A colleague of mine has recently bought one of those "bricky" devices. A sort of plastic guide which you lay on top of a row of bricks to control the depth of applied mortar. For some reason I seem to have "caught" the advert for this a few times recently.
My questions are:
Has anyone bought and used these (preferably someone who has tried conventional methods) and what are their findings in terms of usefulness etc?
On a more technical note:
ISTR at college being told that design strengths considered were based on bricks being laid "frog up", so that the entire brick void was filled with mortar, providing additional weight stability and a very positive key. I have never seen bricks laid this way! ALSO - the traditional means of applying a mortar bed by hand would result in a deeper bed, particularly toward the middle of the course. In the case of the "bricky" device, they were stating an engagement of 2mm (this being the amount that they expected the brick to be pushed down into the mortar bed). It seems to me that this will result in a fundamentally weaker bond, particularly for, say, garden walls which have no top bracing and will tend to be leant on and pushed.
Laying bricks frog down saves 10% mortar. I'm told all the main house builders insist on it for this reason. Brick walls as used in houses have a design strength way in excess of what's required for the task.
"bricky" clearly isn't a professional device. I don't think you should be expecting professional quality walls (in terms of strength) from using one. If you are interested in doing any serious brickwork (even just a garden wall), I suggest getting some training at a local building trades college on how to do the job properly. On a 2-3 day course, you will almost certainly build a garden wall as part of the training.
Yes, I got one for building my extension, along with the DVD (demo of building home office, barbeque etc). I started off using it. The main reason I stopped was that it only produces raked joints, which simply would not look right in relation to the house I am extending. Also these type of joints are not good for shedding water and would not be good practice in an exposed location (which mine is not !).
The first few rows I did were levelling from the foundation which needed variable mortar thickness so it was no good for that, and I kind of got used to doing it the traditional way.
Also, the idea of a template for the mortar courses relies on a very accurate brick sizes, so its essential to use accurate wire-cut bricks. I found the class A blue eng. bricks I was using were all a couple of millimetres too long (e.g. 217 mm), which was a problem, since you tapped them up and the mortar oozed, which meant you had to point it up traditionally.
Also again, if the mortar consistency is just right, I found the mortar beds produced by the tool were perfect for getting the 10mm bed when tapped down very lightly - the tool lays about 12mm, just allowing bedding OK.
But if you use a line and the bricky tool, you can find one fighting the other. Since I have to get accurate guaging for windows, doors etc, I was using a line on every row, and sometimes, you just need a bit more that 10mm bed and that becomes a problem. I think you have to get the courage to "just go with" the tool, and if you can it seems to be pretty good. But for lining things up with an existing building, variable sized bricks etc, it is not really suited.
But it gave me the courage to get started, which was a good thing. And it helps you keep brick faces clean. So far I have only used smooth engineering bricks, and any mortar on the face of these just washes off with a scourer and water the next day. And pointing up is not as easy as it seems the traditional way.
I still use the block edge template for buttering the side of the blocks, but have stopped using the bricky for anything else. The trad manner is simple more flexible.
Yep, frog down, only the edges are supporting the weight, which may be strong enough but its not good practice. Also makes bricks easier to tap down. However, I will be using wire cut bricks with the 3 holes in, not frogged. The frog makes firing more efficient, as do holes. I mean you get solid bricks with no frog or holes (like the blue eng. I am using).
Why ? You use a line to ensure constant guaging. Although the line can sag in the middle !
In my experience, 2mm seems enough - they have carefully thought and tested this. But you must push firmly and the mortar consistency is very important. A little bit firmer than usual I think, and wet the bricks to stop the prelayed mortar bed drying too soon. Of course with raked joints, there is less mortar area between the bricks. Bricks with holes and filled with mortar will help the bold also.
The traditional bricklaying notion of "suction" is very confused. It seems to equate the brick sucking water from the mortar with the "suction" holding the bricks together (due to partial vacuum which lifting etc), such that if the mystical "suction" is lost between bricks you need to re-lay the mortar bed. If you believe that, if seems that using the bricky will not produce this "suction" required for a good bond. What really happens is that with the trad idea of a sloppy mortar and dry bricks, once the brick has been layed it will dry the mortar quite a bit, thus lifting and relaying onto the now too dry mortar will not produce a good bond. But it is nothing to do with the magical "suction" when a will bedding brick cannot be easily lifted up. Having said that, if a brick cannot easily be lifted vertically after being layed, you can be sure the mortar is a good consistency and the bond is good. The bricky tool does not always produce this "suction", but still seems to produce a very solid bond if bedded by 2mm, in my exerience.
Frog down traps some air so might be slightly better, particularly for a solid wall. For an insulated cavity wall though most of the resistance (R-value) is in the insulation and I suspect frog orientation will make bugger all difference.
Think of the narrow edge supporting on a frog-down wall, especially if air gaps left. Then think about repointing (not so likely with cement mortars its true), and how much you would remove for repointing properly. You could break through into the air gap. One edge of the brick could end up totally unsupported. I've seen a housebuilders spec where the practice was banned. Simon.
Thanks for comprehensive response. Particularly interested in the comment on pointing which I had half noted IYSWIM while watching the video. To avoid all these brick laying hassles, I am actually considering using railway sleepers stacked 2 high as a dwarf wall/retainer.
=================================== For a dwarf retaining wall you might consider slotted concrete posts with gravel boards. Such a wall is quite strong up to about 3 feet high and it's quick and easy to build.
I've seen sleepers used for this, looks very good. Of course they must be treated with preservative if actually holding back soil.
There is also some interlocking blocks desgined for retaining walls, that are stacked so that they lean back at an angle against the soil. No mortar is used. Not sure what they are called.
Of course, if you want to learn bricklaying, a small wall is an ideal project. You can use 2 brick or block skins, wall ties and lots of concrete poured in between to make a very strong retaining wall.
Funny you should mention that. I was tiling (the bathroom) walls a little while ago. The old surface was a bit uneven, so I ended up chiselling all the old adhesive off back to the bonding layer of the plaster (very dry and a bit crumbly). Subsequently, I noticed that getting the "right" amount of adhesive on the wall made all the difference. Too little and the tile wouldn't stick; too much and the tile would "float" and then be inclined to slip down if the spacer fell out; just the right amount and the suction was incredible!
Mystical suction? Well, it depends what you mean by mystical, but it's the Holy Grail to be sought after...
Have done a couple of projects with a Brickytool and found it to be very good. As other have said, it's no good for building off an existing structure or if you don't like raked pointing, but otherwise it works well.
There are several archived posts about them.
Don't know if anyone has used this but it's been mentioned a few times:
formatting link
if housebuilders are laying bricks frog down to save mortar, I'm surprised they've not developed some way of laying a ring of mortar round the edge of the brick -- after all, that mortar at the centre that has only air above it isn't doing anything structural, is it? Probably a 50% mortar saving to be made that way :-)
Funny that - probably why Ibstock bother to produce Technical Information Sheet 25 - text below, with pictures if you go to the PDF itself. I have no idea whether three hole bricks are becoming more common but they certainly have not entirely replaced frogged bricks.
Laying ?frogged? bricks
British Standard Codes of Practice BS 5628-3 The Use of Masonry and BS
8000-3 Workmanship on Building Sites state that "Unless otherwise advised, lay single frog bricks with frog uppermost and double frogged with deeper frog uppermost. Fill all frogs with mortar....."
Bricks walls built with frogs down and unfilled are weaker and less resistant to sound transmission.
Advice should be sought as to whether bricks laid frog down are acceptable?. Many bricklayers prefer to lay bricks frog down as they believe it to be a faster method and it uses less mortar. However the performance of the brickwork can be affected by insufficiently filled frogs.
Strength and stability
Compressive strength tests on frogged bricks have traditionally required them to be fully filled with mortar beforehand. The resulting figures are used by engineers in calculating the loads brickwork can support. Brickwork with unfilled frogs will fail at lower loads.
Sound Insulation
Changes to the Building Regulations for England and Wales in 2003 require dwellings to be constructed to new Standards so as to reduce the levels of transmission of sound between and within dwellings.
For solid masonry walls the resistance to airborne sound depends mainly on the mass per unit area of the wall (density).
To maximise this:-
? fill and seal all masonry joints with mortar. ? use bricks that extend to the full thickness of the wall. ? lay brick frog up to achieve required mass per unit area and avoid air paths.
Fixings to Brick Walls
Fixings to walls must be used with care so as not to disrupt the brickwork. The whole structure is less fragile when the voids are fully filled with mortar and there is maximum bonding of all surfaces.
Aesthetics
When laid correctly, the creases on the face of handmade or simulated handmade bricks form a ?smile?. Aesthetically it will look better if all the bricks are uniformly laid but will also help to shed water.
Exceptional circumstances
In very exceptional circumstances It is possible to lay bricks with the frog down and fully filled but it can be time consuming and suitable for particular details only i.e. if ?handed? bricks are not available for either side of an opening it may be possible to invert some on one side.
This may not be acceptable for some textured products.
To lay bricks with frogs down and filled, the trowel must be loaded with sufficient mortar and brick and trowel lowered into position.
My 1930s house is all built with solid bricks. No frogs at all, or holes. They say "leamington brick company" on them (the town leamington spa is around 10 miles away). I think either way, holes or frogs, they should all be filled. You could drill into a brick wall and break though into a void when using rawlplugs etc.
Some of the newer bricks I've seen at the builders merchant have "very" large holes. So much so I'd rather use others. Anyone know how large the holes are likely to get ? You don't want a wall basically built or mortar ! Simon.
There is nothing new about three hole bricks - they have been around since the 1970s, and quite possibly longer. To describe them as "new" would therefore be highly inaccurate.
replying to TheScullster, Surveyor wrote: Frogs DOWN First understand the purpose for your choosen brick. On a house you will be using a cavity wall construction - the outer skin is the 'rain screen'. For a retaining wall it has to be dense high load bearing brickwork including the mortar to resist the latteral force and ground water. That also means frost - frost resistant bricks or Engineering bricks. In exposed areas with driving rain on the outerskin of a house [and frog up] the water tracks through the porous mortar and settles in the frog. In winter the freezing water expands and the bond is lost (Science). Better the frog down and the water can only track across the flat of the lower brick. Also on serve exposed sites it is recommended to form a gap in the mortar along the center of the brick to stop the water tracking across the brick joint. On the drying weather cycle (ave 14hrs England) this outer mortar will dry till the next down pour. Bring in waterproof additive to your mortar for your pointing to solid wall Victorian houses or on expossed sites. So with frogs down and trapped air; it is an insulator - and we know how hard it is to heat air up. Airated blocks, Glassfibre and foam with trapped air is a good insulator. (Inner construction to cavity walls.) If you have to have density for sound insulation then use a dense brick/block and standard mortar quantities in party walls and alike situations. Although floor joists front to back will send the transmitted impact sounds to the front or rear and not into your neighbours party wall. So choose the right brick for the task in hand. With that in mind you can see why specifications and manufactures say frogs up for increasing the strength of the wall. (wrong brick and waste of mortar). For domestic housing in the lowlands frog down on lovely bricks. For the peaks or exposed garden walls use solid bricks, frost resistant or engineering bricks and engineering bricks atleast 4 courses below the DPC at ground level where the brickwork is wet and subject to continual freezing. Why holes in bricks - to save on clay just like tins of tuna. Same size tin but continually less and less weight of tuna in the tin. Thank you to Mr Marshall my Senior Lecturer in 1973.
My semi is built with frogs down, including the double-brick party wall, joists are as you say front to back, but the lower density of the wall means minimal sound insulation from neighbours, e.g. I can not only hear them talking on the phone but I can hear the person on the other end that they are speaking to, even if I can't make out what the other end is saying.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.