basskisser wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Show me that concrete mix design that has 2500# of Portland cement in
it, and weighs better than two tons, and we'll go from there.
ps When I said Portland Cement weighed approx. 2500 lbs, I was referring
to Portland Cement, I never said or hinted that one would put 2500 lbs
of Portland Cement into a yard of concrete mix.

Have you looked over your concrete mixes to see that it is very common
for a yard of concrete to weigh approx. 4000 lbs?

One would not expect a PE to make sure a mistake.

No, it is not. Need proof? And if I show proof, will you admit your
mistakes? And where is that 2500 pounds of Portland cement per yard
used? Please show some criteria for your two tons, and your 2500 pounds
of Portland.


I tried to be helpful and show you many links showing you the exact
weight of concrete, and the exact weight of Portland Cement, you prefer
to ignore them. I didn't want you to continue with your silliness, but
I should have known better. The question wasn't "is all concrete 4000
lbs per year", because there are light weight concrete mixes that weigh
less, but as Bill said, concrete can and does weigh approx. 4000 lbs.
The fact that you fail to see this, does understand why you are not
employed.

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...



So, anybody who hopes to claim to go *way back* (!) in North America
would more than likely look a lot like this:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/kennewick.html


I've met Shortwave. Striking resemblance.

Eisboch


Actually, the Kennewick Man featured on your link kinda looks like Captain
Jean-Luc Picard.

Eisboch

RCE wrote:

Actually, the Kennewick Man featured on your link kinda looks like Captain
Jean-Luc Picard.

Eisboch

Or, Daddy Warbucks.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Show me that concrete mix design that has 2500# of Portland cement in
it, and weighs better than two tons, and we'll go from there.
ps When I said Portland Cement weighed approx. 2500 lbs, I was referring
to Portland Cement, I never said or hinted that one would put 2500 lbs
of Portland Cement into a yard of concrete mix.

Have you looked over your concrete mixes to see that it is very common
for a yard of concrete to weigh approx. 4000 lbs?

One would not expect a PE to make sure a mistake.

No, it is not. Need proof? And if I show proof, will you admit your
mistakes? And where is that 2500 pounds of Portland cement per yard
used? Please show some criteria for your two tons, and your 2500 pounds
of Portland.


I tried to be helpful and show you many links showing you the exact
weight of concrete, and the exact weight of Portland Cement, you prefer
to ignore them. I didn't want you to continue with your silliness, but
I should have known better. The question wasn't "is all concrete 4000
lbs per year", because there are light weight concrete mixes that weigh
less, but as Bill said, concrete can and does weigh approx. 4000 lbs.
The fact that you fail to see this, does understand why you are not
employed.

No, you are wrong. Bill actually said that concrete weighs 5000#.
Please show what facts you have that I am not employed, first. Now,
where WERE those links that you shown that states that there is 2500#
of Portland cement in a yard of concrete? You DO know, seeing how you
are acting the expert here, that in reality, there's somewhere around 5
bags @ 94 pounds in a typical 3,000 psi mix, for a total of 470# don't
you? So, I'd really, really like to see this mix design that uses
2500#, because with a water/cement ratio of .53 maximum, you'd have
approx. 1,325 pounds of water. But you know this, right? Now, here's
the thing. a yard of concrete is an AREA. This 2500# of cement takes
approx. 12.72 cubic feet of area. The water that we need per ACI 307
would take an area of approx. 20.64 cubic feet, for a total of 33.36
cubic feet. You're now at more than a yard before you add in the
largest volumes, which are the coarse and fine aggregates, with proper
gradation of course. So, for an F'c of 3000 psi, the aggregate total is
going to be close to approx. 10 or 12 times the amount of concrete. So
now you have a "yard" of concrete that is 400 or so cubic feet! So, I'm
really confused. Please show me where you are correct, and I am wrong.
Now remember something about that 4,000 pounds you are referring to.
There is a factor of safety involved for that number. A cubic foot of
normal weight concrete doesn't weigh 150 pounds, although that number
is thrown around alot. The actual weight of normal weight concrete is
around 125 pounds per cubic foot, or 3375 a yard. If you'll look at ACI
guidelines you'll even see that there criteria uses 125# per cubic foot
dead load for elevated slabs! And even THAT has a factor of safety.

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 21:11:24 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On 17 Jan 2007 09:25:08 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:

And where did those Native Americans come from?

Mars.

Typical.......

Prove me wrong.

LOL!
--
******************************************
***** Have a super day! *****
******************************************

John H

basskisser wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Show me that concrete mix design that has 2500# of Portland cement in
it, and weighs better than two tons, and we'll go from there.
ps When I said Portland Cement weighed approx. 2500 lbs, I was referring
to Portland Cement, I never said or hinted that one would put 2500 lbs
of Portland Cement into a yard of concrete mix.

Have you looked over your concrete mixes to see that it is very common
for a yard of concrete to weigh approx. 4000 lbs?

One would not expect a PE to make sure a mistake.
No, it is not. Need proof? And if I show proof, will you admit your
mistakes? And where is that 2500 pounds of Portland cement per yard
used? Please show some criteria for your two tons, and your 2500 pounds
of Portland.

I tried to be helpful and show you many links showing you the exact
weight of concrete, and the exact weight of Portland Cement, you prefer
to ignore them. I didn't want you to continue with your silliness, but
I should have known better. The question wasn't "is all concrete 4000
lbs per year", because there are light weight concrete mixes that weigh
less, but as Bill said, concrete can and does weigh approx. 4000 lbs.
The fact that you fail to see this, does understand why you are not
employed.

No, you are wrong. Bill actually said that concrete weighs 5000#.
Please show what facts you have that I am not employed, first. Now,
where WERE those links that you shown that states that there is 2500#
of Portland cement in a yard of concrete? You DO know, seeing how you
are acting the expert here, that in reality, there's somewhere around 5
bags @ 94 pounds in a typical 3,000 psi mix, for a total of 470# don't
you? So, I'd really, really like to see this mix design that uses
2500#, because with a water/cement ratio of .53 maximum, you'd have
approx. 1,325 pounds of water. But you know this, right? Now, here's
the thing. a yard of concrete is an AREA. This 2500# of cement takes
approx. 12.72 cubic feet of area. The water that we need per ACI 307
would take an area of approx. 20.64 cubic feet, for a total of 33.36
cubic feet. You're now at more than a yard before you add in the
largest volumes, which are the coarse and fine aggregates, with proper
gradation of course. So, for an F'c of 3000 psi, the aggregate total is
going to be close to approx. 10 or 12 times the amount of concrete. So
now you have a "yard" of concrete that is 400 or so cubic feet! So, I'm
really confused. Please show me where you are correct, and I am wrong.
Now remember something about that 4,000 pounds you are referring to.
There is a factor of safety involved for that number. A cubic foot of
normal weight concrete doesn't weigh 150 pounds, although that number
is thrown around alot. The actual weight of normal weight concrete is
around 125 pounds per cubic foot, or 3375 a yard. If you'll look at ACI
guidelines you'll even see that there criteria uses 125# per cubic foot
dead load for elevated slabs! And even THAT has a factor of safety.


Do you understand English?

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:24:24 GMT, "RG" wrote:

As odd as this sounds, Navaho on my mother's side (two back) and
Cherokee (four back) on my father's side.
I believe Navajo is the preferred spelling, although your version is
sometimes found in English writings.

Um...actually, either is acceptable because the actual name in
Navaj(h)o is something like Dine' - I'm not in lecture mode at the
moment. There are also others, one which is historically inaccurate
as the Dine' aren't an offshoot tribe of the Apache.

Anyway doesn't matter. Either is acceptable and in fact, as it
happens, my spell checker has either listed which is why it didn't
catch it in the first place.

And speaking of Nikon cameras, I heard something interesting this
afternoon about digital Nikons - in their EULA, there is a clause that
states that all images taken with one of the digital cameras are the
intellectual property of Nikon.

I don't have a Nikon EULA handy - have you heard anything about that
or is it bull****?
it is bull****

I don't have a Nikon EULA handy - have you heard anything about that
or is it bull****?

1. I have no idea what an EULA is.

2. If you look at the statement that you are reciting at its face, there is
no way it could be taken seriously. Look at all the professional
photographers that shoot with Nikon digital gear. Do you think, even for a
moment, that they would allow the intellectual rights to their work be
compromised in any way? I don't think so. The pro community is and always
has been Nikon's bread and butter. I really don't think Nikon would be so
stupid as to try and **** where it eats. Maybe Snopes has the answer you
seek, but I don't give the issue enough credibility to warrant spending any
of my time checking it out.

As to the Navajo issue, I've spent quite a bit of time on the Navajo
reservation, and I've never once seen the Navaho spelling used there. Which
is a bit different than the spelling of Mohave. In Arizona, Mohave is
always spelled with an "h", but in California, it is always spelled Mojave
with a "j". Go figure.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

basskisser wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Show me that concrete mix design that has 2500# of Portland
cement in
it, and weighs better than two tons, and we'll go from there.

ps When I said Portland Cement weighed approx. 2500 lbs, I was
referring
to Portland Cement, I never said or hinted that one would put 2500 lbs
of Portland Cement into a yard of concrete mix.

Have you looked over your concrete mixes to see that it is very common
for a yard of concrete to weigh approx. 4000 lbs?

One would not expect a PE to make sure a mistake.

No, it is not. Need proof? And if I show proof, will you admit your
mistakes? And where is that 2500 pounds of Portland cement per yard
used? Please show some criteria for your two tons, and your 2500 pounds
of Portland.

I tried to be helpful and show you many links showing you the exact
weight of concrete, and the exact weight of Portland Cement, you prefer
to ignore them. I didn't want you to continue with your silliness, but
I should have known better. The question wasn't "is all concrete 4000
lbs per year", because there are light weight concrete mixes that weigh
less, but as Bill said, concrete can and does weigh approx. 4000 lbs.
The fact that you fail to see this, does understand why you are not
employed.


No, you are wrong. Bill actually said that concrete weighs 5000#.
Please show what facts you have that I am not employed, first. Now,
where WERE those links that you shown that states that there is 2500#
of Portland cement in a yard of concrete? You DO know, seeing how you
are acting the expert here, that in reality, there's somewhere around 5
bags @ 94 pounds in a typical 3,000 psi mix, for a total of 470# don't
you? So, I'd really, really like to see this mix design that uses
2500#, because with a water/cement ratio of .53 maximum, you'd have
approx. 1,325 pounds of water. But you know this, right? Now, here's
the thing. a yard of concrete is an AREA. This 2500# of cement takes
approx. 12.72 cubic feet of area. The water that we need per ACI 307
would take an area of approx. 20.64 cubic feet, for a total of 33.36
cubic feet. You're now at more than a yard before you add in the
largest volumes, which are the coarse and fine aggregates, with proper
gradation of course. So, for an F'c of 3000 psi, the aggregate total is
going to be close to approx. 10 or 12 times the amount of concrete. So
now you have a "yard" of concrete that is 400 or so cubic feet! So, I'm
really confused. Please show me where you are correct, and I am wrong.
Now remember something about that 4,000 pounds you are referring to.
There is a factor of safety involved for that number. A cubic foot of
normal weight concrete doesn't weigh 150 pounds, although that number
is thrown around alot. The actual weight of normal weight concrete is
around 125 pounds per cubic foot, or 3375 a yard. If you'll look at ACI
guidelines you'll even see that there criteria uses 125# per cubic foot
dead load for elevated slabs! And even THAT has a factor of safety.


Do you understand English?


I have a feeling this will be another "schnapps is whiskey" circus.

No matter how much kevin is proven wrong, he will always insist he is right.

RCE wrote:

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
groups.com...



So, anybody who hopes to claim to go *way back* (!) in North America
would more than likely look a lot like this:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/kennewick.html


I've met Shortwave. Striking resemblance.

Eisboch



Actually, the Kennewick Man featured on your link kinda looks like Captain
Jean-Luc Picard.

Eisboch


I thought the same thing