Fibermeshing it?
Aside from several niceties about Fibermesh, such as
shrinkage issues, surface wear/tear, permeability, ease
of working with, non-corrosive properties, cost consi-
derations, 'fad' factor (we always want somethin 'new')
etc, etc, we need to look at the down-to-earth issues
of what we expect and need from the finished product
called concrete: strength, hardness, resistance to va-
rious influences (even such as dynamic forces), bend,
etc. And we cannot but conclude that fibers
- may not bind well with cement 'water-based' paste thus
making concrete effectively 'porous' and weaker (and
adding more of them will make matters worse) - to pro-
ve this point (and even if they did bind with cement!)
do you remember that rebars have ridges? and that wire
mesh should be welded at cross points? do you know why?
So? How do you expect to emulate that with lose fibers?
- being plastic and hence elastic even stretchable do
not and cannot reinforce anything sturdy such as conc-
rete (remember: they do not have 'hooks' or 'knots' at
their ends, either to hold anything together). This is
why the 'visitor's' house has its foundation falling
apart. Period. Fibermesh does not perform as a stru-
ctural asset which in plain English means it takes
away structural properties of concrete. And concrete
without its important structural properties (which it
has to have even in a garden path) is not concrete a-
nymore but a weakened crumbly mixture of sand, gravel,
cement granules/dust, fibers and whatever else we add.
It still holds out when not exposed to much of stress
but 'in spite of the fibers', not because of them doing
anything much for it it seems.
Some may hold on to it trying to find justification upon
justification as is common with humans (same as tobacco
companies keep on staying alive with all their reasoning
which with some people works). But for how long? So I de-
finitely put in a word of caution.
- engineer -