Contractor Talk - Professional Construction and Remodeling Forum banner

The 1,000 year house

Tags
4th crap
20K views 98 replies 17 participants last post by  wazez 
#1 ·
#53 ·
"Before irregularities became coveted architectural effects, common bricks were a cheap and abundant resource--a prosaic building material for places generally obscured from street traffic: side and back walls, for example, chimney flues, and structural support behind facades. People sank their money into the more decorative "face brick," which tended to have a cookie-cutter uniformity and was shipped in from other areas. "

From here:

http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/1031.html

Back in the day they sorted the brick, either at the plant or at the site (most likely). I have seen too many pictures of wrecked walls with the exterior buff and the interiors pink for it to be a coincidence. And, as noted above, more expensive face brick were often used on the front of the building.
 
#55 · (Edited)
#44 Stuart45, I see G. Britain as a relatively smaller area then the English speaking Nations of North America...For better or worse the English speaking world is dominated by the USA & Canada culturally.

#45 Dom-Mas, Aren't all variations in bonding multiple wythe walls that don't show the inner construction "hidden" or "Secret" bonds....whether clip or half clip rake bond or the other possible variations, wouldn't necessity demand exact names?

I.e. “clip bond" is a fuzzy term that could mean several different bonds.

"more closely match reality", That means I believe my opinion is much closer to being what an expert 19th or early 20th Century mason knew. Many of the facts you believe are correct, but I think you have some ways to go to in your "big picture" historical accuracy, All trades in the 1850s USA onwards benefitted from massive never before occurring increases in Technology, and literacy that helped make our nation the exceptional place it was.

Felis concolor-Also Deer tiger, Mexican Lion, Panther, Painter,& catamount.
#46 You're welcome SUM.
#47, FJN, I don't think you quite pick up that I'm referring to the "Chicago Commons" demo brick piled in a pallet box and sold as being suitable for freezing exposures.
while a fraction of these brick(the ones formerly sorted by the masons laying the original "kiln run" commons) will last a 100 years as face brick, the majority won't.

If you are seeing 120 year old brick walls that have been out in the weather the whole time, they're not regular "common" commons.

Remember almost all the really poorly constructed buildings have been demoed, don't let the survivors form your idea of the average 19th Century structures that has long since been hauled to the landfill.

Yes, they are many buildings built out of sorted common brick, the softer/crooked/burnt units used as infill wyths... Very few modern masons grasp the difference of having 2/3 or more the units used appearance or weather resistance as insignificant. Thanks for the ticket offer, but no thanks, when I visit the relatives next winter, I'll E-mail you, if you still think I'm totally wrong.

#48, Stuart45, if you can see the brick, isn't it a common laid as a face brick?????
Re: The "overcoat effect" In colder climes, the walls built with absorbent materials will explode from frost damage.

#49-50, it’s a Trig, as in Trigonometry, the trig (third point in the line), twig is just a corruption of trig. As in a line with a properly sighted trig will have only 1/4 the sag of the untrigged line. A trig could be a 'snap-over' or a 'tingle' or a dollar bill/ five lb note with a brick on it. #50 it is a tingle acting as a trig. Never seen one before 45, I haven't read THAT book yet.
#52 Glad to of help make your day.
#53, preaching to the choir, Sir.

Ran out of materials today.:smile:
 
#56 ·
#44 Stuart45, I see G. Britain as a relatively smaller area then the English speaking Nations of North America...For better or worse the English speaking world is dominated by the USA & Canada culturally.

#45 Dom-Mas, Aren't all variations in bonding multiple wythe walls that don't show the inner construction "hidden" or "Secret" bonds....whether clip or half clip rake bond or the other possible variations, wouldn't necessity demand exact names?


"more closely match reality", That means I believe my opinion is much closer to being what an expert 19th or early 20th Century mason knew. Many of the facts you believe are correct, but I think you have some ways to go to in your "big picture" historical accuracy, All trades in the 1850s USA onwards benefitted from massive never before occurring increases in Technology, and literacy that helped make our nation the exceptional place it was.

:
Yeas more English speakers in the US now than in the UK. In 1850 there were more English speakers in The UK. And they had a MUCH longer masonry pedigree as well as closer ties to the Roman past of Western Architecture.

You can believe that the reference book I have a are just written by "some guy" They aren't. The one I can find right now was written by MAlverd A Howe who was a member of the American society of Civil engineers and wrote extensively about the technological aspects of masonry. He wrote many reference books, unlike the Audel series they are almost exclusively about masonry (including concrete) . Everything I have read in this book closely matches what i have read in other books by other authors from the time period. I'm not saying that this book is the be all and end all, but his definition, coupled with 3 or 4 other similar definitions leads me to believe it was a term that was used by LITERATE tradespeople.

Also the "clipped raked bond" or whatever you want to call it is so far the ONLY hidden bond I have seen, I think is was the most common hidden bond, so if an Arch specd hidden bond and that wall was produced he would have been happy

You use the words "believe" and "opinion" in your post. If you had used those words originally i don't think you would have gotten the same response. instead you came out saying "actually" as though you are the more/most informed person. You have SOME information, your weakness is that you don't believe anyone else has any more to give you. your loose

By the way that cop out by saying that since 80% of the bricks in a wall are inner wythes (assuming a 5 wythe wall I guess, a triple wythe wall it would be 66% and not even since the header course would be made of good brick as well) that means that chicago commons are a weak brick and never meant to be exposed to the outdoors is just a weak argument. It's the same everywhere.
 
#60 ·
Here is a real simple definition of "face brick" that I have to explain daily.

If I have a customer match his brick to a cube of bricks buried in the row of commons, then that is no longer a common, it is a face brick. That is to say, if you want commons, the ones at the front are them, no matter the color or texture. If you want THAT BRICK, back there, then it is no longer a common, it is a face brick and the price changes accordingly.

That is the only thing "common brick" means.
 
#62 · (Edited)
Dom-Mas, #56, I'd think most brick tech came to G.B. via the Dutch. Not so much from Roman empire Era.



I didn't invent the free market, but its the reason back up brick were made, sold, and used--Chicagoans would have used the cheaper softer brick in the back up wythes. Even the face header only needed a good end for show...



I'd suggest a little more study of brick manufacturing history, the vast majority of brick makers operated by guess and by gosh, rarely able to duplicate outcomes with clamp sytle kilns, many bricks were hard and well baked, most weren't.



I admit regarding the "half clip rake bond" the alternate course most of the time would have used some version of headers tying the most likely plastered interior wythe alternating with the Hidden bond courses, (Why clip all those units if not needed?).



A actual Tie course every Six course to both outer wythes would satistfy insurance requirements of the time, the remaining 4 courses could be any thing behind the running bond face brick.



GranMa hung clothes out all winter, But GrandPa used portland and lime mortars that wouldn't lose an eight of an inch every year from freezing and thawing.



lime based mortars here would have to be tuck pointed every decade where they're exposed to water and freezing. The caveat to this is that lime mortars will scacrifice itself by wicking most of mortar from softer (non-FBX) brick...



#58 Stuart45, I think if you checked your local lime mortars that were exposed to several freeze-thaw cycles and rain, you'd be able to detect damage to the mortar, especially during the your usually cold winters you've experienced recently. Darn Global warming.:smile:
Eventually you'll end up with dirty sand if any amount of water is passing through lime only mortars.

#60, "A willing buyer AND a willing seller make a deal..."

A soft brick used as an exterior face brick here will have to be replaced in 10 or 20 years. As with people, many brick are employed in inappropriate positions.
Even today many inferior grades of materials are used by the ignorant, lazy and dishonest, Why did the brick maker's Assc. in the Chicago area have Soooo many grades of 'common brick'? market needs/demands?

I my slightly more ignorant youth, I used save every left over unit I could with the idea they would end up as "commons" behind some face brick and save me enough $ to underbid my less frugal competition, sadly I discovered the chances to use the odds and ends were rarer every decade.
most of the time 4"CMUs were faster and cheaper as filler, nearly every 3+ wythe wall is design with a rebar and grout center.

A "common" brick is one that has unaltered fired clay/shale/grog surfaces. During most of my posts I referred to what are NOW known and sold as "Chicago Commons" and have been since the ~1960s across America.

Most Roman Empire/Republic Eras of masonry didn't use units that had any proportions having small common denominaters that ours do, the ratios of 1 to 3 of height to length, depth to length of 1 to 2 with a mortar joint.
So roman work provides little guidence on advanced bonding
 
#64 ·
Dom-Mas, #56, I'd think most brick tech came to G.B. via the Dutch. Not so much from Roman empire Era.


#58 Stuart45, I think if you checked your local lime mortars that were exposed to several freeze-thaw cycles and rain, you'd be able to detect damage to the mortar, especially during the your usually cold winters you've experienced recently. Darn Global warming.:smile:
Eventually you'll end up with dirty sand if any amount of water is passing through lime only mortars.
Gauged and Rubbed brickwork was thought to have come from either the Flemish, or the Dutch.

Lime mortar round here normally needs repointing every 50-100 years.
The recent winters have done more damage to modern London Brick Company Fletton face bricks than lime joints.
Lime mortar when used correctly will last a long time. The key is mixing it up right, using the correct sand, and protecting it from the elements in it's early days.
 
#63 ·
I'm not talking about technology...I'm talking about architectural terms, which is what YOU are talking about. Rome was the common denominator for all of western Europe....So if you want to have terms that apply across western construction techniques the only ones that will apply are the ones that come from Rome. The others are all regional.

You just hit it. your confusing common brick with backup brick.
 
#65 ·
"A "common" brick is one that has unaltered fired clay/shale/grog surfaces. During most of my posts I referred to what are NOW known and sold as "Chicago Commons" and have been since the ~1960s across America.

Most Roman Empire/Republic Eras of masonry didn't use units that had any proportions having small common denominaters that ours do, the ratios of 1 to 3 of height to length, depth to length of 1 to 2 with a mortar joint.
So roman work provides little guidence on advanced bonding "


Are you just making this **** up as you go along?
 
#66 ·
Nowadays there are 3 main types of clay brick in the UK.
Commons, which have no particular finish on any surface, and are used where they are normally covered or appearance is not too much of an issue.
Facing bricks
Engineering bricks.
Modern commons are generally fired as commons, although face bricks with chipped faces may also be used.
 
#67 · (Edited)
I assume we can use the Brick Institute of America and ASTM for a reference Forthgen?

ASTM C62 Building Brick (solid masonry units, more than 75% solid)
Grade SW, MW, NW (Severe Weathering, Medium Weathering, and No Weathering, i.e. backup brick, respectively).

ASTM C 216 Facing Brick
FBS, FBX, FBA (General use, tighter dimensional, and architectural, respectively)

Note that C62 is a physical properties specification (compressive strength, absorption, and saturation coefficient) and and C216 deals with the appearance of the brick (that will also be specified by the SW or MW designation).
 
#72 · (Edited)
Dom-Mas, I'm Talking BRICK LAYING terminology, journeymen should know humndreds of masonry terms that all but a few archtitects would never need to know.

I don't understand your seeking a final answers Re masonry nomenclature from archtitecture.

Tscar- No, take a look at the vast majority of Roman brick proportions, I have.

Stuart45, I used "common" red brick to veneer my house, just fired local shale ground and baked for 4-6 weeks. FBX, average break is around 13 K, they are just a little "glassie", low end of absorbtion.

Tscar, Regarding ASTMs etc.. is that the tail wagging the masonry dog(s)? What other craftmens use the terms of a second or third party?

Would salesmen like to follow the rules of brickie foremen?

While I'm all for national stanards for commodities used in construction,
The present set up has standard creep and board sandbagging by large organizations to achieve barriers to competition, leave plenty of room for improvement lowering the cost of the codes and removing crony regulations. And its a version of the Text book scam by charging hundreds and thousands of dollars for "updates" that only have 5-10% changes...
My last bid I got referrenced 15-20 ASTMs that would have cost my tens of thousands of dollars to buy a legal copy of each...

Imagine a Healthcare(masonry) system that allowed bureacrats to set methods and word choices instead of the practitioners(Masons)--(that would be CRAZY like O-care is).

FJN, oops I meant moisture.... Hard mortar and soft brick with freezing = rubble.

Stuart45, that is the difference between climate and weather, weather like last winter in England would destroy a lot of lime mortars if they occoured every year...

Tscar, And soft used "chicago commons" meet what standard?----C62 NW?
 
#77 ·
Stuart45, that is the difference between climate and weather, weather like last winter in England would destroy a lot of lime mortars if they occoured every year...
Last winter wasn't that bad here. Even so lime mortars have lasted through many bad winters without too much trouble.
If you go back in time the men who mixed up the mortar were experts in their trade. For the bigger jobs the lime gangs would arrive on site before the other trades and work out what mix was needed to match the climate and materials.
Some of the best gangs would travel all over Europe.
 
#73 ·
This is my last post on this because it has become beyond boring

I am talking architectural terms because it is architects who now and previously would spec which bond would be used in a building...NOT the bricklayer.

I'm done you are incredibly boring and don't bring anything to this forum. You should change your user name to TNTmasonryservices
 
#74 ·
Dom-mas, I'm sorry my belief that the practitioners of a craft ought to create the terms used among its masters and that they did. Enjoy your exciting life at the feet of your local architects.

I might be a boring ass, but I'm a well informed one.
We still have the right to be wrong in America. Enjoy yours to its fullest.
Good Bye.
 
#96 ·
If you truly believe that the practitioners of a craft ought to create the terms...then why are you referencing Audels? It was written by an engineer that specialised in mechanical engineering, particularly steam engines. Malverd A Howe on the other hand was an engineer that specialised in masonry construction. And taught at one of the pre-eminent universities in AMERICA...not Canada, not the UK but the USA, where you seem to believe that all masonry terms should come from.

And come on...you really think that a PCL mortar wins against water?


My son thinks he's well informed also. Mainly because most of his associates are also only 7 years old.
 
#75 ·
Sorry, fouthgen, but you are not informed. When you can speak of Vitruvious, Dinocrates, and all of the builders (because back in the day, "architect" meant "builder") since, then you can presume to know about Roman bonding and proportions. If you have looked at Roman brickwork and have been unable to determine the rationality of their techniques, then you are simply a fool.

As regards ASTM, if you understand what exactly they are and are not, they are there for the protection of craftsmen and trade. Hacks do not like them because they expose their deficiency; professionals rely on them to validate their work.

Chicago commons meet no standard, as there was no standard during their production. If tested, the buffs will meet MW and the salmons would rate NW.

And just FYI, I have 14 years in the field before I jumped the fence into material supply. My father is a civil engineer, and his father and his father before were all in construction and I have been on jobsites since I was 5.
 
#79 ·
Close your eyes Dom-Mas,
Tscar I'm talking unit proportions, Not "ideal ratios", the concept of modularity that makes the use of brick cheaper. Something your Roman builders didn't master. I'm a Mason not an Archtitect, I use masonry terms to describe my craft, your welcome to use whatever you want.

To my "limited" knowledge the vast majority of Roman era brick work was veneered with plaster, stone, or tile, appearence of the back up wasn't much of a concern.... Have you seen a roman rusticated "dutch" bond veneer stone?

If I was desidning a new building, I'd review some of the old masters works, even some Roman copies of the better Greek works...for layout of openings, watertables, facias, and etc...

If I had to lay out the bond of inside and outside corners of a 5 wythe modular brick wall for a 19th Century building, The Romans' BRICK WORK wouldn't have much to show me.

You misunderstood me, We need ASTM like standards, just some of them are being subverted for selfish uses, and more then just a little "text book" new editions profiterring.

Stuart45, Obviously lime mortars work, just think how much better the exterior wythes would weather with some portland cement in the mortar mix...
 
#84 ·
Tscar, Slaves aren't making my brick, I can't find at an economical cost units that resemble the ones in your picture, rendering the bond interesting but useless for modern materials.

The height of the unit + joint = 9,10,11 or 12th of the length + joint?
30,40% of the wall is Mortar...

The Romans had use of the "bat" I'll give you.

Show me... regarding bonding units that are made with ALL three dimensions that are ratios of the other dimensions. I.e. 3:1,1:3,2:1,1:2, and 2:3,3:2. Why worry about bonding odd proportioned bricks that won't ever be made again by any rational actors? They were "two manned" also in general....another money maker.

The Romans built some beautiful Buildings, again survivor bias after 2000 years more or less, the shoddy has long since disinterigrated, and the ugly were remodeled, but as font of wisdom regarding modular materials, not so much. Is there a pyprus out there with the "lost masonry bonds of the Roman Republic" I don't think it ever existed, unless some prefect rationallized brick shapes by fiat.

Stuart45, here we try to stop the moisture at the surface of the wall--lime mortars just slow it down as it passes?:smile: Clogging the pores is intential with PCL mortar.... differing strategies, surrender or exclusion?
I like the tensile strength of PCL mortars that allow the use of out of plumb and level units for rustic walls and its addded strength it brings to any structure it surrounds.

But I never get between a Man and his belief system---Ha ha.
 
#93 ·
.
Stuart45, here we try to stop the moisture at the surface of the wall--lime mortars just slow it down as it passes?:smile: Clogging the pores is intential with PCL mortar.... differing strategies, surrender or exclusion?
I like the tensile strength of PCL mortars that allow the use of out of plumb and level units for rustic walls and its addded strength it brings to any structure it surrounds.
PCL mortar has been in common use here as well since the 20's. However it does not stop moisture getting through the walls, which is why the majority of houses were built with a 2-3 inch air gap between the wythes since the 30's.
Clogging the pores is intential? I guess you mean intentional.
It's only recently been discovered about OPC in small amounts causing problems by weakening the mix and clogging the pores.
The main reasons that OPC was gauged into the mortar were economic reasons.
NHL 5 is almost as strong as OPC, but any of the NHL limes take longer to mix up. 20 minutes in the mixer, another 20 to fatten up and then mixed again for a few minutes.
The main point you were making was that lime mortars would have suffered badly in the last few winters in the UK, which they have not done.
 
#86 ·
Fourthgen, they do not have to economical to you, they were economical to THEM. You are judging their methods in light of current conditions, not the realities of when they were used. We are discussing the application of unitized masonry, not Roman economics.

No one is suggesting that modern masonry should resemble Roman masonry, and although the survivor bias you reference is a real factor, you have to admit that there sure are a hell of a lot of examples of the construction extant, from roads to wharves to commercial and municipal buildings. In fact I will go so far as to say that what they built that no longer exists does so because it was purposely destroyed, either in war, modernization, or natural disaster, not failure of the construction for the most part.

As for lime VS OPC, I just have one question for you:

Have you ever worked with hydraulic lime?

I know I haven't, but I have studied it and it's properties and applications. Hydraulic lime is pretty much non-existent in the US, but is/was common in England and the continent.
 
#87 ·
In fact I will go so far as to say that what they built that no longer exists does so because it was purposely destroyed, either in war, modernization, or natural disaster, not failure of the construction for the most part.


Very much true. Another reason much of the ancient world is now gone is because many structures were "cannibalized" for their readily available source of building material.


Case in point,Kephern the middle pyramid on the Giza plateau (the one on our dollar bills) only has it's casing stone intact at the very apex. It and the two other accompanying pyramids had their casing stones stripped around 1356A.D. to build other structures.
 
#88 ·
The key to the above statement is the three letter word "try". And here in is where the rub comes in. OPC try as it does to clog the pores and establish a water barrier eventually is breached ,either by the joint or the masonry unit. Once that barrier is compromised the trouble begins.


OPC does have its merits however,those merits do come at a cost.One of it's "attributes" if you want to call it such is it's rigidity. Any mason who has a foot in both arenas (new / modern work and lime based mortars) will quickly recognize the limitations of OPC.


Some of its limitations resulting from its rigidity and eventual failure to totally block water intrusion can be seen every day on modern construction sites.Because of it's "unforgiving" nature we as masons are required to install a whole host of accouterments to accommodate for those limitations. They come in the form of base flashing,head flashing,control joints,expansion joints,weep vents,end dam flashing,heck,even the exponential increase in masonry sealers are proof enough that OPC is not very successful at stopping the water.

My gosh,a modern mason spends almost as much time installing the accouterments as they do laying the masonry units.


Aside from the time and cost of installing these accessories,IMHO the visual impact on wall bonds / patterns by expansion joints every so many feet on center and at spandral beams is a visual assault that was not necessary before the advent of OPC. So yes,it does come at a cost.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top