Penners
Member
- Messages
- 17,294
- Location
- Suffolk, England
You just rescued yourself in time there, Feltwell!Feltwell said:
- Thread starter Pennyviz
- Start date
LadyArowana
Member
- Messages
- 3,687
Penners said:
Nobody ever called me Dave!
Feltwell
Member
- Messages
- 6,378
- Location
- Shropshire, England
Hmm, "Dave" - popular or just common? :wink:
One thing is for certain, the fashion for names moves on. Go to my kid's school and you won't find a single Dave, a Mike, a Sarah or even a John - well not amongst the kids at least.
Names can be a minefield for parents. Take my friend Mark Davis - an ordinary enough name with limited mickey-taking opportunities you would think - until you realise we've called him "Mavis" for about 40 years now.
Anyway, this is stretching Fred Drift to his absolute limit!
One thing is for certain, the fashion for names moves on. Go to my kid's school and you won't find a single Dave, a Mike, a Sarah or even a John - well not amongst the kids at least.
Names can be a minefield for parents. Take my friend Mark Davis - an ordinary enough name with limited mickey-taking opportunities you would think - until you realise we've called him "Mavis" for about 40 years now.
Anyway, this is stretching Fred Drift to his absolute limit!
Hi Pennyviz
Dave (common type not popular) here. I would only replace that lintel if it really had to be replaced. Are there cracks in the wall inside or out?
I think the option of:
i) Use new timber as a like-for-like repair - is a justifiable option. However, it might look odd compared to other timbers and look a bit anachronistic. If I did use a new timber (which I have in my own house) then I would date it. i.e. carve the date into the wood. I agreed this approach with my CO for replacing some rotten stud posts. I did two types of repair. Where only part of the post was rotten I'd cut out the rot and replace with a new section. Where I replaced a whole piece - I dated it. MY CO was happy with this approach.
ii) Using a reclaimed timber is also a justifiable option. As it will have less impact on the 'character' of the building. When I did my own LBC I checked out what others had done in the area and noted that several proposed reclaimed timber - particularly for internal work (i.e. the beam was exposed internally and not painted or plastered over) and these where approved by the local CO.
iii) cutting away the first couple of inches of the surface and re-facing is another viable option - but then you have to consider the fixing. You could glue and peg it (oak pegs) or bolt it (you'd have to use stainless steel fixings). However, either one is likely to alter the character. The benefit of this technique though is that you keep some of the historic fabric. So I would use that technique on a large piece of timber such as a wall plate or sill plate that was exposed. For such a small piece like this I think refacing doesn't provide much benefit, but it really depends on what your local CO thinks and what you as the householder feels is the right thing and to make and argue your case.
On the balance of options and from what I can see of your home's character. I think if I was hell bent on fixing it I would propose to use re-claimed timber in this case, but I would add to the work that I'd want the cement removed and have it repointed in lime that matched the colour and grade of intact lime pointing as best as it can. I would insist that the builder only uses hand tools to remove the cement (no power tools - which are likely to damage the stone work and once that is gone it's gone forever, no scrub that - they are not likely, they WILL damage the stonework! Don't trust a builder that says he'll be careful).
In terms of finish, you have to paint it to match the rest of your woodwork, so I'd consider something like this http://www.linseedpaintcompany.co.uk/
they do a black. Although I have not tried this - but I'd look into this option.
Personally I think the cement pointing is a slightly more important issue to address than the old lintel.
All the best and thanks for sharing.
Dave (and proud)
Dave (common type not popular) here. I would only replace that lintel if it really had to be replaced. Are there cracks in the wall inside or out?
I think the option of:
i) Use new timber as a like-for-like repair - is a justifiable option. However, it might look odd compared to other timbers and look a bit anachronistic. If I did use a new timber (which I have in my own house) then I would date it. i.e. carve the date into the wood. I agreed this approach with my CO for replacing some rotten stud posts. I did two types of repair. Where only part of the post was rotten I'd cut out the rot and replace with a new section. Where I replaced a whole piece - I dated it. MY CO was happy with this approach.
ii) Using a reclaimed timber is also a justifiable option. As it will have less impact on the 'character' of the building. When I did my own LBC I checked out what others had done in the area and noted that several proposed reclaimed timber - particularly for internal work (i.e. the beam was exposed internally and not painted or plastered over) and these where approved by the local CO.
iii) cutting away the first couple of inches of the surface and re-facing is another viable option - but then you have to consider the fixing. You could glue and peg it (oak pegs) or bolt it (you'd have to use stainless steel fixings). However, either one is likely to alter the character. The benefit of this technique though is that you keep some of the historic fabric. So I would use that technique on a large piece of timber such as a wall plate or sill plate that was exposed. For such a small piece like this I think refacing doesn't provide much benefit, but it really depends on what your local CO thinks and what you as the householder feels is the right thing and to make and argue your case.
On the balance of options and from what I can see of your home's character. I think if I was hell bent on fixing it I would propose to use re-claimed timber in this case, but I would add to the work that I'd want the cement removed and have it repointed in lime that matched the colour and grade of intact lime pointing as best as it can. I would insist that the builder only uses hand tools to remove the cement (no power tools - which are likely to damage the stone work and once that is gone it's gone forever, no scrub that - they are not likely, they WILL damage the stonework! Don't trust a builder that says he'll be careful).
In terms of finish, you have to paint it to match the rest of your woodwork, so I'd consider something like this http://www.linseedpaintcompany.co.uk/
they do a black. Although I have not tried this - but I'd look into this option.
Personally I think the cement pointing is a slightly more important issue to address than the old lintel.
All the best and thanks for sharing.
Dave (and proud)
Feltwell
Member
- Messages
- 6,378
- Location
- Shropshire, England
DavidB said:
After my gentle teasing, aimed I confess primarily at Penners, I should point out that my youngest son is a "David" by middle name - so I'll vote popular!
Penners
Member
- Messages
- 17,294
- Location
- Suffolk, England
Feltwell, I'm the only brother of three sisters. Compared with them you're a rank amateur!Feltwell said:
Feltwell
Member
- Messages
- 6,378
- Location
- Shropshire, England
It's been said before Penners.
My kids are past masters at knowing how to wind each other up, like most siblings.........
My kids are past masters at knowing how to wind each other up, like most siblings.........