authentic building materials?

[robgil]

whilst doing the garden i had to cut down loads of elder tree bush things , this would be great for wattle i thought but as i understand it they would have used hazel?
so , this got me thinking , to restore an old house built from vernacular materials would it not be appropriate to do the work from what ever there was locally available even if the original materials we no where to be found in the area? so to repair a hazel wall would it not be appropriate to use elder because this is the only thing locally available?

 

[philpjuk100]

When my clock fell off the wall it took largish chunk of lime plaster with it,the plaster was laid on woven twigs(as we are on the river bank I guess this is probably willow)on cutting down some willows it seemed a shame to burn them and There was a gap between the shed and the hedge so I wove a panel from the willow rods to fill it,phil.

 

[JoceAndChris]

Nice!

Rob, as you know there are no hard and fast rules on the subject. But what you're talking about (apart from the environmentally friendly aspect I presume) is the emotional connection with the building and the materials it's comprised of.

There is something lovely about using local materials and styles, especially when you know that your kind of stone or thatch is typical for the region and not found much elsewhere (like my old limecrete floor)- be it the material or the way it's used. It's one of the things that bind us to a building, or place, and I suppose also one of the reasons why many might identify a certain housing estate type building as faceless or bland.

I must say I get great satisfaction out of using stuff from the garden -the windowsill was filled with stone, wood repairs have come from trees- I've just patched the road with stones from a cleared flower bed. There's an economy and simplicity to such repairs that's very satisfying too.

You do need to find out about the respective properties of hazel versus elder though - is hazel stronger and straighter?

 

[Flyfisher]

I'd be surprised if there was no hazel in the area; it's pretty common throughout the UK. I think Joce also makes a good point about suitability of materials. OK, there wouldn't have been an infinite choice of local building materials, but some of those available materials would have been better than others.

Of course, hazel may not have been commonly used for panel infills, even though it seems to be commonly found these days, which could imply it's quite durable in that application. Perhaps elder was also used but didn't last the test of time? Pure conjecture though.

I don't really know how durable elder is, but all the ones I've cut down seem pretty 'soft and wooly' to me. But you could always do a controlled experiment and repair one panel with hazel and one with elder and publish the results in 50 years time. :wink:

 

[Penners]

I've always understood that the staves used in wattle were usually hazel. But I find it difficult to believe that this was a hard-and-fast rule. As you suggest, if no hazel was available, I'd bet that pretty well any local youngish hardwood would have been pressed into service. For the average vernacular dwelling, I don't imagine hazel staves were brought (expensively) in from other areas.

I wonder what the durability of various timbers is, in this application. I suggest you use whatever local wood you can, then get your great-grandchildren to check on its condition in 100 years or so.

 

[robgil]

i woundlt have thought a hard wood was entirely necessary , a coppiced soft wood might have been better as it would grow quicker? after all its just an infill that would be daubed over so no real strength in the staves would be needed. hazel may have been used for the wattles because it could be weaved without splitting perhaps?

 

[robgil]

well , as it turns out this cottage has not got wattles woven into staves.
its got staves all right , still in the round but the wattles are nailed to the oak wall studs and the staves and wattles are bound together with what looks like hemp rope.
the wattles , if we can now still call them that look to be made from a soft wood , the rings on one are fairly widely spaced.

this form of wattle is evident all over the cottage.

 

[middi]

Given the choise, and depending on the status and age of the building, the studs would have been groved the whole length and "muntings" ( planks of oak) chamfered and fitted in the groves between the studs.( very common in the 12th, 13th and to some extend in the 14th C.)
In cases where good quality studs which are groved the whole lenth but staves and wattle and daub is used it is a sure indication that they are reused studs, or, a noble idea to infill with oak that never came to fruition.
The next step ( more pronounced from the 15thC onwards) was to just cut slots in the studs and force oak staves in between these uprights with split oak wattles tied on to these usually with willow.
On the later centuries and on the " run of the mill" cottages they would have used anything the local builders could have laid their hands on, but, good builders would have taken notice which material was more durable for certain applications, this is why the standard application on wattle and daub construction was always oak,elm,ash,willow and hazel. The reason why other " local" wood materials were not used in abundance was because either these could not have been obtained easily in large quantities or would rot too quickly.

The truth is that if it grows in your garden you can use it, as to how long it lasts ?. well. there aren't many examples of elder building construction still standing. This should give you some idea.

 

[robgil]

point taken , perhaps elder isnt the best choice , shame though , ive got tons of the stuff. willow sounds about right though , apparently it was everywhere round here.

 

[chuckey]

Yes but what if the local material is not of the correct grade? The traditional Wensleydale cottage is built with sand dredged out of the river Ure. I am repointing my barn at the moment and find that the lime mortar is a soft sand with a lot (>10%?) of earth in it along with a large amount of soft white lime balls where they could not be bothered to mix the mortar properly. Am I going to duplicate this?, I think not. Like wise the timber used in the rafters and purlins seem to be a lot pliable (bendy) then current wood available. I can't see how they could grow a weaker sort of tree, but they managed to.
Frank

 

[Carol]

We found wattle and daub made with what we are sure was woven willow behind some 1970's plasterboard here in Somerset. We do have a lot of willow here even now!

 

[robgil]

I think i am just wondering about historical correctness v's historical building technique correctness. What i mean is if your building was listed and you needed to repair some wattle , and lets say the original wattle was willow however there was no willow locally available would it be appropriate to use what ever you could find? because that's how the original builders would have done it , or , would it be appropriate to use willow grown somewhere else , thus losing the buildings vernacular status?
is it still a vernacular building if you have to use materials that are bought on the internet from a company 200 miles away? which is more important , keeping the building as true to vernacular as possible or keeping the materials as close to the original as possible?
just wondering what peoples thoughts are on this.

 

[AMc]

I would focus on using the same material as before on the basis that if it was used the first time and has shown to be fit for purpose then it would be the most appropriate to use again regardless of source. If you use something different but local and it fails to stand the test of time then next owner won't know what should have been there.
But I wouldn't be overly hung up either way.
I understand why thatchers are using reed on buildings that originally had straw - given the limited number of craftspeople and the expense of the job using a better, non original material seems to be a fair compromise albeit not a purist approach.

It is odd that when I was recently buying NHL5 lime I had an English company offering me lime from Germany or France.
For a lower carbon building material it sure has a lot of road miles on it.

 

[Penners]

I would focus on using the same material as before on the basis that if it was used the first time and has shown to be fit for purpose then it would be the most appropriate to use again regardless of source. If you use something different but local and it fails to stand the test of time then next owner won't know what should have been there.
But I wouldn't be overly hung up either way.

I reckon that's good advice.