And its a good thing you dont have my mud man. He's been doin it two years with me and still makes im too wet or to stiff a hell of a lot more than he should.


----------



## stacker

*jvc*



> Now having said all that-- the ratio is generally in the 3 sand to 1 cement range, but in my opinion, it's the feel of the mud on the trowel that is the most critical component of any mix, and that is where a good mud man can make a crew, or a poor one will keep the masons aggravated all day long.


i love it when you have a new laborer and he makes your mud to sandy or to sticky.and when you ask them how many sands they put it.....its always the same answer.....i put in what you told me to :no:.
i had one guy who i swear used cars driving by to count his shovels of sand.i still remember the day the funeral prosession drove by.i think we had 3 wheel barrows of mud out of one sack of cement.


----------



## Tscarborough

In masonry cement, the difference between Type N and Type S is 5 (4.7 to be exact) pounds more masonry cement in the bag. Masonry cement, BTW, has no lime in it. The bottom line is that either one will usually meet S standards if you actually measure your sand ratio.

The real question is what is required for what you are laying. Absorbent masonry materials need a lower strength, higher lime mortar, as a rule, and hard units lay better with a stronger (stiffer) mix.

JVC, the best mud for our limestone is actually in this ratio: 1:2:3. This gives you plenty compressive, great workability, and the proper amount of flexural strength and waterproofing.

Concrete/civil engineers always specify too strong of a mortar, since they are used to dealing with reinforced concrete, which unitized masonry is not. Why would you ever use a mortar that has a higher psi than the units you are laying?

The whole masonry rating system is crap, if you ask me, since it addresses the wrong question: Compressive strength. To say nothing of the fact that there is no specified method of field testing mortar, although the lab test is often required for field mixed mortar, leading to entirely junk (too strong) mortar being used just to pass the (incorrect) requirement.

A logical and useful method would assign values to absorption, permeability and flexural strength.


----------



## 6stringmason

LOL! I hear ya. I think the stories could be endless. I love it when they bring it back with the consistancy of a gooses ******************** on exlax and they say "I put in just as much water as every other time."


----------



## Tscarborough

Water is the only variable. A good mudman uses consistant quanitites of materials and adjusts the amount of water.


----------



## 6stringmason

If your on the same job and using consistant quantities of material water should be a constant as well. Theres only one consistancy of water out of the hose so it shouldnt much matter.


----------



## Tscarborough

Provided you keep your sand under wraps and the temp stays the same, you are correct. A 20% change in humidity and 2 days of your sand pile laying in the sun make a big difference in how much water your mudman has to add, to say nothing of retempering.


----------



## 6stringmason

Touche... you're absolutely correct.


----------



## wbsbadboy

WOW I didnt think that this thread would be so popular. Thanks to everyone that replied. I am going to absorb all this info and play with it some and Ill let you know how it turns out. 
Thanks again.


----------



## lukachuki

Lots of good replies but everyone forgot the most important ingredient.
3parts sand
1part type s or n mortar
H20
1 dead MOUSE...

Nothing mentioned even compares to "Mouse" mud. 

The oils in the fur or something make all the difference


Tim


----------



## lukachuki

Tscarborough,

Thanks for sharing your wisdom concerning mortar I'm filing it away on my computer but i just had to comment that you don't exactly engender confidence in your wisdom as your avatar contains no mortar. :no: :no: 

Thats coming from a guy to cheap to find an avatar. :notworthy 
Just Pickin,
Tim


----------



## stacker

*mouse*

never found a dead mouse in my mud,i have found toads(dead and alive) half of a snake once,i dont know what happened to the other half ,and loads of cat s%$t.cats must post lookouts at the sand plant for when a load goes out and places it in the cat network.i swear every cat within 20 miles found my sand pile once,either that or there was something very wrong with that one cat


----------



## wbsbadboy

Stacker I think I can deal with the cat s**t. Most cats where Im doing this job are the foo foo type that think kitty litter IS sand. But there is one nemisis that all masons dread. The three brats that came to visit the customers family over the last week. The rain here has been keeping me doing in doors work as of late and I had left the pile of sand under some plastic so it wouldnt turn to mud. The kids found it and must have thought it was kept that way just for there pleasure. I came back yesterday to find my pile had been scattered around aproximatly an 30 foot radius. Complete with sand pails shovels etc. (new I might add). 
I did managed to get some work done despite this and am looking forward to the customers return on sunday. He has just bought a brand new pick up. I think Ill let him break it in. (evil grin)


----------



## stacker

*hot wheels*

dont forget the brats leaving hot wheels buried in the sand.


----------



## tbird2

i use 15 sands to 1 bag of motar


----------



## stacker

*15 sands*

15 shovels of sand,and i assume you mean sq point shovels,seems awful rich.i dont know how you can get it off your trowel when its that sticky:blink:


----------



## Tscarborough

Maybe he is the energetic sort, and his shovel-full is about 12" high. I guess I am used to commercial spec, I don't see how you can maintain a consistant color, much less strength, tossing shovels of sand into a mixer.


----------



## tkle

Once again it depends on what you are doing,though 15 to a bag seems awfully rich for most applications,perhaps firebrick.Generally I like to keep a 2.5 to 1 ratio.The thinner the bedjoint the richer the mud.Shovels work fine for doing block work.About 20 shovels(fully loaded contractor grade squarepoint) to a bag depending on the fineness of the sand.Other applications I've gone as far as to weigh the color and accuratly measure the sand and cement with a bucket.
When using a hose and shovel to mix the tender must know the look and feel of properly mixed mud.Keeping the same mudman on the entire job keeps the mix constant.


----------



## stacker

*shovels*

i have always used shovels to measure my sand.18 full square point shovels to a bag of mason.i have tried to teach my mud man FULL!!!shovels.my biggest problem is when it comes to half batches(yes i mix half batches)this dumb sob i have working for me now,6 times out of 10 will mix it too wet and add 2 to 3 extra sands to it.:no: and then argue with me that he mixed what i told him too.now if i had a nickel for every batch of mud i have mixed,i wouldnt be working now.a good mason and a good mud man can tell if the mud is right by looks.if he cant by looks he sure as hell should be able to by feel.
you will never get the same mix when using shovels or buckets.the only time i have found mud to be the same batch after batch is when SPEC MIX is used.your mud man would have to be so dumb he couldnt pour pee out of a boot with instructions on the heel,to mess that up.


----------



## Tscarborough

I am not foolish enough to think that proper techniques will be used on jobsites to mix mortar. I would not presume to tell you how to mix your mud anyway, but I will suggest how you should make your mortar to pass the generally accepted requirements.

Use a five gallon bucket for sand; filled to the top ring, it is one cubic foot by volume. One bag of portland is also one cubic foot by volume, as is one bag of type S lime (not really, but close enogh, so long as you are consistant). Knowing those facts, it is a simple thing to create consistant mortar that will meet the specification of the job, as well as maintain color consistancy and workability. Utilize C-270 to determine what mortar you should be using, or if the type is specified, how you can achieve the proper mix. It isn't hard to do, it is just hard to change from "the way I have always done it".

Here is a good website to read:

http://www.mc2-ice.com/popular_conversion/popular_conversion_files/masonry/mortar.htm


----------



## RobertF

Tscarborough said:


> I am not foolish enough to think that proper techniques will be used on jobsites to mix mortar. I would not presume to tell you how to mix your mud anyway, but I will suggest how you should make your mortar to pass the generally accepted requirements.
> 
> Use a five gallon bucket for sand; filled to the top ring, it is one cubic foot by volume. One bag of portland is also one cubic foot by volume, as is one bag of type S lime (not really, but close enogh, so long as you are consistant). Knowing those facts, it is a simple thing to create consistant mortar that will meet the specification of the job, as well as maintain color consistancy and workability. Utilize C-270 to determine what mortar you should be using, or if the type is specified, how you can achieve the proper mix. It isn't hard to do, it is just hard to change from "the way I have always done it".
> 
> Here is a good website to read:
> 
> http://www.mc2-ice.com/popular_conversion/popular_conversion_files/masonry/mortar.htm


That's a good link, gonna bookmark that one!


----------



## 6stringmason

Tscarborough said:


> "the way I have always done it".


"the way I have always done it" has seemed to always work though.   One thing I have learned is always try to do a good job and work smarter not harder. Instead of taking the 20 shovels of sand(spade) and dumping them into a bucket, then into the mixer, I opt to teach my guys to grab consistent sized shovels and remove a step. I've never had a problem with discoloration or "patchy" looking mortar on any of my jobs. Generally its fairly simple for us as well as we only make one batch at a time.

Although its handy info to know. Thanks for the link!


----------



## tkle

I use the bucket method mainly for mixing colored grout.Mainly with silica sand.Staying with the same brand names is as important if not more when working with color.Some cements are dark and dirty looking while others are light and take on color better.Different grades of sand also makes a difference in the mix as well.Depending on the job size using a 2.5 gallon bucket makes it easier to make half batches as does using a measuring cup for color making sure it's packed the same each time.


----------



## stacker

*labor*



> One thing I have learned is always try to do a good job and work smarter not harder. Instead of taking the 20 shovels of sand(spade) and dumping them into a bucket, then into the mixer, I opt to teach my guys to grab consistent sized shovels and remove a step.


to me that is one of the most important things a man can teach on the job.reduce the number of steps to achive the results.if you are using 18 shovels of sand in your mix,your labor has to fill the bucket with sand,then lift it into the mixer.cut out the step and achive the same thing by having him throw it into the mixer.if he cant learn to consitantly make the same batch after a week or so,fire his ass.i tell my hands masonry is the same thing over and over everyday.the rules dont change from day to day.i want my mud the same everyday,i want my wall stocked the same everyday,i want my scaffold built the same.if i change the rules,ill tell them before we start.i had a laborer once who couldnt get the mix right.i needed help so bad i couldnt fire him,so instead i started docking him 25.00 per messed up batch of mud.after 75.00 he learned to make good mud.


----------



## 6stringmason

stacker said:


> after 75.00 he learned to make good mud.


LOL! Amazing how fast people catch on when its starts costing THEM money. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:


----------



## tkle

Like that movie groundhog day.Same thing every day.Why is it so hard?When the crew hears me singing"every days a new day",they know what I'm thinking.


----------



## stacker

*new day*

i have been accused of not giving my help breaks.i respond by telling them that i would give them breaks,but it takes to long to retrain them:laughing: one of my favorite sayings to my help is,"first day on the job?"when they have messed up.


----------



## denick

For the last 80 years we have been using 26 heaping round point shovels of sand, 1 94# bag of portland and 1/2 a bag of lime as the mix for block. 22 shovels for brick. 22 shovels but no lime for stone. We've had great success with these mixes in the New England climate. This mix was before mixers, just tubs, hoe, hod stand and hod.

I wanted to say something about the consistency of the mix but I found myself starting off on a tangent so I deleted it. 43 years ago at the age of ten I learned the reasons for consistency in no uncertain terms and haven't forgotten. "It has to be important to you" to be consistent.

Nick


----------



## Tscarborough

I assume when you stay stone, you mean granite type stone?


----------



## denick

Here we do mostly a native field stone it can range from a hard limestone to granite depending where it comes from. Most of it is somewhere in between for hardness. Here people want that weathered NE look. 


Nick


----------



## Tscarborough

Gotcha. Our limestone is soft here, you can get away with 1p, 1l for stonework.


----------



## stonecutter

joasis said:


> I wonder if I am breaking the rules by asking what the home grown recipe is for refractory mortar, like for my pizza oven?


I second heatstop 50.


----------



## Tscarborough

Heatstop is really good stuff, but I have confidence in the home made as well, having tested it with a 1400 degree heat gun. A decent sized oven will use 3-4 bags of HS, so you are looking at a couple hundred dollars VS 20 or 30 for the home made.


----------



## Tscarborough

8" lightweight CMU in most parts of the country is rated for 2 hours using the equivalent thickness requirement.


----------



## concretemasonry

A normal weight (or heavyweight) CMU is almost 2 hours unless the core design and slightly thicker (1-5/8") face shell give it more fire resistance for a 2 hour rating. Many manufacturers make a 2 hour heavyweight unit.


----------



## stonecutter

Tscarborough said:


> Heatstop is really good stuff, but I have confidence in the home made as well, having tested it with a 1400 degree heat gun. A decent sized oven will use 3-4 bags of HS, so you are looking at a couple hundred dollars VS 20 or 30 for the home made.


What's your mix design Tscar?


----------



## Tscarborough

1-1-1-3 portland/lime/fireclay/aggregate (sand type varies with the joint, for fireplaces very fine, for ovens, medium to fine.


----------



## lukachuki

Tscarborough said:


> 1-1-1-3 portland/lime/fireclay/aggregate (sand type varies with the joint, for fireplaces very fine, for ovens, medium to fine.


the secret is now out....the heatstop guys will be paying you a late night visit.


----------



## TheItalian204

Thats what I thought...I thought 8" with type S...customer is requesting refractory mortar parge thats why I posted that here...I guess I need to learn to stand my ground.


----------



## Joasis

Tscarborough said:


> 1-1-1-3 portland/lime/fireclay/aggregate (sand type varies with the joint, for fireplaces very fine, for ovens, medium to fine.


On the Heat Stop website, they list this http://www.heatstoprefractorymortar.com/delta.html

So what would be a substitute for this stuff? Home recipe? 

By the way, forgive me for not knowing, but how is fireclay sold? By the bag or the pail, like my mason uses on laid fireplaces? I guess I could simply call him.... :laughing: but he charges for everything.....like all masons do. :laughing:


----------



## Tscarborough

We sell fireclay by the pound, 10# or 70# bags. I picked up the Heatstop line a couple of years ago and have switched almost all of the guys around here to it from home made and wet refractory. It really is good stuff.


----------



## stonecutter

Tscarborough said:


> 1-1-1-3 portland/lime/fireclay/aggregate (sand type varies with the joint, for fireplaces very fine, for ovens, medium to fine.



Thanks...ill do that for my next oven!


----------



## dom-mas

TheItalian204 said:


> Thats what I thought...I thought 8" with type S...customer is requesting refractory mortar parge thats why I posted that here...I guess I need to learn to stand my ground.


Tell him to glue some 5/8ths drywall to the wall. Refractory parging sounds EXPENSIVE

I just looked at some charts. If you grout every core solid in an 8" wall then you should have your 6 hr rating. You could also fill the cores with roxul or an approved aggregate but I think grouting would be cheaper and faster. Not cheap but cheaper


----------



## TheItalian204

dom-mas said:


> Tell him to glue some 5/8ths drywall to the wall. Refractory parging sounds EXPENSIVE
> 
> I just looked at some charts. If you grout every core solid in an 8" wall then you should have your 6 hr rating. You could also fill the cores with roxul or an approved aggregate but I think grouting would be cheaper and faster. Not cheap but cheaper


I am thinking first four rows grouted and over with it...60 mins is what he wants,60 mins is what he will get.

By my calculation I am looking at 800 bags of cement easy.
4600 8" blocks.


----------



## dom-mas

Jeez, why did i think 6 hr. 1 hr. I think a 6" wall is rated for 1 hr, but I'll go look at the chart again.

A 4" semi solid wall is just enough for a 1 hr fire rating. I'd go with 6" just because I hate laying up 4"


----------



## Tscarborough

6" is normally rated at one hour.


----------



## TheItalian204

I will submit some pictures as soon as work starts,its out of town...should be interesting...its commercial.


----------



## concretemasonry

I agree about the 6" block. Many contractors lay it cheaper than a 4" because it is more stable (not tippy) and not that heavy. In many countries, it is the preferred size for high rise load-bearing masonry because of the cost advantage.


----------



## TheItalian204

its non-load bearing partition walls so not as existing but whatever pays for bills in dead febuary.


----------



## jomama

When we had a few issues with an elevator shaft poured foundation being slightly off a few years ago, we were forced to lay 6" HW's (really just the standard here) on one wall. To comply with the 2 hour fire rating, we simply needed to fill the 6" with sand.


----------



## fjn

*mortar*

I have not read all these posts. They are all interesting.From the data i read the ability of a lime / cement mortar to have the ability to self heal (autogenous healing) may be a myth the producers would like us to believe . I have read that the intrduction of even a small amount of OPC "binds up" the lime and leaves no "Free" lime to perform that task


----------



## stonecutter

TheItalian204 said:


> Lol I thought I followed you on here,wait I will check and tell you...
> 
> Yea soccer you talking about I played for 12 years...but then look how many italian(americans) are in NFL lol...


I watch more football(soccer) than NFL these days anyway. I lost FSC so the only games I have been getting are on espn2.

Serie A:thumbsup:


----------



## TheItalian204

stonecutter said:


> I
> Serie A:thumbsup:


Calcio A is better soccer to watch anyway...we dont have money bags like in Spain so its real soccer...

Get Setanta Sport if you like Soccer,its like 8 bucks a month and all soccer you can watch..can you give me a link to that thread? and btw in CFL its only 3 downs instead of four...and if i am not mistaken punt into end zone is 1 point(or 2 :blink CFL is just good reason to get wasted.


----------



## dom-mas

yeah CFL has 12 players and 3 downs, I think NFL has 11 players. CFL is a good place to see where those guys on your college teams went that weren't good enough for NFL


----------



## stonecutter

TheItalian204 said:


> Calcio A is better soccer to watch anyway...we dont have money bags like in Spain so its real soccer...
> 
> Get Setanta Sport if you like Soccer,its like 8 bucks a month and all soccer you can watch..can you give me a link to that thread? and btw in CFL its only 3 downs instead of four...and if i am not mistaken punt into end zone is 1 point(or 2 :blink CFL is just good reason to get wasted.


 Thread is here..
http://www.contractortalk.com/f22/la-mia-famiglia-113044/



Thanks, I was just busting on Dom ...sorry Dom.:laughing:

Yeah, but serie A got a lot of coverage around here and I dont really have a team but I root for ac milan..I really like Brazilian football the best but hardly any games.


----------



## TheItalian204

stonecutter said:


> Thread is here..
> http://www.contractortalk.com/f22/la-mia-famiglia-113044/
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, I was just busting on Dom ...sorry Dom.:laughing:
> 
> Yeah, but serie A got a lot of coverage around here and I dont really have a team but I root for ac milan..I really like Brazilian football the best but hardly any games.


Dont mind Brasilians..you know whos getting that fifth start in 2014 :whistling


----------



## TheItalian204

Che bello. Sono contento che tu abbia trovato queste fotografie della tua famiglia. Non li perdere che non ci sono molte famiglie che non sanno chi sono i loro nonni e che mestiere facevano

Might be crude translation but basically:

How nice.I am glad you showed these pictures of your family...There are a lot of people who forget/dont know their ancestors/grandparents and their roots/business..


----------



## stonecutter

TheItalian204 said:


> Che bello. Sono contento che tu abbia trovato queste fotografie della tua famiglia. Non li perdere che non ci sono molte famiglie che non sanno chi sono i loro nonni e che mestiere facevano
> 
> Might be crude translation but basically:
> 
> How nice.I am glad you showed these pictures of your family...There are a lot of people who forget/dont know their ancestors/grandparents and their roots/business..


I wish I could have learned italian from the family. Mom could understand and speak it but stopped after she left the house. Dad speaks french but never had the patience to teach us 4 boys...however, I seem to know curse works in both languages!:laughing:


----------



## stonecutter

TheItalian204 said:


> Dont mind Brasilians..you know whos getting that fifth start in 2014 :whistling


if they can get in gear and finish the stadiums.:thumbsup:


----------



## TheItalian204

stonecutter said:


> I wish I could have learned italian from the family. Mom could understand and speak it but stopped after she left the house. Dad speaks french but never had the patience to teach us 4 boys...however, I seem to know curse works in both languages!:laughing:


Its easy if you speak english...ask SS i am pretty sure he probably understands very well..

I dont speak official italian myself too well either,I speak dialect,taught since I spent a lot of times around my grandparents...you can call me italian ******* if you wish :laughing:


----------



## TheItalian204

stonecutter said:


> if they can get in gear and finish the stadiums.:thumbsup:


lol they already got their fifth star...Brasilian time is over...so is Spain's time...one shoot wonders...win one world cup/euro and thats about it..Italy did so bad in 2010 because we had generations changing...truth is our school always gives birth to good players that in comparison to other teams happens once every fifty ish years.


----------



## stonecutter

TheItalian204 said:


> Its easy if you speak english...ask SS i am pretty sure he probably understands very well..
> 
> I dont speak official italian myself too well either,I speak dialect,taught since I spent a lot of times around my grandparents...you can call me italian ******* if you wish :laughing:


Superseal is bilingual?

Wow...nice boots, daredevil scaffold set ups, second language....triple threat guy!:laughing:


----------



## TheItalian204

stonecutter said:


> Superseal is bilingual?
> 
> Wow...nice boots, daredevil scaffold set ups, second language....triple threat guy!:laughing:


If I get it right Phil is short for Phillipo,so yea hes crushing :laughing:

Last I was in Philly(05) I knew you dont grow up Italian there and dont speak any lol


----------



## stonecutter

TheItalian204 said:


> lol they already got their fifth star...Brasilian time is over...so is Spain's time...one shoot wonders...win one world cup/euro and thats about it..Italy did so bad in 2010 because we had generations changing...truth is our school always gives birth to good players that in comparison to other teams happens once every fifty ish years.


I dont know..some of the new guys are pretty awesome, Neymar for example. I just like thier style of football....the world cup final was boring to me. Like watching the new jersey devils in '95 with their neutral zone trap...yawn.

We might have to move this into off topic...even though mortar mixes have been beaten to death.:laughing:


----------



## superseal

stonecutter said:


> Superseal is bilingual?
> 
> Wow...nice boots, daredevil scaffold set ups, second language....triple threat guy!:laughing:


Si, come stia. L'italia e un paese meraviglioso!

Just took a short online course :laughing:


----------



## stonecutter

superseal said:


> Si, come stia. L'italia e un paese meraviglioso!
> 
> Just took a short online course :laughing:


WHATCHA CALL ME?!!!:laughing::laughing::jester:


----------



## TheItalian204

stonecutter said:


> WHATCHA CALL ME?!!!:laughing::laughing::jester:


says he understands..and that Italy is beautiful land...then he mentioned that he took short course lol


----------



## stonecutter

TheItalian204 said:


> says he understands..and that Italy is beautiful land...then he mentioned that he took short course lol


I really thought he was bragging about how great his boots look.


----------



## JBM

dom-mas said:


> No inside braces at all? I usually at least have the first inside brace on (once I go up), so I can load from the back


Nope, you don't need one for only 3 high ...famouse last words.


----------



## JD3lta

Goo 7!!


----------



## dom-mas

The bilingual stuff reminds me of a funny story my Father in law yells. He worked for Hydro and once they were contracting out a sub station. One of the terms of the contract was that the contractor had to be bilingual (2 official languages in Canada, English and French). An Italian got the contract and during the review brought a friend with him who was interpreting. The Hydro official says in French "You do know that the contractor needs to be bilingual" and the interpreter answers "oh he speaks both Italian and Portugese fluently"


----------



## TheItalian204

dom-mas said:


> The bilingual stuff reminds me of a funny story my Father in law yells. He worked for Hydro and once they were contracting out a sub station. One of the terms of the contract was that the contractor had to be bilingual (2 official languages in Canada, English and French). An Italian got the contract and during the review brought a friend with him who was interpreting. The Hydro official says in French "You do know that the contractor needs to be bilingual" and the interpreter answers "oh he speaks both Italian and Portugese fluently"


:laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## Gordon Forsyth

ratio 3 to 1 = type s the more accurate the measuring the more consistent the mud


----------



## heavyc

Gordon Forsyth said:


> ratio 3 to 1 = type s the more accurate the measuring the more consistent the mud


With that being said, what is your advice as to keeping sand incrimination
accurate every time sand being wet or dry?


----------



## fjn

heavyc said:


> With that being said, what is your advice as to keeping sand incrimination
> accurate every time sand being wet or dry?





Do sand bulking tests at least once a day,preferably in the morning before the start of work.


----------



## jazzwillie

There has been a great deal of discussion on the methods of mixing mortar on here but I haven't seen the first post about why the ratio is what it is. If you have too much cement in your mix then you will end up with shrinkage cracks. Cement shrinks and if you don't have enough sand in your mix to spread out the particles of cement you will end up with to high a concentration of cement and risking shrinkage cracks in your wall or foundation. If your mix is testing two or three times the spec or the last test results that the manufacturer has documented (they give that out pretty handily if you ask for it) you are mixing too rich.

We've mixed with buckets for the last several years now and we were surprised how much farther we got on a bag of mortar when we put the proper ratio of sand in the mix. If you take your shovel count and throw it on a tarp and then get a cubic or half cubic foot box and put 3 cubic feet on a tarp next to the first pile you will see a difference. Most people will. Personally it spread better when we used that method. It cuts out so much guess work on how many shovels you have thrown in. Who wasn't mixing mortar at one point and someone comes up to you 5 shovels in and distracts you, then you lose count. If you have a set volume setting in front of your mixer you know how much you are putting in right off. So your only real variable is water content of the sand. It doesn't take much to gauge the water content of your sand. If your hand comes out wet if you stick it just inside the surface of the pile or bag then you may want to start out with a little less water than usual. If your pile is at the bottom of a hill collecting the property's water... that's your fault and you'll likely get some efflorescence to clean off later. 

Someone mentioned in an earlier post about an employee getting injured hefting a bucket of sand. We use 2.5 gallon buckets. So you are using 8 per bag instead of 4. Using smaller buckets allows for a min or two more for mixing time anyway.


----------



## heavyc

The mixing clock on mortar begins after all components are added. That gives a MAXIMUM of 5 min.
There is no need to lift buckets of sand if you think out side the BOX. That's all I can add on proper measurement of cubic feet. It took us several attempts through trial and also error to develop our method. Not about to let that trade secret out. May try to patent the design see where it goes? We under go scrupulous field drawn sample testing 3 times daily. Our breaks vary only in couple hundred pounds increments max. 
On the 3 to 1 ratio, if you read the directions on the mortar bag. Some manufacturers are recommending 2 or 3 parts(cubic feet) of sand to each bag.


----------



## Tscarborough

There is no field sampling testing protocol, tell them to shove it up their ass (Only when you do fail, of course).


----------



## concretemasonry

Tscar is absolutely correct. There is NO standard for field sampling and testing of mortar because of the variability of the materials from batch to batch. The applicable specification for mortar is ASTM 207, which is a laboratory method.

The moisture content of the sand varies by location of the sand taken, so a standard from the field is meaningless. There have be attempts to create a meaningful standard for over 75 years, but committees writing the specs (contractors, manufacturers and engineers) could not arrive at something worth controlling.

I knew of several mudmixers that were paid more than a mason because they were critical to real production than the masons. - This was for mid-rise loadbering construction where production and lack of excess mortar in the wall was always a problem when it comes to partial grouting. - The company was very critical about materials and wanted all block to oriented in a cube correctly (block top side up so the mortar beds made handing easier, especially for 8",10" and 12" 2 core block that were laid one-handed. When you lay 1 to 2,000,000 block a year, you get what you want at any price.


----------



## JBM

When the batch just touches the shaft inside it's a full batch.


----------



## heavyc

You two Gentlemen please feel free to attend our next preparation meeting with the ACOE. At that day and time I'm sure you will be enlightened beyond belief. I guess government work isn't for everyone. The ACOE can and have it their way period. Sorry to step on toes that haven't performed work of this nature. As I've said previously we call the ACOE directives, blessings for a very good reason.


----------



## Tscarborough

Would that be, say, the Corp of Engineers? Maybe Department of Defense, Army, Airforce? How about University of Texas, State of Texas, various city governments, etc.?

Because I have shut all of those guys bull**** down when my customers were called on field testing of mortar. It is not allowed, although you are welcome to agree to it, there IS NO METHOD OF TESTING IT, period.


----------



## Tscarborough

Do this, HeavyC, take the last set of mortar specifications where they field tested your mortar, including the references at the beginning of Section 4200. Scan them in and post them, and let me show you, using those specs, how it is not allowed.


----------



## concretemasonry

It would be interesting to see the comments on the specifications for mortar and masonry units since they are intertwined in the end.

I would be glad to show those to the ASTM committees (C12 & C15) that write the pertinent specifications and let them decipher what ACOE is and the association credentials and activities are.

I could also present the information to the joint ACI/TMS/NCMA/BIA committee that controls the ACI Doument (ACI 530) plus the ASTM standards committee for testing and standards that covers the design and construction of masonry for the U.S. and about 20 other counties by adoption.


----------



## Tscarborough

And just to be clear, they can field sample and test all they want, but they can not use a failing result to require teardown and rebuild.


----------



## heavyc

I'm in total agreement with both of you"ll. We are at Ft. Bragg and the Savannah District over sees operations.
I will follow up with your advice at initial for next job thank you very much, any and all help greatly appreciated. I will contact our PM to arm him with this information for submittal process of our contracts. I'll update immediately. Gonna poke around through old paper work and see if I can reference their directives.


----------



## heavyc

One more question for the experts. Our spec's call for 2,000 psi mortar. How without any testing would you ever know. Thus why is it even a spec?


----------



## Tscarborough

There are 2 methods. The first is a proportion specification, where you simply use ASTM 270 Chart 2 to determine the ratios of sand/lime/cement to achieve the desired strength. This is the best and most common method, and it works just fine, even though a field collected mortar sample may or may not pass a lab compressive test, it doesn't have to.

The second is the properties specification where you take the materials to be used in the field to the lab and test them in accordance with several different ASTM standards including the mixing, curing, and testing of the materials. This is done prior to the start of construction.

Those are the only two methods to specify mortar strength, and it is an either/or choice, although many specs reference both. Either way, there is NO specification or method for collecting field mixed mortar and then testing it in the lab. No method or specification= no such thing as "failing" a test. What test? what method? what specification?


----------



## heavyc

There are cubical samples collected daily. They are placed in plastic/ fiberglass looking trays with dividers in them. Then a plastic bag is placed over the jig to avoid contamination I guess or something to do with curing process as we are required to cover all work. Then the sample is left in a restricted/ designated area overnight and collected the following day. Off to the lab it goes. Then the process is repeated each day.
I could care less what they do with it where it goes or what the results are. The GC is the agency requesting and footing the bill for the testing agencies service. They also the GC collects and retains the test results.
On another job breaks were nearly 500lbs. off. No work was torn down I'm assuming because of the stipulations with testing you've explained thoroughly. Just know it is what it is I give mortar away all day long to different trades for different reasons so why should I even care that they're wasting our tax dollars doing testing that has no legitimacy.


----------



## Tscarborough

Taking mortar samples is OK, so long as they understand that they have no standing in relationship to your contract. When they "fail" you for a collected field sample, then there is an issue, one that they will lose every single time, usually with a couple phone calls or at worst a jobsite meeting.


----------



## concretemasonry

There is no accepted standard for field samples. Even if a sample is taken there is no basis, since it is just information of the mortar after it was mixed and not the wall.

Actually, the field strength of mortar is meaningless.

For masonry wall strengths, mortar has little effect on the compressive strength of a wall. The governing method to verify the wall strength is a 2 block high, hollow face shell bedded prism that is tested at 7 or 28 days to determine the masonry strength (f'm) that is the only number that should be in a correct specification and is referenced in all major codes and standards. In the mortar specification (ASTM C270), in the appendix, it states that weakest mortar possible to carry the structural loads should be used because the weaker mortar possesses other properties, such as workability that are important. 2000 psi mortar can be used to get a 4500 psi masonry strength, since the unit strengths control the wall strength.


----------



## heavyc

Couple covert photos for your viewing pleasure


----------



## Tscarborough

That doesn't meet any ASTM standard for a lab mixed sample much less a field mixed one. I don't doubt that they sample, they do. It just does not hold up under the mildest form of informed protest.


----------



## Fouthgeneration

What about ASTM E 447 tscar, two unit mortar test?

Unfortunately a 14" CMU test weighs over 150 lbs one of five required.... and if grouted needs a 400 ton capacity lab press. 

Currently involved in a grout testing scam by national engineering lab that has been over-billing customers by ignoring the IBC prohibitions on these redundant and superfluous testing regimes. 

Returning to original issue of post, masonry sand that is graded nearly perfectly, and with the greatest possible % of large grains can be mixed at ratios exceeding 3 to one and still yield mortars that are "rich"/plastic, won't shrink crack, and meet any strength tests, As with any other cemented aggregate the larger the particles allowed less % of filler paste needed.

The USSR developed many different ways to test Concrete with out expensive test equipment to enforce QC. 

A half unit grouted full with a 3/8" x 6" deep anchor bolt as pull test sample, cost about 5.00$ per test, could be tested on site with simple pump jack rig.....Nah too simple for an engineer, no profit margin for a lab, an no reason for a new standard every 3 years for ASTM standards gold diggers.


----------



## Tscarborough

2 unit is a bedding mortar sample, and there is also a 4 brick cube method, but the one pictured has all bonding surfaces as cuts.


----------



## concretemasonry

The Russian testing is really a comedy of errors. The problem is the "bigger is better" concept, compared to U.S. and European specs and concepts.

In the CIS/USSR, for a precast building made using plant produced reinforced concrete modules, the module has 8" thick walls and measured approximately 10' x 12' x 20'. They tested it by placing it on two points about 16' apart and then applied a vertical load at the center to break it like a beam.

For block prism testing, I saw a 8"(20cm) unit test where they made a "prism" that measured about 32"(80cm) x 32"(80cm) x 64"(160cm).

The concept of testing a solid grouted 2 block prism of 14" block that weighs 140# gives a meaningless result. In the civilized world, prisms are tested hollow/ungrouted with mortared joints, since the codes are based on the ungrouted strength of the masonry units. The strength of the masonry units controls the strength of the prism (filled or not) because the failure mode is in diagonal shear and not direct compression.

There are truck loads of testing results that have been analyzed and conducted for about 50 years to determine the relationship of the wall strength with the unit strength, since the strength of mortar is not a factor in compressive strength. - It all depends on way the design codes are developed with accurate testing methods.

ASTM is not a for-profit organization. Membership is for individuals. The committes that write the specs/standards are individuals with one vote per person and is a balanced membership between designers, contractors, users, academic and interested/public parties. Anyone can join and participate in committee activities, but voting memberships take experience and time. I was an engineer for about 5 years before I joined. A few years later, I tried to get more involved and got on some committees. After about 10 or 15 years of waiting, I got a voting membership opened up and I got to vote. Membership is cheap ($75/year and you get a free copy of one standard of your choice every year to keep current), they do not make money selling standards.


----------



## Fouthgeneration

CM the Grouted Unit was only for the grout test, a single unit grouted at the same time as the wall panel... the mortar test would of course have just the shells spread for intermediate coursing, or the shells and webs for the first two or last two courses.

I didn't make my self clear, the USSR reference was to circa WWII concrete NDT...I don't know anything RE soviet masonry tests.(there is a vanishing academic field...)

"they do not make $ selling standards..." The boy scouts are not for profit" too, and everyone at the National level is "comfortable".:whistling
IMO, ASTM standards have gone the way of USA college textbooks, as soon as the market is saturated with the current edition, change a chapter or two, a few new diagrams, 250.00$ for this years standard...burn the now useless legacy codes.

For the climate in my area, the mortar strength is more of freeze thaw resistance guide then wall strength correlation, above a certain minimum strength the mortar lasts through far more freeze/thaw cycles.

Single wythe masonry of course, multi wythe brick was/is its own world.

Heavy C's attachments show a test jig? I thought was supposed to be made out the same material as the Units laid in the mortar, fired clay for brick, and super special CMU form just for the mortar cube former for concrete units...
the mold in the pictures appears to be plastic? and of course the above jigs can't be reused due to the pores filling with cement and minerals wicked from the mortar every use.... lowering the porosity of the jig..
Just as the C1019? requires NEW block for every test, Unless one was using used block in the wall assemblies.


----------



## concretemasonry

Fourthgeneration -

Where are you and what standards are in effect?

Take a look at ACI 530 (Design and Specifications for Masonry Structures). It is the bible for masony in the U.S. and many foreign countries. It is published by ACI since they have the systems and means to distribute document. The document is written jointly by the MJSC (Masonry Joint Standards Committee), TMS (The Masonry Society) that has member that are contractors, engineers unions, material suppliers, state and national associations and educators, the NCMA (National Concrete Masonry Association that is comprised for material manufacturers and sellers), the BIA (brick manufacturers and distributers), masonry contractors and few others. These groups also are respondible for the the ASTM standards for specification of material standards, test and sampling methods and reporting. It is a very valuable that addresses masonry design and construction in a good format with some tables, drawings.

I am not aware of any place where a one block with grouted cores is acceptible unless it is in a location with unique standards or spec writers with strange ideas. The commonly used site sampling and preparation of site is a 4"x4"x8" cube that is form when 4 block are laid to make a 4"x4" square to be filled with grout after some absorptive paper lines the cavity. This allows the block to absorb the excess moisture as it sets and cures and is truely indicative of the properties of the grout in place and the block are not adhered to the sample that can be removed after the block are removed. - A core of a single block is irregular, impossible to measure and cannot be removed, so the block will affect the test. As you know, the cores of the block are not square and the widthe of the core varies since the block have tapered cores and the top may have a flaired face shell and webs for the convenience of contractors. - There is a similar test for grout in brick construction, where the brick are stacked in a similar pattern.

Regarding ASTM standards, there many individual volumes on different related subject. There is one for mortar that also gives the standards of the components and the products themselves. The individual standards (ASTM C90 for concrete masonry units as an example) and others are revised when needed to keep current with others referenced in it. The volumes are reprinted very often and contain all the current standards whether they are changed or not for convenience. - I only really reference one volume for my purposes. Since, I am a member of ASTM ($75.00/year), I get a free volume of my choice annually (hard copy or on line in detail), so that is a great bargain and the $250 does not sound right. As a member, I can download any standard in the volume I choose and print it and use as I choose. Since I am a member, I can go to the site and reference any standard in any volume and buy it at a greatly reduced member price (not need to buy the entire volume of the set of about 30 volumes. - Take a look and you be surprised at what is available for $75 per year that is a business expense deduction.

Again, the "mortar" test you referred to does NOT test the strength of the mortar, but the strength of the mortar and block together. The compressive strength of mortar is not important in the strength of masonry since you can make a 2 block face shell bedded prism out of high strength block and 2000 psi mortar that tests almost 5000 psi, since the masonry unit strength governs. - This is all shown and explained in the ACI 530 I mentioned earlier.


----------



## heavyc

I'm just curious if the testing is such a travesty. Why aren't any whistle blowers sounding off. Especially with the knowledge so apparently abundant. Seems redundant that no one is working on preserving OUR hard earned tax dollars on pointless unnecessary testing. Referencing Federal Governmental funded projects through out the USA? Must be a stich of validity somewhere.


----------



## Tscarborough

Because, HeavyC, even done wrong, the samples seldom fail, and it is only an issue when they do.

The reality is that requiring the not-to-specification testing really means is that the one requiring them is getting a WORSE job than if it were done correctly.

This is because the masonry contractor will be sure not to fail, and the only real way to assure this is to make the mortar incorrectly, i.e. too strong for the actual design value required for the masonry assembly *using the standards by which the assembly is engineered. *

The real, actual reason for the not-to-specification testing, and why it so often occurs on government work is simply them covering their ass. Too bad it doesn't though when it gets down to it.


----------



## Fouthgeneration

I'm in the center of flyover Country, between Two rivers....

Owned a copy for ~20 years, just about ready for latest version...
Yes the various committees does a good job in general, But many single issue lobbyists secure positions on the committees through patience and a little camouflage. 

See rebar lap rules rewritten to 'encourage' the use of patented"tested" connectors.

Brick manufacturers packing committees to get former tiles declared brick by fiat,(previously ANY unit more the 25% cored was a tile.... )manufacturer saves a penny, I spend 3 cents filling the holes with much expensive mortar, raising walls costs and lowering masonry share of the Wall market.

See the "box" as a replacement for the block jig used in C 1019. 

An unfilled unit/half unit the same age as the filled is used as the "control"/Tare block, subtract the unfilled break strength from the filled break= strength added by grouting divide by average # of square inches of cell area sections, = compressive strength of grout/PSI. much closer to actual wall samples. No this is just my idea of a workable repeatable cheap, easy, and positively reflects actual in wall grout strength.

Yes, I'm aware of the confined spaces effect, see concrete filled lolly tubes for a example that relates to "trapped" materials testing higher in compression than homogeneous material.... or a rubble filled castle wall.

For all the ten thousand year history of mortared masonry much of how it actually works remains a"undiscovered" country for Engineers. 

Heavy C: I've tend to bid on over specified jobs because wiser heads don't want play the paper chase reindeer games.
My person experience is sadly most engineers are apprentice 'wizards' with little or no idea how the math formulas came about or when they aren't appropriate, Strictly "black box" button pushers. 

I believe most standards are include on job documents to lend a mostly false air of academic and technical know how. They are spread through a epidemic of cutting and Pasting that isn't stopped because Subs DON"T CHARGE ENOUGH for having to plow through thousands of pages of wrongly invoked standards.

Most engineers are still trying to apply rules developed for Portland concrete construction to masonry grouts and mortars. 

TScar: For me the biggest pain of over strength mortar and grout mixes is the double and triple costs of cleaning the walls and floors, followed distantly by a slight increase in visible cracks. More isn't always better...
I seen to many jobs that the foreman gun decked the tests and the workmanship on the head joints and flashing were non-existent, why bother testing see through walls that leak on day one?

Having worked with fat and thin mortars, I think any foreman would prefer lower strength higher lime content mortar vs uber strength Portland dominated mixes, or over sanded mixes that ruin masons' arms and lower production far beyond the few dollars saved. Forcing masons to crappy mortar to meet some lab rats ideal mortar is silly.


----------



## Tscarborough

4thGen, the way the standard is designed it IS up to the masons on the job to provide workable mortar for the varying daily conditions. Thus no field testing of mortar samples.

It is not like it would be hard to design the method, the problem is that it really has no meaning in the context of the masonry assembly.


----------

