Finished result looks a bit unsightly, though.
- posted
17 years ago
Finished result looks a bit unsightly, though.
Can't argue with the logic of it I suppose, but I didn't think porcelain was porous.
Ok for that old eyesore though
>
================================ This subject was discussed here about a year ago and the informed opinion then was that they don't work.
I can't find a reference but I think there will soon be people along to give the technical details (for why they won't work) which were quite convincing as far as I remember.
Cic.
IIRC the conclusion was that you might just as well drill holes and not bother with the tubes :-)
Peter
No. the tubes salt up and no furher evaporation can then occur. But youre thinking along the wrong path altogther. If there is a damp problem, it doesnt need a (steeply priced) magic treatment, it needs the cause putting right. It aint rocket science, just sort out whats gone wrong.
Theres a great deal of misinformation about damp n the world. It its an old house, try
Perhaps someone should tell the conservationists at Westminster Abbey
Used to be called Doulton Wallguard. They went broke.
A donation to the restoration fund can work wonders with conservationists.
unglazed ceramic objects are cheap enough if anyone wants to try it.
NT
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.