20x20 Tile

Tom R

Taunton Press books are definitely the most informative available, IMO.

And I have 'scores' of books . . .

__________________
http://www.tr-built.com

Bud Cline

All of those books have something to offer. None of those books seem to follow an "industry line" too closely when it comes to approved methods. Haven't seen any of the recent Taunting publications, maybe they have improved although I doubt it. Some of the authors are quite informed and been around a long time but some of the information is shoot-from-the-hip at best in my recall.

Tom R

If you feel you know more, - - I'm sure there are publishers waiting . . .

__________________
http://www.tr-built.com

Bud Cline

Yow I know I know, you and Coops must have the same manager. I'm done with this thread.

Tom R

I have no idea what you're referring to, - - but I'm sure it's quite irrelevant in the grand scheme of things . . .

__________________
http://www.tr-built.com

HS345

With 20x20 tile I wouldn't even consider anything smaller than a 1/2x1/2 square notch, and even with that I'd back butter.

Personally, I would use a 3/4" u-notch and skip the back buttering. But that's just me.

As for the oozing problem, I would rather contend with a little oozeage cleaning than have poor coverage under the tile.

Floordude

Guys besides a tool to get the mortar on the substrate. A trowel is a measuring tool. The notches measure out the amount of mortar that gets on the substrate.

OK, if a 3/8 trowel gets coverage on a smaller tile. It is in theory, going to get the same coverage on a bigger tile. Why would it not, if the substrate was as flat as a pane of glass? How thick is the mortar bed under the tile. It is going to be the same, for all sizes of tile. This is just common sense. Now, go to a bigger notching. Are you going to get a better bond, if the smaller notch provided, equal and plenty of coverage before.

The kicker is, the flatness of the substrate and the profile of the back of the tiles. The bigger format of tiles makes the ability to level the tiles harder with less mortar, and you will not get near the coverage because of it.

__________________
**Education is the key to success. Learn more, earn more.**
http://www.AustinFloorguy.com

Bill_Vincent

Tom, What Bud's referring to is that fact that most books on tile setting aren't worth the ink used to print them. Unless they're written by someone Like Mike Byrne, or Tom Meehan, I wouldn't trust them.

As for the whole trowel size thing, with a tile that size or larger, the SMALLEST trowel I'd consider using is 1/2x1/2, and that's only with flat troweling the back of the tile, and ONLY if the subfloor is just about perfectly flat. Otherwise, it's 1/2x3/4, and it's medium bed mortar instead of thinset, and preferrably, they'd be mudset, instead. For large format, I'll choose mudset any day of the week, if I've got anything to say about it (I know-- that isn't very often). Otherwise you're pulling your hair out to get a perfectly flat floor.

__________________
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're probably right."

http://www.creativeceramicandmarble.com

HS345

While this would seem to make logical sense, in the real world, it does not.

Large format ceramic tile tend to be "domed" a little bit, even though they may not appear so to the naked eye. This makes it impossible to get good coverage in the center of the tile with a smaller notch, without adding extra mortar to the center of each tile. This will only slow you down.

You do make a good point about the extra mortar being needed to keep larger tile on plane, one that I failed to mention in my last post.

Hey there Bill, you look very familiar to me, hmmmmm, I just can't place where I've seen you before.

Bill_Vincent

Yeah, I'm a tile slut. I get round.

I may be easy, but I ain't CHEAP!!

__________________
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're probably right."

http://www.creativeceramicandmarble.com

Twust1285

1/2x1/2in is the standard. Unless there are other things that need to be considered, like the floor being really bad, but the point is on a 20x20 I would never go below a 1/2x1/2 trowel, the tiles are just too big, and no floor is perfect. Most of the builders I sub for don't mind (so much) time or money, so for me I usually will just mudset tiles of that size and up. Also anything over a 16x16 is a new price range, it just takes ALOT more time to set them right, level and with no lippage.

P.S. I just read Bill's post after I posted, did not mean to repeat, I read the post and replied, and this is why I like reading Bill's posts our work seem to be similar, and not to mention most of the other guys on here try to say that the way I do things (mudset) is a dead art, takes too long BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. If you do not have enough time, and you really should mudset then you should fight for time, and money. It's worth it for me, less headaches honestly, and getting paid in the high $20/sqft always works for me also.

jarvis design

I have found that the flatness of the floor is so important with larger tiles.

A 1/2 x 1/2 trowel, once applied and the tile set will yield about an 1/8" of mortor - of course depending on the texture of the tile, etc.

Whatever trowel you are using, always lift a tile to check for coverage.

I believe that 90% transfer is what you are going for (minimum), unless doing exterior where you need 100%.

www.jarvisdesignbuild.ca

nwtile guy

I did a floor a couple weeks ago with 20 by 20's and used a 3/8 by3/8 notched trowel and it worked great. The floor was nice and flat though! I agree with most of the guys here and have that 1/2 incher ready to go.

__________________
Chad

Twust1285

I personally would never go less than a 1/2x1/2 on a slab there is just no way the floor is going to be level or flat enough. The way these guys poor slabs there are rolls and valleys and pitches where there should not be. The only time I would go less is if I would to screed the entire floor of MYSELF first, which i have done before on decks and also inside of large homes when flagstone style mudset was not an option either due to price or Rinker being out of my special sand which has been alot lately.

OCRS

There used to be a post right before mine. It was a spammer selling tools or something. It started with "thanks,....tools..." and then a web site. That's why I'm doing the shake the head thing.

Bud Cline

Twust,

Aren't you the guy that is selling-off tools and pulling up stakes and moving 1300 miles because you have no work where you are now?

Bill_Vincent

Not for nothing, but I agree with him. Anything less than a 1/2x1/2 on tile that big, and you're asking for trouble. Even with the 1/2x1/2 you're going to need to flattrowel the back of the tile. I'd be willing to BET that you won't get adequate coverage with 1/4x3/8, unless maybe you notchtrowel both the floor and the back of the tile.

__________________
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're probably right."

http://www.creativeceramicandmarble.com

MattCoops

Why do you have my name on your tongue?

Not for nothing, but if you need a book, or even a "standard" to tell you what size trowel to use for a job then you should stay in the library and off the jobsite.

Mix up your thinset, slap it down and trowel it, beat in your tile. Then lift your tile up and check your coverage.
Call me a rebel, but if you're doing residential work, even the standard doesn't even call for 100% coverage. It's not hard to achieve.

__________________
Matt with Cupan Custom Tile & Paint of Lowell, Massachusetts
Design and installation of ceramic tile and natural stone for floor, wall, and countertops
(978) 601-8774 | cupantile@gmail.com | view tile pictures and more

R&D Tile

Good thread, carry on.

ridewags

1/2x1/2 is what I would be using