The Structural Engineer > Archive > Volume 10 (1932) > Issues > Issue 1 > Portland Cement: Discussion on Mr Gutteridge's Paper
Name of File 1219-10-01.pdf cached at 13/12/2017 13:18:28 - with 8 pages. pdfPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\c6\c6e90252-0dd8-45dc-9f0a-cc5b2ed758b8.pdf. thumbPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\c6e90252-0dd8-45dc-9f0a-cc5b2ed758b8_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: c6e90252-0dd8-45dc-9f0a-cc5b2ed758b8_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article

Portland Cement: Discussion on Mr Gutteridge's Paper

Dr Oscar Faber said the paper hardly lent itself to discussion in the ordinary manner, because it was such an excellent description of modern cement manufacture,and nobody could argue with anything that was said in the paper. That made it more difficult to arouse at any rate a very fierce discussion. The first years of his own college course were spent in a cement works, and he had been interested in cement ever since, and for that reason he had appreciated the paper very much. In referring to the universal practice of adding gypsum to make cement slow setting, the author said this is added to the extent of anywhere between 2 per cent, and 3 per cent., but the British Standard specification required that it should not exceed 2.75 per cent. This obviously meant that there was some objection to gypsum if it were introduced in excessive quantities. The objection to gypsum was that an excess of it made a cement what was known as unsound, and it gave the cement certain properties which were deleterious to a permanent concrete.