circa 1800 cottage, internal wall question

[joechip]

This is my first post so hello to all. I have been reading the forum for a week or so and thought I would ask for some opinions of what do do about an internal wall we have taken down. We have been working slowly on a renervation of two downstairs rooms in our circa 1800 stone cottage.

Unfortunatly my father died last month and he was the practical one in the family so I will not be doing any construction myself, i'm just taking things down and doing the unskilled parts to try and keep costs down.

The problem I have now is an internal wall between the main living room at the front of the house and a smaller room also at the front of the house which we call 'the snug'. The wall is plasterboard on a wooden frame and on taking the plasterboard down and exposing the frame i'm wondering if there is anything I can do to keep a frame showing and plaster between like you see in these old cottages. I don't want it looking like a pub though but I guess not having them in black will solve that one.

The wood does not look like oak to me and is quite rough cut, i'm wondering should I build a new frame with reclaimed oak (or perhaps some other type of wood). I also don't want a door frame like the one that is there but also use reclaimed wood set into the plaster for a more cottage look.

I would also like to replace the main upright support beam with an oak beam set back a few more inches into the wall as it sticks out a little and is leaning slightly although i'm aware this may not be cheap.

A lot of what we now call 'features' seem to have been ripped out of the place probably in the 1930's when the crittle windows were put in. We are replacing those with oak framed windows, having slate tiles put down etc to try and get some of the 'feel' back. We absolutly love this cottage and want to get it feeling right.

I've attached some photo's which should make it easier to understand what my situation is. As it stands now i've got all the plasterboard and beams down (not the main supporting beam of course). I also have a question about the floor (or rather lack of it) under the old wall but i'll post that in a follow up over the weekend with pictures to save getting this post too long. Thanks in advance for any advice.

Regards,
Garry

Picture above, we had some damp in the right corner but since opening it up and taking off the thick wallpaper on the other side of the stud wall it has dried out somewhat so i'm hoping it's just a case of repairing the wall but this time letting it breath.

Picture above, close up of one of the beams, not sure what type of wood this is. It looks as though it has been previously used in the wall as there are many stud holes all the way up.

 

[Moo]

It looks to me like stud-work from which lath-and-plaster has been removed (all those closely spaced horizontal marks....).
If it is, then the exposed wood would have been nothing special.

If you don't want to move/remove the wall, and are aiming at a 'cottagey' look, why not just replace the lath-and-plaster*


*lime, of course.

 

[Ian Bond]

If I was doing that myself, I may lath and plaster the wall both sides. It look to me exactly as Moo says.

To pay someone else to lath and plaster it.... Well beyond my means.

An alternative is to board and skim with a lime plaster, using an appropriate board, e.g.

http://www.mikewye.co.uk/Invotek_Strawboard-Panels_Lit.pdf

Just an idea. There's strawboard, reed board, clayboard. Cheese board

The PPUK Shop has a reedboard for sale, see Plasters and Mortars / Plaster Backgrounds.

Quicker than lath to install, and you can still apply a lime plaster. Then limewash for a beautiful finish.

I suppose you could just board one side, then plaster the other between the studs leaving them exposed. This would not be the 'correct' finish as those studs are not for show.

They are lovely though, with all the lath marks and nail holes, and so much more character than modern planed and squared timber. It would be a terrible shame to chuck timber of (what looks to be) that quality away.

From those few pics it looks like an interesting and lovely cottage you've got there. Best of luck with it all.

 

[joechip]

It looks to me like stud-work from which lath-and-plaster has been removed (all those closely spaced horizontal marks....).
If it is, then the exposed wood would have been nothing special.

If you don't want to move/remove the wall, and are aiming at a 'cottagey' look, why not just replace the lath-and-plaster*


*lime, of course.

Thanks for your advice guys, it makes sense now.

Can I ask why would replacing the lath-and-plaster give a more cottagey look rather than just reboarding and skimming in the modern way? Is it down to visual textures and feel?

I suppose I could aim to replace the door frames with some nice reclaimed wood and still look for a nice central upright to replace the leaning one. Perhaps a nice oak beam set into the rebuilt wall will look and feel better for the room as i've never liked the current beam.

Here's a pic of the cottage, I suppose it was a kind of farm workers cottage as there is an almost identical one about half a mile away and I know a pig farmer was living here at the time of the tithe in 1840.

We have also been told it was used as a school house at one time, I could not figure that out for a while as it's quite small but I guess in these hamlets and villages perhaps only a handful of children would be taught at a time. We spoke to an very elderly man who lived here many years ago and he told us when they removed an old range there were handfulls of tiny pencils stuffed behind! I guess this is about all the proof one needs for such a story to be verified.

The cottage was originally built standing alone but in the 1920's the owner built another property onto the side at an angle apparenty for her sister. As they face away from us, at a right angle the building is more attached rather than semi detached if that makes sense. I mention this because in the picture you can see what is the side of that property. It's a funny little place but after looking through property pages for years I know realise rather unique in it's own way.

 

[Ian Bond]

I like the pics, what a great place you have got!!!

The only reasons I use laths / reedboard and lime plaster are:

1. It's similar to the materials originally used, which have stood the test of time

2.The lime plaster blends in well with existing finishes.

3. Lime plasters are a bit more flexible than gypsum skimmed boards etc, which is important in an old building. The lime allows for some movement in the structure with less cracking - within limits.

4. Lime plasters are breathable, and help manage moisture - not as vital for internal walls.

5. You've got longer to work lime plaster, so great for learning the technique with. Gypsum's much less forgiving for a starter. I know - had to throw a few mixing buckets away

6. It looks great. Especially if you can apply a trad finish such as distemper or limewash.

Anyway, I'm biased as I got into lime plasters from using gypsum (badly) and found it much easier, with results that looked well in my wobbly cottage. It's up to you whether you want to use the modern stuff instead, of course, but it looks like you've just removed some PB that didn't look right.

 

[Ian Bond]

Or even tongue and grooved beaded boards, as an alternative to plaster. That can look good in a cottage.

Must have a pic somewhere, if I find one I'll post it....

 

[Ian Bond]

!

http://pic15.picturetrail.com/VOL583/2913924/18113053/284280518.jpg

1830s Cob cottage, North Devon. Boarded partition between bed chamber and staircase.

No it's not mine

 

[chuckey]

For an "effect", why not board the lower part of the wall with "neetaboard"(Sp.?) with a nice 3 X1 capping strip in a decent piece of wood and plaster/board over it. Neetaboard is 9mm MDF machined to look like old tongue and groove boarding. The purists will throw brick bats at me, but the "good" bit of the wall has already gone, what you are after is a pleasing appearance? Or if you are dedicated enough or plain lucky, buy some reclaimed T & G and scrape it down and varnish it - super! (have used both methods)
Frank

 

[Nemesis]

MDF... :roll:

You can actually still buy t and g.

New.

 

[Moo]

There's a variety of t&g that has a rather attractive beading down one side, if you want something a bit more decorative.

 

[Gervase]

Ask to see some 'Butt and bead' at your local timber mill - it's what was traditionally used for walls.

 

[Matt Green]

The timber looks like oak or elm from this distance.

Cut a triangle out of it so you can see the grain. Wet it*. If you can see wavy lines- elm, rings of dots- oak, neither: post the picture.



Matt Green
*don't lick it. Did that once- splinter in the tongue. Nasty business.

 

[Penners]

You've been given a lot of good suggestions above. I would just add a comment about your plan to replace the post that supports the king joist.

Don't!

You mention that it's a bit crooked and it sticks out into the room a bit.
The crookedness is called "character" by estate agents - people buying houses pay extra for it! And unless it's looking really dangerous - which in your photos it isn't - there's no technical reason to replace it.

The reason that it sticks out into the room a bit is because of its larger section. If you replaced it with a smaller section post, this would reduce the bearing area supporting the king joist - not a good idea.

Anyway - you're trying to add "cottagey character" to the building. That post and the king joist are probably the most characterful pieces of timber in the place!

By the way, your studs may be oak... or elm. They're not the colour that you'd expect of oak, but they've been covered up for over 150 years, so won't have darkened.

If you want someone here to identify the timber, post a close-up photo of a clean area of the grain. If necessary, wet it a bit before taking your photo, to show up the grain structure.

 

[Penners]

Sorry Matt - you posted while I was typing mine.

Great minds think alike! :wink:

 

[joechip]

Thankyou for all the suggestions guys. It has given us few things to think about.

I had a look at some butt and bead strips at the local builders merchants/wood yard today and it looked very thin, is it available in something more substantial or is it always just a very thin peice of wood?

I quite like the bead instead of the usual t&g though so thanks for pointing us in that direction.

We have decided to remove the elm/oak posts and build the new internal wall frame with tanalized timber since it will not be on show and we can use the old timber for the inside of our garage when it's built as I would like one of those open bay (oak posts at the front under a tile roof) garages. These beams may be good for the inside and they will be on show. I will treat them and store them dry (I will take off a bit of rough from the base to expose the grain and post a pic for identification).

Penners, thanks for your comments. We will not remove the old beam, apart from our limited budget and probably an element of risk you are probably right and once the room is finished it will find it's place. I think what has always put us off is it stood proud of the plasterboard wall that was papered and not skimmed. When the new wall is constructed and lime plastered etc, I hope to have the beam set into the wall very slightly so you can't see behind it if you get my drift. I guess it will give our carpenter something to think about though if we have butt and bead as it will run upto and beyond that beam.

So I guess we are looking at a reed boarding or similar, lime plastered with butt & bead on the lower part of the wall (i'll never search for that on google again with my mother present :roll: ), and a lime wash color paint above the boarding (and the boarding painted too, probably a neutral color). We have uncalibrated multicolored slate flooring going down so I guess i'll need to keep the colors neutral in the room otherwise it could be a bit overwhelming.

One question I have is where we took the wall down, there is a channel in the concrete floor. In the channel is the bare earth and parts of what could be the old flagstone flooring (one piece had a matt black glaze like surface). Should I just seal the base of this channel for now with concrete of should I use a lime morter so the floor can continue to breath a little? As we removed mice nests from up in the old frame I dont really want to leave this open to invasion.

Last question for now, should I be using lime mortar for all internal repairs and relaying stones? We have quite a few area's where plaster has been taken down ready for repairs and stones need to be repointed and relayed in certain places. We have used cement in the past but I now take it this is not the correct method. With small localised areas and 2 feet thick walls i'm not sure it will matter so far but i'd like to do all future render and stone repairs the correct way.

Thanks again for all your advice.

 

[Ian Bond]

If that was my stud wall (or remains of it) I would keep it, and either board it all or plaster it. Or even plaster and wainscott the lower half, as you are suggesting.

It would be a shame to remove the existing structure to replace it with something inferior, and also be a lot of extra work and expense.

You can always source oak for future projects.

As to materials, you won't go far wrong if you stick as close to those originally used as possible. Lime mortars and renders in place of cement and gypsum. And no MDF!!!!

 

[Moo]

I've just had another look at your pictures, and am puzzled by the smooth surface between the studwork.
In the third picture, especially, it looks as though the rest of the wall is covered with some sort of render that has been removed around the door to reveal the underlying brick.

Have you any idea what this is? Is there any possibility that the previous owners had a 'damp specialist' in, who recommended removing the old lath & plaster so as to treat the walls with 'damp-proof' cement render?

 

[Ian Bond]

Looks to me like the back of lath and plaster.

The wall would have been lathed and plastered on both sides, but someone removed one side of the laths to expose the studs, then plastered between them.

This wall looks old and good quality to me.

 

[joechip]

tbh the pictures show the beams to be better than they really are. I think perhaps 3 of them are what I would call nice.

The 3rd picture just shows the back of the wooden strips on the other side of the wall and the plaster board on the same. All this is now gone.

What should I do with the channel left in the floor below the beams, do you think a thin layer of cement to seal it will be ok? The whole floor is cement so i'm sure it will be ok but at the same time i'm wondering if the floor has been using this as some kind of breathing hole. The bottom of the plasterboard was gone but probably very old and sitting near the bare earth with no plaster skim on top, just wallpaper. Perhaps a breathable infill with be a happy middle solution.

 

[Ian Bond]

The studs were never intended to be on show. Someone has hacked the plaster off the laths and plaster-boarded over one side, and removed the laths from the other side to expose the studs. This is the sort of cottage treatment that goes along with stripped pine and bare brick walls. It's the reason it looks wrong.

You appear to have a good, old stud wall, and the best thing to do from a conservation perspective would be to retain and repair it. If you remove the studs, you'll be giving yourself so much unnecessary work, unless you want the wall removed completely.


I can't picture the problem you are having with the channel. Are the feet of the studs not located in a timber sole plate, or has this rotted away?

The plasterboard would disintegrate if left in contact with damp earth. I repaired my stud walls with laths, but as I mentioned earlier this is a lot of work. A fibre or clay board would do the trick, and allow you to render over with lime for an authentic, breathable finish.

I fix 2 horizontal battens along the base of the studs, and nail skirting to these. The skirting will protect the bottom of the wall from knocks, and the plaster would finish neatly along the top of the skirting. If you are worried about damp, you could leave a small gap between the bottom edge of the skirting and the floor. With a breathable covering, the space between the studs should not get too damp. Clay or fibre board with lime plaster and limewash on top should be OK.