Klingan Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 This is a subsubject to the Aqueducts thread. While working with roman waterdelivery systems in the cities I came by the question about sediments and it's effect. It's known that aqueduct suffered from sediments, wich was cleaned away by slaves, and that lead pipes were protected from their poisonous effects by two reasons: The water was constantly moving, and as long as it does it won't be effected enough to make you notice the difference. The second reason is sediments that after only a few months protected the inside of the pipes from the lead. But then, how did they make sure that the sediments didn't block the water flow? They didn't have any chemical that solved it to my knowlege. From what I understand there's only one explanation and I'm not content with it at all: They took up the pipes every 3-5th (Very approxomatly, considering what I know about sediment build up.) year and remelted them. It have sevral downsides: Impurities in the lead when remelting it. The work needed to remelt the pipes all the time. The work to digg them up and down. Consider that many pipes were put right under the atrium floor, I very much doubt that the lads with mosaics etc wanted their floor removed freqvently, and if this was the case wouldn't we see somekind of hatches? Time consumption. Very very much time when other work could be done would be used to inspect and replace the pipes. Pipes built into walls would make a great deal of trouble. The pipes came in standardized sizes and was between 2.5 and about 55 cm in diameter. Any thoughts are welcome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 I think that before the water entered the city it went through a cistern for distribution. This would tend to collect the sediment. Lead pipes last a long time. I don't think that the Romans were aware of lead poisoning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcus Caelius Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 I don't think that the Romans were aware of lead poisoning. According to "Ancient Rome on Five Denarius a Day," they knew about it, but considered it an acceptable trade-off." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faustus Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 (edited) Salve Klingan, etal Pipes in Roman times as compared to piping today: The main difference between our piping today and that of Roman times is that pipes today are part of a Edited October 3, 2007 by Faustus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caldrail Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 Roman plumbing was quite advanced. Bronze fittings of standard sizes were used to connect lead pipes. Regarding the burying of pipes under the floor, it must be remembered that wealthy people were quite willing to pay for another mosaic if need be. Mosiac artists were skilled and used prefabricated patterns, so it wouldn't take as long as you might expect - very important for an artist seeking clients who don't want their homes disrupted for months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASCLEPIADES Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 (edited) Salve, Amici. Water and Wastewater Systems in Imperial Rome Edited October 4, 2007 by ASCLEPIADES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nephele Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 A wonderfully entertaining and informative little book I've recently read is Working IX to V: Orgy Planners, Funeral Clowns, and Other Prized Professions of the Ancient World, by Vicki Le Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 Salve, Amici. Water and Wastewater Systems in Imperial Rome Very informative and entertaining. Thanks, Big A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klingan Posted October 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 Great posts everyone! From what I believe now the deposits of the inside of the pipes would grow rapidly in the beginning forming a protective layer, possibly beacuse of the nature of the relationship between sediments of lime and lead, but then take more time to build on a truly thick layer. I will have to confirm that guess with a chemist thou. Obviously they would have to change pipes now and then, probably with long intervals but that wouldn't really mater since a pipe in Rome herself were not inheritable or sell able. Therefor you would most likely have to redraw or remove pipes every 20-30th year anyway considering the low lifespan. Other pipes were probably changed when needed. ASCLEPIADES; Great link, it seems mostly correct but do you know the author or can confirm it's correctness in any way? The way it's referring to classical sources as: Frontinus, 1961, p. 361 really does give me a cold shiver. Nephele; I'll take a look for that book at Monday when I'm back at uni! Thanks for the tip! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASCLEPIADES Posted October 5, 2007 Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 (edited) The way it's referring to classical sources as: Frontinus, 1961, p. 361 really does give me a cold shiver. Salve, K! Me too. Here comes Sextus Julius Frontinus De Aquis at Bill Thayer's website (With plenty of handy links, as usual). I hope this stuff may be useful. Edited October 5, 2007 by ASCLEPIADES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klingan Posted October 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 The way it's referring to classical sources as: Frontinus, 1961, p. 361 really does give me a cold shiver. Salve, K! Me too. Here comes Sextus Julius Frontinus De Aquis at Bill Thayer's website (With plenty of handy links, as usual). I hope this stuff may be useful. Thanks A, I'm already reading that one and cross comparing it with a danish translation (with lots of great comments) translated and commented by J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.