Could anybody tell me what is the coating applied to these beams?

[BristolLofts]

Hello all,

I'm a new member here, and I'm just in the process of buying my first period property; a loft within a Georgian-style terrace, constructed around 1852 and Grade II listed since 1959.

The property has black beams in every room, and I had assumed that these were original, black-painted oak beams, and that I would be able to use a solvent stripper to remove the black coating, revealing beautiful original wooden beams underneath.

I've just been for a second viewing of the property, and noticed that rather than being solid wood, the beams appear to have been coated at some point with a plaster or stucco covering, to give the impression that they are made of solid wood. Obviously I'm not sure when this took place, but I would imagine it happened when the building last underwent renovations in the early 80's.

My question is whether anybody knows what the coating could be, and what might potentially lie underneath? I'm guessing that there are still beams underneath as they seem to be structural, but I would imagine these are modern flat beams, as opposed to characterful original oak beams. Would this seem like standard practice for the 1980's?

I'm in a quandary as to what to do with the beams now, as I should imagine if I strip away the coating I will discover modern wood underneath with little character, which won't be particularly in-keeping with the style of the property, and likely not particularly attractive. I can't imagine anybody would have coated the original beams with plaster (but you would certainly make me very happy if you could tell me this does sometimes happen) and the lofts have always been original to the building (not a modern conversion). The loft space is mentioned in the listing for the property, so would it seem likely that permission would have been granted to remove the original beams and replace them with some faux alternative?

I had imagined stripping the wooden beams of paint could be done without seeking approval from the CO, but I'm guessing that now it seems like this is potentially more involved than that I would likely need to seek their consent before even contemplating doing anything with this coating? Is there any chance it could be original, does anybody know when it could have been done. I suspect I may now need to leave them as they are, unless anybody can tell me there is a chance I could discover beautiful original beams underneath, but I wondered if anybody might have any ideas what it might be, and if anybody could think of anything I can do to improve their appearance, limewash maybe?

You can find some pics of the beams here
https://www.flickr.com/photos/110390232@N04/shares/5e7C95

https://www.flickr.com/photos/110390232@N04/shares/443X00

https://www.flickr.com/photos/110390232@N04/shares/5cA108

https://www.flickr.com/photos/110390232@N04/shares/p1tV8f

https://www.flickr.com/photos/110390232@N04/shares/4ZwEG3 (it looks like you can see the wood surface underneath in this pic)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/110390232@N04/shares/250sp7 (In this pic you can see what appears to be one of the original iron beam supports)

This is the exterior of the property if anybody is interested: https://www.flickr.com/photos/110390232@N04/shares/iHH779

Any help would be much appreciated, and apologies for my first post being longer than intended, I do have a tendency to drone on!

 

[Zebra]

Hello and welcome to the forum. What do these beams sound like when you tap them or knock on them? Do they sound like timber?
I'm sure someone with more knowledge will be along shortly. However, my own musing is that a Georgian-style terrace constructed around 1852 would be unlikely to have had exposed oak beams in that "characterful" style, and that therefore they may well be a later addition, and perhaps fake. The property you are looking at is a loft apartment. Do you know whether it was originally inhabited as servants quarters? Or would it have been uninhabited originally? When was it converted into a flat, was this in the 80s? If so, I fear that your suppositions are correct, fake beams being very much in keeping with 1980s style (I've seen polystyrene fake beams from the 80s - almost convincing until you touch them!).
Timber for construction in the 1850s would have been cut very squarely, and most likely from softwood rather than oak, I believe. I doubt that stripping them would yield anything that would be lovely to look at. Painting over them in the same colour as the ceilings might be the best option.
The property looks lovely from the outside though!

 

[BristolLofts]

I thought as much. When you knock them they don't sound like wood but they don't sound wholly hollow. They sound almost solid, almost like you might expect wood with a very solid coating to sound.

I assume the loft was formerly servants quarters, because the whole terrace seems to share lofts with the same layout, and in the 1850s it was a fairly affluent area. The staircase into the loft is also narrower than the grander staircases in the rest of house so I'm guessing this was the reason. I haven't had a chance to see if the neighbouring lofts have the same beams, or something more original. The 1980s conversion doesn't fill me with promise, and I'm guessing the beams must have been clad back then.

I wasn't particularly looking forward to dealing with the solvents to strip them anyway, and I can live with them as they are if they are lightened up, I just had visions of beautiful beams underneath.

Most of the similar terraces around here are much earlier, so I wondered if it might have been built in some sense of Georgian revival. The terrace opposite and most of the houses nearby from the same period are much more Victorian in their proportions.

From land registry searches it looks like it was split into flats in the 80's. I'm having the survey done tomorrow so I suppose I just have to hope it doesn't throw up anything else unexpected. Cheers.

 

[88v8]

Mmm, have to agree with Zebra.
Handsome house. The timbers, as Zebra has said, would all have been straight & true, likely machine-sawn.

Could be a mix of original and replacement beams tarted up to look uniform, or oldernised.

Look on the bright side; stripping and refinishing old beams is a tiring, messy, job. Now you won't have to do it

Of course, if you think your curiousity will always niggle at you, you could have a peck at the concealed backside of one of them.

Ivor

 

[BristolLofts]

Hey Ivor, yes I'm still intrigued what lies underneath, the small piece of wood that is visible is straight and true underneath so I guess there is a chance it's original. I looked in the loft space and the wood seemed to have not been interfered with that much, the timbers look pretty beefy and not particularly 80's, but I guess I'll have to have a closer look once I've moved in.

I'd like to see what is in the neighbouring terraced houses. Should I speak to the conservation officer about it?

 

[Penners]

As Ivor has said, you have a very handsome, classic Georgian house. However, these beams puzzle me. They're clearly in the topmost floor of the house, partly under the roof, and they appear at first to be part of the roof structure - rafters, purlins and so on.

Were it not for the picture of the one with a chunk removed, I would have guessed that they were genuine roof members, thickly coated with layers of some kind of paint. However, the damaged one appears to blow that theory out of the water.

Are you able to break out any more material from that damaged area and have a close look at it? If possible, could you also post a high resolution photo of the material (not grainy mobile phone shot)?

 

[malcolm]

From the way the plaster has chipped off I would guess it is lime. If so the beams were tidied much earlier than the 1980s (those guys would have used concrete or gypsom with a steel mesh). I have some beams plastered over like that. The earliest plastering over beams was done in Victorian times (or could even have been original) and other beams were plastered (or the plaster repaired) in cement much more recently, perhaps 1980s. In either case the plaster can be removed easily by hitting it with a hammer.

I think the reason some of my beams were plastered was they formed part of an external wall which shrunk and let air in around the beams. Possibly yours were plastered for the similar reasons. Another possibility is the Georgians were very capable of bodging and the timbers could be quarter split bits of weedy local tree which someone felt looked a bit ugly if it is an attic conversion. The Victorians liked their old timber to look neat.

 

[BristolLofts]

There was a small bit that was loose but it's pretty difficult to photograph, these are my best efforts:

https://flic.kr/p/ycWQBb

https://flic.kr/p/xWk5ER

https://flic.kr/p/ybw34u

Also found a few pics of the loft above, I don't really have any idea what I'm looking at but these beams seem fairly original looking to me, and if the beams underneath look anything like these I think I'd be more than happy:

https://flic.kr/p/xgXaHn

https://flic.kr/p/ydQykc

The house is fairly grand, so it seems strange to me that if the original beams are underneath, and were always intended to be on display, that they would made of cheap bodged materials. Maybe if as it appears this was the servants quarters that would explain it. The pic below is of one of the lofts further down the terrace, and the beams are still there but don't seem to be nearly as substantial:

https://flic.kr/p/xgZZrp

 

[LadyArowana]

The damaged one does look like someone coated somewhat ordinary beams in a finish to give them the texture of rough hewn timber and then painted them. Never discount what others might wish to do to their living space. When we took out a false ceiling ( Edwardian mansion block ) we discovered steel beams, used when our's and the one next door were converted from one much larger apartment. A visitor ( not anyone from PPUK I hasten to add ) said "You could make them into a lovely looking set of tudor beams" ..... and I politely thanked them for their suggestion. After they left I told the builder that we definitely wouldn't be doing a tudor on them, and indeed we just painted them while like the rest of the ceiling and left them as good honest steel beams.

 

[Penners]

good honest steel beams.

The house that was our home about 20 years ago was a C17 timber frame gem that had been sadly neglected and vandalised over the centuries. The integral garage (complete with galvanised up-and-over door) had once been a big, beamed cross-gable room. Naturally, I wanted to restore it as a beautiful sitting room, but on one side of the "garage" a badly deteriorated king joist had been supported with a vertical RSJ. In discussions with the CO, I explained that I wanted to remove the RSJ and scarf in a new end to the king joist.

"Yes, you could do that," he said, "but I would quite like you to leave the RSJ where it is, as an honest development in the history of the building."

I agreed that this was an option, but that I would prefer it if he would explain to Mrs P why there would be a steel post in the middle of her nice new sitting room. He blanched and agreed to my plan!

 

[Penners]

There was a small bit that was loose

On the basis of your first photo (the only one that showed some detail) I tend to agree with others that that is lime plaster. So if they're all like that, I don't see that there's much benefit in your stripping them - might as well live with the black paint!

 

[Feltwell]

They look like an original part of the roof structure to me. Your pictures inside the loft space look like original roof timbers, with a few extra strengthening pieces probably added in the 1980's conversion - the paler upright pieces of timber.

My house is nearly 50 years newer - 1899 - we have attic rooms with exposed timbers. In the front room, clearly always intended as a bedroom, it has a nice panelled door and an arch topped sash - and the big purlin running across the sloping ceiling has had a simple moulding attached the bottom, and the sides plastered, to make it look a bit fancier. This is original.

In the other attic room, it's much more utilitarian - the door is a cheap planked one, the window is a very plain casement etc. The other end of this purlin comes into this room, and here it's just plain sawn timber that's been painted. Same goes for all the other exposed roof timbers in that room.

I agree with Penners and others in that it looks like lime plaster (which means it was done well before the 1980's) and it's been someone's attempt to make plain sawn beams look attractive, long in the past. The rustic look is a bit odd, and at odds with the period of the house, but then again it may be that they just weren't very good at plastering! If they didn't know what they were doing, and didn't put any kind of beading or guide at the corners of the timbers before plastering, you would get a very wavy finish. But then again it may have been intentional, who knows!

If you strip the plaster off you'll have plain sawn timber to look at, just as your pictures from inside the loft show. I'd leave them as is and maybe paint them to match the ceiling colour if you want them to be a little less intrusive visually.

 

[Zebra]

Has anybody yet suggested doing the vinegar test? Putting the fragment in a cup of vinegar to see if it fizzes... If it does, it's lime.

 

[Penners]

The house is fairly grand, so it seems strange to me that if the original beams are underneath, and were always intended to be on display, that they would made of cheap bodged materials.

I meant to say earlier that I don't believe the beams would have originally been intended to be "on display". In a fairly high status Victorian house, that would be extremely unlikely.

 

[Feltwell]

I don't really agree there Penners - not when the rooms in question are the attic, which would only have been storage or servants rooms. If it was a room lower down in the house that visitors may have gone into, I would agree completely, they would have hidden them up.

The Victorians had a clear hierarchy of how they treated the rooms - you can see it here - in the downstairs reception rooms and hallway the skirtings are very deep, we have nice cornice, ceiling roses, the door locks are expensive inset ones, etc. Progress through to the utilitarian rooms like the kitchen and the skirtings are smaller, no cornice, cheaper rim locks and no mouldings on the doors. This declining status continues as you progress through the house, until when you finally get to the most obscure room in the attic where it is completely utilitarian - the structural roof timbers are on display with a lath & plaster ceiling between them - not for aesthetics but just because that was the cheapest and easiest way to make a ceiling and still keep some head height in the room.

The OP mentions that the staircase to the attic is much less grand - just the same as my house, my attic stairs are narrow, steep and completely plain, in stark contrast to the fancy staircase leading off the downstairs hallway.

I suspect the ceilings were like mine - the beams were plain and exposed with a lath & plaster ceiling formed between them. Then someone tried to make them look better later.

 

[Penners]

I suspect the ceilings were like mine

I can't really remember the period of your house, Feltwell but - rightly or wrongly - I have you mentally pigeonholed as Arts & Crafts. Are you earlier?

 

[Feltwell]

A bit earlier Penners - very late Victorian at 1899. I tend to think of Arts & Crafts as being more Edwardian, but in reality I know it was around before then. However, out here in the sticks they weren't particularly up on the latest trends architecturally, so style wise my house is fairly typical of anything later in Victoria's reign, 1870-ish onwards, and alas doesn't show any obvious Arts & Crafts influences.