Indeed. I said "at least not legally".
If any of the applicants for the job described themselves as an architect, then they are commiting an offence. The term comes from the US, where no such law exists. As you can see, enforcement in this country is less than total.
Christian.
At least Jon Rouse and yourself are in agreement about something! My interest is precisely that, the use of modern materials in restoration. PVA and SBR added to cement mortar gives it extra flexibility which *I* think can make it a good substitute for lime mortar in old buildings. Some water resistance at least.
Technically Thompsons isn't silicone, and isn't a coating. It consists of siloxanes, a kind of rubberised grease. Basically the same stuff used in dpc injection but doesn't work as a surface treatment because it is eventually dislodged by the elements.
Glad to hear that. I've used polyester resin and rods to repair many a sliding sash window that would have ended up in the skip otherwise. Restoration shouldn't just be about stubbornly sticking to traditional materials. And as for that bloody IMM, I applaud his right to comment but I do wish he'd SNIP. Like most idealists he has no real regard for anyone else.
stuart noble wrote
in message news:Kp2Yb.6767$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net...
You may well be right. I have clients to worry about, and I would need to see it in action successfully for a good length of time before I'd be convinced enough to recommend it to them. I'd be interested to hear about any research results you get theough!
I just wish he'd check his facts before he starts an argument, or at least question things in a more polite way.
Peter
Mark wrote
OK but I can't make any sense of it without seeing some photos. A sketch plan would be helpful too. If you can't mail me, can you put anything on a website?
Please answer the following to enable me to picture the house properly:
1 Whereabouts in the country is this? (the county will do). Local construction methods and materials are important. 2 I take it this is a terraced house with external and party walls of solid brickwork about 240mm thick overall, with bare facing bricks (no rendering) outside and plastered inside, and internal walls on ground floor about 140mm thick overall, solid construction with plaster both sides. If not please correct me. 3 Is there a typical Victorian rear addition? 4 Exactly which walls are affected by dampness and which appear to be dry? Can you give any possible explanation why there is dampness in only some of the walls? 5 Is there a physical DPC anywhere at all? Has any chemical dpc or other form of damp-proofing been attempted in any of the walls in the past? 6 What is the external ground level in relation to floor level at front and rear? 7 How deep is the floor void now you've cleared it out? Is the oversite bare earth or is there a surface or any kind? 8 Are there any areas of solid ground floor in the house and where is this in relation to the damp walls? 9 Are you dooing all the work yourslef or do you have a builder? 10 How would you describe the overall condition of the house?That'll do for starters. I'll have more questions later about the quotations you've received.
That's about normal.
I don't see a problem there. The real problem occurs when the fluid disappears down a void inside the wall which you don't know about.
I still feel a chemical dpc is the best method for you, short of cutting out and installing a physical dpc. It's certainly much cheaper. The membrane system will need to go up to at least ceiling height at ground floor level. It will only hide the dampness and I'm worried there's a risk it might cause it to spread. Also, it is impossible (and nullifies the guarantee) to fix anything to the wall mechanically if you haven't put the fixings in to start with. So you won't be able to put up any shelves or even hang pictures unless you glue them.
There are various other ways to provide a chemical dpc other than fluid injection. There's the gravity system where the fluid infuses into the wall slowly from individual pots, which I've generally found very reliable, and various pastes and gels etc. Also it needn't take months to dry out, and you can plaster straight away if you use Limelight or other renovating plaster.
Come back to me with answers and hopefully a sketch plan.
Peter
In article , stuart
Indeed current thinking in all bit the least informed circles is that it is a myth. We seem to be the only country in the world to experience the phenomenon - no doubt because we are the only country with a rising damp industry.
Clearly you have not studied Roman buildings, nor mediaeval ones.
Come back in 2000 years time and tell us if they are still standing, the Roman ones are!
Expert!
J.
In article , IMM writes
Yes, and in most cases the surface available for evaporation is twice that in contact with the ground.
J.
In article , Peter Taylor writes
Good points well made. I'm afraid I cringed when my comments were so close to those made by those I don't hold in such a high regard as yourself, sorry . . .
In my field, electronics, innovation is everything :-!
Construction? They have never heard of the word!
restoration.
I am not an idealist. I am down to earth pragmatic.
I am the epitome of politeness.
I don't think he intends the wall to last 200 years.
No, I specifically referred to Victorian buildings. I've no doubt that lime mortar works well in certain types of thick walled buildings where it never fully dries. But I know from experience that it is next to useless in the repair/ re-pointing of 9" brickwork, where it is vulnerable to the next downpour. IME most Victorian mortar is a crude form of hydraulic lime where they chucked in handfulls of brick dust, and any other rubbish they had lying around, to achieve a quick set. So, although technically they used lime mortar, I doubt if the real benefits of lime ever existed. Volcanic ash pozzolans were probably far more sophisticated but those classical geysers weren't exactly in a hurry by our standards.
In article , stuart noble
In article , stuart noble mortar works well in certain types of thick walled buildings where it never
I really don't know where you get your strange ideas from - not been talking to the RICS have you? A well pointed wall is going to have dry mortar in it - the whole idea is that the moisture can evaporate from both the brick and the mortar.
Then you are mixing it incorrectly. You have to keep it damp whilst curing but once set it will withstand the heaviest of downpours.
They weren't interested in speed. It is unusual to find hydraulic limes in building mortars.
SO that must be why all the pre-war houses have fallen down then.
What have hot-water springs got to do with the topic?
J.
Ok Thanks. I'll do a floor plan and take some pictures, and post again with all the info you asked.
-- mark
I can't see that there's too much difference between hydraulic lime mortar and cement mortar. If it sets underwater, it can't then be said to have healing properties. It sets and has total water resistance, end of story.
In article , stuart noble healing properties. It sets and has total water resistance, end of story.
I was thinking of a partially hydraulic lime, not an eminently hydraulic one - I don't think too many of us will be building lighthouses!
J.
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.