The Ultimate DIY Rocks!

Status
Not open for further replies.
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10520221#post10520221 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mr.wilson
...and standard portland seems to only take a week or two for many...

Who are these many, Mr Wilson? Have I missed something?
Except for like one person I can think of, the shortest kures for traditional portland, that have been reported here, are in the 3 week range, but most people report 4-6 weeks as how long it took them.

Hydration for traditional portland is a 28ish day process, unless accelerators, polymers or other admixtures are used - or steam is part of the equation. Until hydration is ceased, the pH should remain on the high end, around 10-12.

Once hydration is ceased (naturally or by admixtures), pH can be dropped quickly, without rebound, by using acid or other possible treatments, or with a couple of weeks of water baths.
At least that is how I understand it...
 
BigTex,
I just realized I combined two of your questions in my head, and probably confused you, as well as myself. Hey - it is late and I learned stuff today - the brain can only take so much, lol.

Anyway, I stand on what I said about Water Stop (or like products), there are several items in that MSDS, that the mix may or may not contain, that we don't really need.

I still think mixing our own recipe is the way to go...

If silica fume is the same as microsilica, then it sounds like it might indeed reduce porosity by filling many of the pores and capillaries. It is something to think about, and, if possible, seek answers for.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10521157#post10521157 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Insane Reefer
BigTex,
I just realized I combined two of your questions in my head, and probably confused you, as well as myself. Hey - it is late and I learned stuff today - the brain can only take so much, lol.

Anyway, I stand on what I said about Water Stop (or like products), there are several items in that MSDS, that the mix may or may not contain, that we don't really need.

I still think mixing our own recipe is the way to go...

If silica fume is the same as microsilica, then it sounds like it might indeed reduce porosity by filling many of the pores and capillaries. It is something to think about, and, if possible, seek answers for.

We could get around this by adding more aggregate like perlite.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10520805#post10520805 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Insane Reefer
This is something that is sort of an area of contention.
By its nature, Water Stop would be non-porous - it is meant to seal. So not an ideal product IMO for nice porous rock. Mr Wilson uses this (or products like it) to create rock covering and walls, not biological filtration rock. Adding in aggregates and making a drier mix will loosen it some, but I think if we can locate a source for Microsilica, then using traditional portland, in addition to the calcium chloride and microsilica would be the best solution.
the rocks I made with the water stop are very porous (I think the addition of the OS helps)... not as porous as the rocks with the perlite, but about on par with the original oldskool formula
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10520906#post10520906 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Insane Reefer
Who are these many, Mr Wilson? Have I missed something?
Except for like one person I can think of, the shortest kures for traditional portland, that have been reported here, are in the 3 week range, but most people report 4-6 weeks as how long it took them.

Hydration for traditional portland is a 28ish day process, unless accelerators, polymers or other admixtures are used - or steam is part of the equation. Until hydration is ceased, the pH should remain on the high end, around 10-12.

Once hydration is ceased (naturally or by admixtures), pH can be dropped quickly, without rebound, by using acid or other possible treatments, or with a couple of weeks of water baths.
At least that is how I understand it...
I made a batch (experimental) about two weeks ago that is testing out at 8.3 ... now, it may be a fluke, so I am going to try and duplicate it this weekend. If the new bacth is ready in two weeks or so, then I may have found a new way to make it that causes it to kure faster.... lol.. time will tell huh?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10520221#post10520221 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mr.wilson
Micro-silica may be the active ingredient in the fast-setting concrete additive they sell at Home Depot. It says on the label that it isn't calcium-based, but it could still be polymer-based.

Fast-setting cement only takes a few hours to stabilize PH, and standard portland seems to only take a week or two for many, so I don't see an advantage to using any other products or procedures.

It very well could be Mr. Wilson. I've noticed it being in one type of bonding cement Lowes carries that also happens to be white (don't remember off hand what it was). The problem is that it's in low proportion to what I'd use. Many of the applications that could use silica in the mix aren't designed for marine environments so the amount of it won't be the same as the silica isn't added for pH control per say which is our objective.

How much you use of it depends really on the total recipe you are using and it changes a little depending on the amount of different additives in your rock mix.

I've gotten some different PMs so I'll answer some of them generically here:

Is there a perfect recipe (IE sand, CC, CS, cement, salt)? No, not really. This is more of a texture thing and is in the eye of the maker. I personally try and keep the cement to 25%-33% of the total mixture depending on the type of cement and what's in the mixture. This is no different that has been discussed here.

Is salt OK to use? As already discussed, salt is an enemy of cement. HOWEVER, we're not building bridges/building so the "strength" can be compromised some with salt. Using a fast set cement mix takes some of the worry of salt away. As already mentioned add salt as the last step of the mix. I'd try and keep salt to 1/5 or under of the total recipe. You really don't need to use salt in the mix however. This does create "pockets" in the rock but it's really not needed for bacteria/fauna that live in the rock. Cement is very porous by itself if you ever look at it under a microscope or big magnifying glass. Salt & sand can be quite useful at casting time to create tunnels and holes, etc. This is more of a personal preference and I'd agree with most of the use of salt from the thread.

How much water to use? Tough call and really depends on ingredients used and type of cement. It's helpful to understand what water does from a hydration standpoint. As your fresh rock hardens it doesn't "move" to fill in voids. Where ever there was water there will be a void as the rock hydrates and this is one of the main reasons why cement is so porous. Some types of cement seem to work better with less water while others can be more moist and still be workable. There's a limit of course with any type of cement. In general for type I/II the "cottage cheese" description is pretty good but I'd go on the "squishy" side of cottage cheese. In otherwords a tad (small amount) more then maybe you presently use (try it). The downside is the pH stays higher longer in I/II cement but the rock ends up more porous. Other downside is you might need to leave the cast alone a little longer before moving/touching it.

Do I use CC or CS in my mix. Normally NO. Haven't found it to be needed or that useful in the mix. Again it's a personal thing and more of a texture you are going for. I do occasionally sprinkle a little CC in the mix at the end if my mix is a tad to wet or for a little variety but it's not a staple in my mix. Plus it adds to the cost and when you are selling it the objective is to keep costs down.

Do I add coloring to my rock. YES, same as Walt Smith does, only I don't make "red" rocks. I go for more of a tan color with maybe a touch of pink look. I'm not fond of white, gray or red rock (neither are those who buy my rock). I've also found off white or tannish color rocks look better down the road. White rocks gets more of a "black" look to it in time. Pretty much same comment from Walt Smith way back in the thread. I actually do intentionally add a little more or less coloring to different batches for variety.

Do I mix by hand or machine. Both, although I like to do it by hand as much as possible since it's the only exercise I seem to get lately. Mixing 50lbs of ingredients at a time really gets the heart going. :) If I have a large order in the wings I'll step up production with a mixing machine. It mixes while I'm casting.

What do I use for casting? Not much really, I have hardened sand beds (from use) with interesting formations on them. I just pour over this. Depending on shapes I'm trying to make I'll flip the rocks over the next day and build on top of them. This is an easy way to avoid "flat-bottom" rocks unless you need that "feature".

How can I make a really big slab rock for an overhang without waiting 6 months for it to kure? How can I make boulder size pieces with the pH problem? With type I/II cement do it in stages. For example maybe you could make a bunch of golfball/baseball size pieces. After casting let them sit for a week (or two) in a moist environment (spray with hose and keep covered with plastic). This will reduce the pH a lot from the rock. Then take all your balls/pieces with more mix and cast them together for a large rock. You will definitely cut down on kure time doing this as much of the "internal" part of the rock is pre-cured.

Is it better to use fine or course sand? Yes :) I use a combination.

Should I use white or brown sand? I don't know. I use white fine sand and brown course sand since that is what I get easily.

Should I use aragonite or silica based sand? What ever you can get easily. I don't buy into the silica based sand problems. I have a large silica based DSB and no problems. Silica is actually good in limited amounts to our tanks and it's a "trace element" in salt mixes. I believe Randy wrote up a good article on this and came to the conclusion that silicate based sands can be a good thing for many people. If you're making rock for yourself pickup a silica test kit and test your tank. If you're high then use aragonite based sand to be "safe" if this mentally helps. I don't think it makes a difference in rock.

I think that covers the individual questions I've received.

Keep in mind. I'm not a Rock God and neither is Walt Smith. We probably have tried a lot more things then most people but that doesn't mean we couldn't do things differently or better for the average person. We're making more rock then most people (especially WS) so you have to keep in mind "production schedules". Making more rock doesn't mean making better rock by any means. It just probably indicates you've tried more things and make "consistent" rock that sells.

Carlo
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10520421#post10520421 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bigtex
I'd just like to find a source for it in the Dallas area to try out. The cement guys I have talked to look at me like I have a horn growing out of my forehead when I ask about silica fume or microsilica.:rolleyes:
Check and see if you have a Shepler's concrete supply or Rufus Walker
or some other concrete specialty store if they don't have it they can get it for you. The Sikacrete is available in a 25# bag.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10520729#post10520729 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bigtex
I found a company on line that has this description of silica fume:

This ultra-fine material will better fill voids between cement particles and result in a very dense concrete with higher compressive strengths and extremely low permeability.

Is the use of this admix affecting or even destroying the desired porosity of the finished rock? Obviously, you can make the rock more porous by using less water but how will this affect how the silica fume works? Just a few thoughts....

The description you found would mainly apply to ready-mix batched concrete not so much hand mixed. I found basically the same thing on several sites they went on to tell an operator how to mix it in and how many revolutions to use at X RPM's. It also warned about making sure that a good portion of the aggregate and water were present before the MS was added to keep it from balling up. MSDS sheets on this stuff warns against breathing and prolonged contact with skin or eyes. In other words it isn't much worse than cement :eek1:

The mixes that are being used are already degrading the strength of finished concrete enough that this will probably only help with the overall strength of the final product. IMO
Robert
 
CAYARS when you are making up water for your mix are you shooting for a nuetral PH or are you looking for a bit of a acidic PH?
I would think that a slightly elevated acidic content would speed up the Kuring process.
Robert
 
badfish03,

Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned "acid" at all as that probably gave the wrong impression. In a nutshell you want close to "average" but not acidic water. If you're very alkaline (as many will be) then some acid can help.

For small amounts of rock RO water is good to use. I wouldn't use DI water however as to many minerals are pulled from the water.

Here's a good read on acid and it's effect on concrete: http://www.cement.org/tech/cct_dur_acid.asp

Carlo
 
Honestly for me if all I have to do is let the rock sit for 3-6 weeks then that is the way to go.....I would rather not add other ingredients which drive the cost up (not sure how much silica fume is or how much is needed).


However....
I really want to do a test with a sealable 55gal drum and CO2 gas to see what that does....
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10522326#post10522326 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cayars
badfish03,

Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned "acid" at all as that probably gave the wrong impression. In a nutshell you want close to "average" but not acidic water. If you're very alkaline (as many will be) then some acid can help.
Carlo

I think I did a bad job of writing this up also, What I meant (that you have answered) is whether you were looking for a balance or nuetral PH or something slightly acidic. Since my water at the house is very Hard I would need to add a mild acidic solution to balance my water to a nuetral PH correct. Have you tried Tannic Acid to do this?
Soaking live aok leaves in water for several days would give you a slightly acidic solution and would add some brown color to the mix.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10522326#post10522326 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cayars

Here's a good read on acid and it's effect on concrete: http://www.cement.org/tech/cct_dur_acid.asp
Carlo

Nice site for basic information but you need several of the books on the site if you want to go into more depth. I already knew the effects of acid on concrete or at least the basics.
Robert
 
It's hard to keep track of all the players in this epic thread, but I remember reading a number of posts where two or three weeks of dry curing was all it took to get the PH down to 8.6. For some, it was just a matter of days.

A PH in the high 8's is not detrimental when used in a new tank. Rock that buffers 0 TDS water from a PH of 7 to a PH of 9 may not have any significant effect on PH when added to saltwater. It's a matter of dissolution rates. Soaking cement or aragonite in ion hungry 0 TDS filtered water will cause it to dissolve at an accelerated rate. Why remove calcium and carbonates that are beneficial to a reef tank? After going through great effort to remove these ions from the rock, you end up spending more resources adding these same ions through chemical dosing and via calcium reactor.

Biological filtration has two aspects, nitrification, and denitrification. A greater surface area will provide more viable sites for bio-films and subsequent nitrification; however, a sufficient number of sites isn't a significant limiting factor for biological filtration in marine tanks. For this reason filtration resources are not focused on nitrification, but on nutrient export and chemical filtration.

Denitrification requires an anaerobic zone with sites within a certain range of void space and surface area. Void space will provide more oxygen, and surface area will provide more sites. Fast setting cement mixes offer more surface area with fewer void spaces thus making it more conducive to denitrification, but from scientific studies and anecdotal evidence, it appears that a great range of pore sizes will work. Reef tanks have been maintained with 0 nitrates with a large variety and quantity of media, from bare bottom tanks to open (acropora skeleton) rock work, to very dense Caribbean rock.

There is no proof that rock work should be any more dense or porous than naturally occurring reef rock. As long as we fall within this range, there is no need to reinvent the wheel. There are a number of ceramic filtration media products on the market, but they offer nothing more than marketing to support their merits. Once a surface area is clogged with bio-films (bacterial slime) the pore size becomes moot.

I have large commercial coral vats and fish systems with no rock for biological filtration. The substrate is a more efficient means of carrying out denitrification than rock. Sufficient nitrification is accomplished by the substrate even with the heavy bioload of newly imported coral shipments and subsequent die-off and mucous production, and over-stocked fish tanks with stressed fish.

Tanks with chronic nitrate problems are best dealt with by addressing import and export methods, mechanical filtration and through chemical filtration and with external deep sand beds.

In the matter of water-proof cement mixes, there are two ways of achieving this. One is to use a plasticizer like Sealbond, the other is to speed hydration through the use of polymers, calcium, micro-silica, or Co2. Any of these methods will render full hydration throughout the concrete, resulting in a more dense pore structure (waterproof). Type 1/11 portland takes 28 days to cure and will have a larger pore structure (more void space and less surface area). This is why all of these fast setting additives and mixes claim that the final product is stronger (more dense).

Density varies from product to product, depending on how quickly it sets. Once you add aggregate to these mixes, the waterproofing is lost. All of the fast setting mixes I've used allow water to penetrate through.

If you are producing rock commercially, then it is wise to buy cheaper type 1/11 portland and store the formed rocks for 28 days. The retail store will likely have it on the shelf for a few weeks or months anyway.

I use fast setting mixes because I have a tight time line with construction schedules, and I don't mind paying twice as much. The added bonus for me is a stronger product with better bond to walls and PVC plumbing and a modeling clay texture.

As I stated before, I wouldn't use faux rock in an aquarium unless it was aquacultured. It takes six months to establish a tank with live rock. With dead rock, it takes over a year and biodiversity and coraline algae coverage is still limited. You will acquire biodiversity from the rock base of corals, but the hobbyists using DIY rock are generally on a low budget and are stocking sparingly.

Manmade rock is definitely the way the industry needs to go, but only through a means of replicating the true benefits of live rock (the microorganisms they carry).
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10522950#post10522950 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mr.wilson
It's hard to keep track of all the players in this epic thread, but I remember reading a number of posts where two or three weeks of dry curing was all it took to get the PH down to 8.6. For some, it was just a matter of days.

A PH in the high 8's is not detrimental when used in a new tank. Rock that buffers 0 TDS water from a PH of 7 to a PH of 9 may not have any significant effect on PH when added to saltwater. It's a matter of dissolution rates. Soaking cement or aragonite in ion hungry 0 TDS filtered water will cause it to dissolve at an accelerated rate. Why remove calcium and carbonates that are beneficial to a reef tank? After going through great effort to remove these ions from the rock, you end up spending more resources adding these same ions through chemical dosing and via calcium reactor.

Biological filtration has two aspects, nitrification, and denitrification. A greater surface area will provide more viable sites for bio-films and subsequent nitrification; however, a sufficient number of sites isn't a significant limiting factor for biological filtration in marine tanks. For this reason filtration resources are not focused on nitrification, but on nutrient export and chemical filtration.
I wouldn't ever soak rock in 0 TDS RO/DI water as that is counter productive as you pointed out.

I only suggested some people might be better off using RO (not DI) water in the mix itself.

I'm not sure what you meant by " For this reason filtration resources are not focused on nitrification, but on nutrient export and chemical filtration."


Denitrification requires an anaerobic zone with sites within a certain range of void space and surface area. Void space will provide more oxygen, and surface area will provide more sites.

More accurately the void spaces allow exchange of water flow at a slow pace. The farther into the rock you get the presense of O2 is decreased until there is none. This provides the denitrifing bacteria a place to work.


Fast setting cement mixes offer more surface area with fewer void spaces thus making it more conducive to denitrification, but from scientific studies and anecdotal evidence, it appears that a great range of pore sizes will work. Reef tanks have been maintained with 0 nitrates with a large variety and quantity of media, from bare bottom tanks to open (acropora skeleton) rock work, to very dense Caribbean rock.

I'm not sure I'd agree with that from observation. The more void spaces you have the more population you can have of denitrifing bacteria (up to what the tank needs). Regardless I'm sure it's porous enough to not matter.


There is no proof that rock work should be any more dense or porous than naturally occurring reef rock. As long as we fall within this range, there is no need to reinvent the wheel. There are a number of ceramic filtration media products on the market, but they offer nothing more than marketing to support their merits. Once a surface area is clogged with bio-films (bacterial slime) the pore size becomes moot.

Agreed


I have large commercial coral vats and fish systems with no rock for biological filtration. The substrate is a more efficient means of carrying out denitrification than rock. Sufficient nitrification is accomplished by the substrate even with the heavy bioload of newly imported coral shipments and subsequent die-off and mucous production, and over-stocked fish tanks with stressed fish.

The subtrate can be less or more effective depending on the system. However I think with many people moving away from DSB and going to thinner sand beds the use of rock is even more important.


Tanks with chronic nitrate problems are best dealt with by addressing import and export methods, mechanical filtration and through chemical filtration and with external deep sand beds.
That's one way. I prefer biological myself over mechanical or chemical filtration but they are all important! Granted with heavy bio-loads in some tanks even a ton of rock won't help.


In the matter of water-proof cement mixes, there are two ways of achieving this. One is to use a plasticizer like Sealbond, the other is to speed hydration through the use of polymers, calcium, micro-silica, or Co2. Any of these methods will render full hydration throughout the concrete, resulting in a more dense pore structure (waterproof). Type 1/11 portland takes 28 days to cure and will have a larger pore structure (more void space and less surface area). This is why all of these fast setting additives and mixes claim that the final product is stronger (more dense).

Density varies from product to product, depending on how quickly it sets. Once you add aggregate to these mixes, the waterproofing is lost. All of the fast setting mixes I've used allow water to penetrate through.

I would never ever use a water-proof cement for making rock. The problem with this is that it "seel" the rock and makes it very hard for water to pass through it. This pretty much kills off the denitrifing abilities of the rock as a whole.


If you are producing rock commercially, then it is wise to buy cheaper type 1/11 portland and store the formed rocks for 28 days. The retail store will likely have it on the shelf for a few weeks or months anyway.

I never said I didn't use I/II type cement. I add my own stuff to it to make it quick setting and to lower the pH. If I don't have to have it sitting around for a month I can turn it over quicker. I got an order yesterday for 600lbs of large pieces and they need it next Friday (one week from today) for a weekend install. If I don't happen to have enough large pieces in the wings I'd be in trouble. However the way I currently make the rock I can do this and give them rock next Friday that will be under 9 pH and closer to about 8.7-8.8 and these are large pieces. This size rock might take others 2 months to "kure" with normal I/II methods.

[/b]
I use fast setting mixes because I have a tight time line with construction schedules, and I don't mind paying twice as much. The added bonus for me is a stronger product with better bond to walls and PVC plumbing and a modeling clay texture.

As I stated before, I wouldn't use faux rock in an aquarium unless it was aquacultured. It takes six months to establish a tank with live rock. With dead rock, it takes over a year and biodiversity and Coralline algae coverage is still limited. You will acquire biodiversity from the rock base of corals, but the hobbyists using DIY rock are generally on a low budget and are stocking sparingly.

Manmade rock is definitely the way the industry needs to go, but only through a means of replicating the true benefits of live rock (the microorganisms they carry). [/B]

Where did you ever get 6 months from? Maybe to get good coralline algae growth but I can make rock today and put it in a tank with a little "plug" of coralline algae (starter) and have the tank stocked in a day or two (fish and corals including acros). Bio-Spira and Turbo Enzyme 900 will pretty much do away with cycling a tank and the bacteria takes to man made rock very well. Pods and other fauna can easily be introduced to a tank for a rapid start. (good amount of sand from another system can do almost as well). You just need to know how to do it (and I'm sure you do). I personally think things like the 1 year before sps rule is bogus but it takes most people that long to get the tank undercontrol, gain need knowledge and get plankton and whatnot going naturally. Nothing here that can't be introduced and augmented as the tank matures in the hands of an experienced person.

Carlo
 
Mr Wilson do you think that adding life sand as a construction material for the aquacultured rock would be beneficial to quicker establishment of bacteria in and on the rock? Or do you think the curing (Kuring) process will kill it off negating the benefit?

This whole thread is more a mental excersize 28 days for curing is not a long time and the majority of that time the material does not need to be submerged as most do it.

Robert
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10523826#post10523826 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by badfish03
Mr Wilson do you think that adding life sand as a construction material for the aquacultured rock would be beneficial to quicker establishment of bacteria in and on the rock? Or do you think the curing (Kuring) process will kill it off negating the benefit?

This whole thread is more a mental excersize 28 days for curing is not a long time and the majority of that time the material does not need to be submerged as most do it.

Robert

I agree, many of the methods and practices described in this thread are brain teasers and fun projects. For a one-off project, it would take longer to employ some of these curing methods than to just wait.

These experiments are valuable nonetheless as some will lead to new discoveries. I think advances will come from mistakes before they come from theory.

The cementing process will kill everything, so live and should be added later once the tanks running. As IR suggested in a previous post, you should add some live rock to the tank to seed it, then remove it later.
 
Woooo Hoooo....I seem to have found a local supplier of Silica Fume. The bags run $20 for 25#. Not sure if this is a good deal or not...
 
Cayars; My comments weren't directed at you or your practices.

What I meant with regard to biological filtration, is it is easily achieved and requires no special attention, thus resources are focused more on the other methods of filtration that are harder to perfect.

What I meant by it taking 6 months to a year for a tank to stabilize wasn't what people commonly refer to as "cycled", as the nitrogen cycle is continual. Ammonia is easily removed chemically and with bacterial inoculations, but nitrite doesn't even become a problem until several months down the road, and nitrate and phosphates may not peak until the six month mark. As a result, corals tend to recede and bleach and fish suffer from stress-related diseases. A mature tank has very few fish or coral mortalities and no algae plagues.

My definition of "stabilized" is the point in time when nitrate and phosphate are 0, nuisance algae appears only on the glass every three to four days and is limited to green slime algae, and the tank is ich and bacterial/fungal infection-free.

Yes, you can add fish and coral immediately to a new tank, but you will experience a longer period before the tank is truly stable, and greater risk of disaster. If you are trying to achieve this chemically with sterile rock, it will take months of dosing as you wait for each respective form of beneficial bacteria to develop.

I experience good coraline algae coverage on my faux rock walls at the six month point, but that's in a tank full of live rock.
 
How are you guys getting good natural looking rock? Ive only tried to make it once and it didnt come out very natural looking. Im talking about the shapes of the rock, not the texture.

wilson what kind of additives are you adding to shorten the cure time?

-Kurt
 
I spoke with the folks at Reef Balls....here is what they recommend for the addition of Micro Silica:

"Use about 5% microsilica by weight of Type II Portland Cement. Be sure to use a high range water reducer if your mold is complex and you need liquidy concrete. Do not use too much water in your mix. Cure at 80% or greater humidity for at least 30 day before using.

Thanks,"


Since they don't use Calcium Chloride to fast set I would guess that is why they recommend the 30 day cure (to complete the hydration).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top