Choices for internal walls

[Cloudscape]

I know I have more important things to do to my house (mainly stone with internal timber-framing) - like... just about everything. :shock:

But something that's bugging me. In the whole house, there's just two badly-constructed stud-partition walls. One divides the front room into two rooms, the other carves what would otherwise be a ridiculously large landing into a more reasonable landing and a bedroom.

I don't want to lose the downstairs one that makes the two rooms. I want two rooms. The ceilings have a lot of character in those rooms (big beams and lots of joists. The fireplaces are modest Georgian or early Victorian. The floors are rough old parquet.

But something about the naff wall, the badly constructed doorframes... everything about it is starting to bug me. The house is hundreds of years old, but I think this wall is mid 20th century.

The one on the landing bugs me more. It's surrounded by big beams and heavy OTT timber framing. The wall is in the wrong place, splits one side off a fireplace and...

Again, it's something about the whole nature of the wall that bugs me. This wall was put in in about 1980, I think. I also don't want to lose the bedroom. The landing would make an even better bedroom, but it would be a walk-through room.

What are the choices for walls?

I could tidy it all up, or re-do the plasterboard and improve on the nasty 60s-looking timber skirting and other mouldings.

Can visible new timber-framing work next to dark old (very dominant) old timbers? Has anyone done this?

Or just make a nice plain oak architrave for the doorway?

Is there something I haven't thought of that would bridge the gap between the interesting/old and naff/newer?

 

[Cloudscape]

Thinking further on this - maybe what bugs me is the use of off-the-shelf mouldings, such as thin skirtings and various basic door architraving. It's just been done to 'edge' the plasterboard. All the rest of the timber in the house (excluding the windows, but including the doors) looks very hand cut (or chopped).

It's the leap from historic timbers to naff modern mouldings that's bothering me, I think.

Can very plain simple wooden frames and skirtings work?

 

[Gervase]

You could make new stud walls and lath them and then lime plaster, with mouldings and skirtings from a timber mill rather than a DIY shed - you'd get a greater choice. Or, if you find you're happy with the current wall locations, even keep the existing studwork, ditching the boarding and mouldings, and lath over that.

 

[Cloudscape]

Ah... thanks, Gervase. You're right. It's the materials that are giving out all the wrong signals. That and the worksmanship. :wink: :shock:

 

[middi]

It is obvious that partitions have been erected purely to satisfy the previous ownners needs, it is also quite obvious that the previous choise of materials or location is unsuitable for you needs.

Simple then, get rid of what you don't like and rebuild again with something that you do like.

One word of advise here, If your building is a few hundred years old the new partitions ( either yours or previous) are most likely to be an "extra" which were never intended to be fitted in the building. Sometimes it is more effective to keep things very simple, such as doors and doorways, these could be simply made ledged and braced oak doors fitted into sturdy square oak frame, no architraves at all.

 

[Penners]

I agree with Middi. In a fine old timberframe building it's often advisable to keep modern alterations very simple and plain, rather than trying to add a pastiche of the original.

I also agree with Gervase that getting rid of the plasterboard and replacing it with lath and lime plaster will soften the look of the new walls, making them much more sympathetic. And simple, traditional mouldings (or even no mouldings at all) on skirtings and/or architraves will sit happily with this.

Can we see some photos?

 

[Cloudscape]

I'm following this thread closely http://periodpropertyshop.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=8571, because it's helping me a lot with my long waffly questions.

I suppose my situation is similar. I haven't peeked behind my plasterboard yet, but I get the feeling it's all been done since the 50s. I know one short section was done in the last five years, but I might get a surprise with the others (I hope).

I wondered to what extent a stud partition wall might be structural - or at least performing some level of support function. One of mine hugs a long very old purlin, and you have thought that the extra support would be welcome.

In fact this wall crosses the other stud-partition wall I have on the ground floor. Because the house has been extended in width, at least twice, the main floor/ceiling beams between the ground and first floors are in odd places, leaving quite a long run of joists in the middle. The ground-floor wall must be helping take some of the bounce out of these joists?

Actually, thinking about it, there's a 1.5m section of stud-partition wall elsewhere in the house. I think it's replaced old timber framing, or else closed a gap when some rooms were reconfigured (donkeys years ago). I've a sneaking suspicion this section of wall is also acting as a crutch.

Surely, in these older houses, almost anything is possible as different tradesmen came and went - some real craftsmen, but not all. Or when you have to get on with life, you do whatever works.

I think you guys are totally right though... keep it simple.

I like the idea of butt-and-bead wainscotting for at least one wall, if I can source some that looks the part. Otherwise it'll be simple wall finishes and plain timber frames around the doors (where needed).

Does anyone know how far back (in time) butt-and-bead panelling goes? And is the best way to fix it by pinning into the groove?

I'll try and take some pics to show what the problems are.

 

[Penners]

I've always associated wainscot-type boarding with the Victorians. I don't know whether it goes back earlier. I'm sure others will know.

Pinning it through the groove (known as "secret" fixing) is visually very good, because you have no nail-heads to hide on the face of the boarding. But with thin matchboard it's quite difficult. The wall of the groove is very thin, and is liable to split off when you pin through it. I should try it and see how you get on. The thinner your pins the better. It's also a good idea to grind the point off the pins - this tends to make them rip through the wood fibres, rather than forcing them apart, and can help to reduce splitting.

As to whether your modern studwork walls are providing any support for the old timber-frame - that's very difficult to say. Of course any posts underneath a long spanning beam will help to support it, and to make it more rigid, but who can say whether the beam would be OK without the studs?

 

[Cloudscape]

My camera's gone awol. I had to rummage through old pics to find examples of the 'newer' vs the old. This is probably the worst clash, for me. Old timbers, wobbly walls and old floorboards... with dead flat plasterboard wall and naff mouldings.

(Yes, that is an example of some of the creative wiring in my house :shock: )