Become a TFP Supporter Pool Math Forum Rules Pool School
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Aggressive Water Versus Improper Pool Plastering

  1. Back To Top    #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Arizona & California
    Posts
    770

    Aggressive Water Versus Improper Pool Plastering

    How aggressive does water need to be, and how long does it take to visibly etch well-made plaster? And if plaster is not well-made, what can even balanced pool water do in terms of early deterioration and discoloration? Interestingly, the results of this study showed that a few improper plastering practices were harder on pool plaster than significantly aggressive water.

    “Good” Plaster, “Bad” Water - The first part of our study was designed to determine the amount of calcium that can be dissolved or etched away from well-made pool plaster by aggressive water. Several plaster coupons were made with a proper (low) water-to-cement ratio, with no calcium chloride (an accelerator), and were allowed to cure and harden for 24 hours before being individually submerged in aggressive water for six months. The beginning calcium level of the water they were placed in was only 80 ppm, and the water was maintained continually with a Langelier Saturation Index (LSI or CSI) ranging from -0.5 to -1.1. After six months, the measurement of the calcium in the water tanks showed an average increase of 50 ppm. (Note: An increase of calcium in the water indicates a loss of calcium from the plaster surface). No discoloration of these coupons was visible, the coupons remained very white and smooth, and there was no visible shrinkage or craze cracking.

    “Bad” Plaster, “Good” Water – The next part studied how much calcium can deteriorate or can be removed (dissolved), from poorly made plaster that was placed in balanced water. The beginning calcium hardness level was 180 ppm and in a LSI range of +0.2 to +0.5. The “poorly made” plaster coupons were made with a high water-to-cement ratio, a high amount of calcium chloride, and they were placed in water only one hour after final troweling, representing three possible and sometimes common improper plastering practices. After two days, the calcium level of the water in the tanks was tested, and the result was an average increase of 160 ppm! Since the ratio of plaster surface area of the coupons to gallons of submersion water was similar to that of an actual pool, we can calculate that this amount of calcium loss from a plaster surface is equal to about 26 pounds of calcium carbonate from a 20,000 gallon pool. Some gray discoloration and minor craze cracking of the coupons was also observed, which confirmed the known effects of using excessive amounts of calcium chloride and a high water-to-cement ratio.

    As can be seen in this study comparison, three times more calcium was lost from the plaster surface due to the improper plastering methods than is lost from significantly aggressive water attacking well-made plaster for six months. A loss of calcium from the immediate surface increases porosity (and possible change in whiteness color) which directly affects the aesthetic durability of a pool plaster surface. Simply put, it reduces plaster’s ability to hold up well in a water environment and makes it more susceptible to staining and discoloration.

    There is data from other sources that support the results of our study. The American Concrete Institute has documented the negative and detrimental effects from using high water-to-cement ratios, high calcium chloride contents, and submerging cement too early before sufficient and proper hardening.

    Also, an objective review of the data from the studies of the NPIRC at Cal Poly reveals some similarities to our results. For example, in their Phase 1 protocol, the plaster sections that were submerged in water immediately after final troweling looked visibly worse in comparison to plaster sections that had six hours of drying time before being submerged in water. In Phase 2, several of the test pools were reported to have had either visible deterioration or discoloration in just six weeks’ time even though the water was balanced and non-aggressive. These results indicate something other than aggressive water chemistry as the cause of the deterioration and discoloration of the NPIRC test pools, although this information was not included in their final conclusions.

    It should not always be assumed that an increase of calcium in the pool water (compared to the tap water readings) has to be the result of aggressive water dissolving calcium from the new pool plaster surface, but instead may be the result of improper workmanship practices. The discoloration of plaster, whether white streaks or spots on white or dark colored plaster, should not be blamed on unbalanced pool water. And grey mottling discoloration is most likely caused by calcium chloride added to the mix and/or late hard troweling. If the pool water has been maintained properly and reasonably well, and within APSP standards, a review with the plasterer regarding the quality and workmanship of their product is appropriate.

    Another known improper plastering practice which correlates to the effects of a high water/cement ratio, is the act of adding water to a plaster surface while troweling. Doing this increases the water–to-cement ratio where the water is added and troweled into the surface. This procedure is known to cause increased laitance, increased porosity, weakness, softness, shrinkage (craze cracking), discoloration, and a non-durable finish. That is why both the ACI and the PCA advise against adding water while troweling a cement or concrete surface, which would include pool plaster.

    Fortunately, today’s technology provides the ability to analyze pool plaster for its water-to-cement ratio, the content of calcium chloride, and whether etching has occurred due to aggressive water or whether the plaster has simply deteriorated, discolored, and leached (by balanced water) due to improper plastering practices and additives.

    See also this post: ten-guidelines-for-quality-pool-plaster-t42957.html
    And this post: white-spotting-of-new-plaster-pools-t56607.html

  2. Back To Top    #2

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Rafael, CA USA
    Posts
    12,082

    Re: Aggressive Water Versus Improper Pool Plastering

    Thanks. That's good info and great experimentation. Do you think the increase in CH of 50 ppm over 6 months in the aggressive water case would continue to occur so that perhaps over many years one might begin to see the negative effects from the low CSI? It's good to know that properly made plaster resists having problems from poor water quality, but it may just be delaying what happens, not eliminating the problems completely. This is consistent with the advice that, at least for decent plaster, having a low CSI for the short time done for procedures such as lowering the TA or dissolving scale that has formed is probably not a problem, but having the CSI be low for years may shorten the life of the plaster though perhaps from 20 years to 10 or something of that order-of-magnitude (probably very dependent on pH as well).

    Was the pH in your tests near normal pool pH at 7.5? As I've written in this post, a lower pH might accelerate whatever dissolving effect a lower CSI has on plaster. It would be great to have an experiment that compared what happens in two waters with the same low CSI levels but one with low pH and the other with high pH, varying CH level to make the CSI levels similar and both having similar TA levels (which might be somewhat difficult in the low pH case, so probably having the TA level be on the lower side in both cases).
    16,000 gallon outdoor in-ground 16'x32' plaster pool; Pentair Intelliflo VF pump; Pentair IntelliTouch i9+3s control system; Jandy CL-340 square foot cartridge filter
    12 Fafco solar panels; Purex Triton PowerMax 250 natural gas heater (200,000 BTU/hr output); automatic electric pool safety cover; 4-wheel pressure-side "The Pool Cleaner"

  3. Back To Top    #3

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Arizona & California
    Posts
    770

    Re: Aggressive Water Versus Improper Pool Plastering

    Yes, I am convinced that continued aggressive (negative CSI) water will eventually show a uniform and etched (slightly rough) surface, even on well-made quality plaster. Poorly made plaster will simply show signs of etching much sooner with aggressive water, and of course, without aggressive water. I agree that quality plaster that is maintained well will last 20-25 years, and poorly maintained pool water will cause the plaser to only last about 10 years depending on severity. That is what I have observed over the years. Poorly done pool plaster begins to show signs of problems within the first two years, and most often less than a year. That should be an indicator of what to consider.

    The pH was maintained between 7.3 and 8.0. I would lower the pH to 7.3 every time it reached 7.9-8.0. As you already know, when aggressive water dissolves calcium carboante, the pH rises along with the calcium and TA. I kept my water tanks covered to reduce CO2 exchange (which raises the pH also) trying to achieve a more consistent pH. I am aware of your thoughts regarding low pH effects, and it makes sense. However, if Langelier is correct, perhaps a lower pH may not increase the dissolution of calcium carbonate if other wate parameters are off-setting. I have done experiments on low TA and low CH, but I agree that is still a worthwhile experiment to conduct someday on pH differences.

    Your excellent questions caused me to think more about this. My experiment was on new plaster coupons that is still curing and hardening. It is possible that after one year of curing, after it has really hydrated, that the water might need to be more aggressive to achieve the same results on dissolving calcium carbonate (which calcium hydroxide has been converted to) from the surface.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •