NEWBIE

[RestorationWoman]

Hello all. I'm very new to this and have around a thousand questions to pick your brains with.. :? However, after four years in the planning we are finally starting on our lovely 17thC timber framed house. We are stripping back to the frame and adopting a conserve, preserve and strap approach. A large amount of the Wattle and Daub Panels are missing and have been replaced with brick trapping moisture and all. Big Job! Therefore I am in the market for some experienced trades - I have quite a few on board already, but what we are in need of is a local (Cheshire) Wattle and Daub Contractor who will use local hazel (if we can find it) and local subsoil to repair the few panels that are left and Hempcrete in the new ones. Any one out there? This is proving a bit of a problem.
Also has anyone any experience of using dry ice to clean/remove bitumen from oak timbers?
If you lovely people could help me I'd really appreciate it. Any tweeters out there can see pics @CrossleyHall
Thanks so much Caroline

 

[jackpoint]

Wow, that's a beautiful project to get stuck into!
All the best

 

[RestorationWoman]

Thank you Jack. It's certainly a sleeves rolled up project!!! :shock:

 

[mims&pip]

Hi and welcome

I can't help with trades in that area at all, but wanted to say your house looks lovely!

Good luck with what looks like a very interesting project.....

Mims x

 

[88v8]

Hello and welcome.

Sorry can't help with trades.

Dry ice, that's an interesting idea. Have you tried it? A plumber's freezing spray would enable you to try a small area. Might depend how liquid the bitumen was and to what extent it seeped into open grain, but worth a go.

Wattle doesn't have to be hazel. It was used because it's everywhere, or was, it's quick growing, responds well to coppicing and is flexible and has low shrinkage when drying.
Most fresh green timber will be fine. In our wattle of c1660 there is a mix of hazel and elder. The daub here was clay (ours is very suitable) with chopped grass and cow dung.

I expect you've seen this
http://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/wattleanddaub/wattleanddaub.htm
and
http://www.buildingconservation.com/directory/prodlist.php?category=Wattle+%26+daub

Brick panels are not necessarily a problem, unless they've been put in with cement mortar. Problems more usually arise because the timber was not profiled to shed water.

Anyway, I won't ramble on. Hope the work goes well.

Ivor

 

[Penners]

A plumber's freezing spray would enable you to try a small area.

I don't think that's going to simulate dry ice blasting in any way. A plumber's freezing spray simply lowers the temperature of the target area, whereas dry ice blasting actually has a mildly abrasive effect.

RestorationWoman, have you considered a DIY project to remove the bitumastic coating? Strippers of Sudbury make a range of products, including one called Solvistrip, which they say will remove that kind of surface coating.

Have a look down the list here: http://www.stripperspaintremovers.com/I_want_to_remove.htm

I should add that I have no connection with this business, other than the fact that I have been satisfied with their products in the past.

 

[Flyfisher]

That certainly looks like a major project - that steel building alone must be costing a small fortune . . . certainly a lot more than the tarpaulins I used when refurbishing our roof :wink:

Stripping it down to the bare frame does seem like an extreme intervention, but I assume the building is listed and that the relevant CO has been involved in the four years of planning, so there must be good reasons for it.

As Ivor pointed out, brick infills in a timber frame is not an inherent problem. Our G2* C16 timber frame has been extensively altered over the years with the addition of sash windows with the result that some of the original wattle-and-daub panels were lost and replaced with bricks, which can be seen in this photo taken during re-rendering works last year:

I wouldn't dream of stripping out all this brickwork and replacing them with new wattle-and-daub as it is part of of the history of the building. I also doubt LBC would be granted for such work. Having said that, I appreciate that all buildings are unique and have their own particular qualities and challenges.


As for dry ice blasting, this was discussed in another thread last year: http://www.periodproperty.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14521

 

[Penners]

I wouldn't dream of stripping out all this brickwork and replacing them with new wattle-and-daub as it is part of of the history of the building.

I don't tweet, I'm afraid (actually, I'm not at all afraid - I reckon tweeting is for the birds :lol: ), so I can't get to see your photo. But did you have trouble getting insurance, some years ago? If so, then I have seen your house (and you!) in the Telegraph.

If the structure of the house is anything like FF's, then I entirely agree with him. The brick infill is an honest part of its history, and I would not want (and doubt whether the CO would permit me) to remove it.

However, as observed above, your CO may have other ideas.

Any chance you could post some pictures of your project here?

 

[malcolm]

You might not need to twit. https://twitter.com/crossleyhall

 

[Zebra]

Yes, I don't tweet, and I could see the pics.
Very interesting house, RestorationWoman. Is the wattle and daub something you could have a go at doing yourself? You'll get lots of tips and information on here. I think many of us often find that informing ourselves as well as we can and having a go is as good or better than trying to find professionals with the right expertise. Not necessarily, of course, depends on one's skills, budget, etc. But if you do it's something to be very proud of!

 

[88v8]

A plumber's freezing spray would enable you to try a small area.

I don't think that's going to simulate dry ice blasting in any way. A plumber's freezing spray simply lowers the temperature of the target area, whereas dry ice blasting actually has a mildly abrasive effect.

Oh, blasting. No, of course it won't, I'm talking piffle.

If it comes to blasting, there are various media less damaging that ye olde sandblast. I think a lot depends on the skill of the operators. Could recommend one in Surrey that uses plastic media, alas too far.

Ivor

 

[Penners]

there are various media less damaging that ye olde sandblast. I think a lot depends on the skill of the operators.

From what I have read (and not from any personal experience or expertise) dry ice blasting is the least deleterious of all blasting techniques, although I agree with Ivor that the operator is the make-or-break of the technique. Nevertheless, any abrasive treatment like this could risk removing some old, soft material from the beams. This may not be quite so important if they are simple, unembellished members, but if they have mouldings it can be destructive.

Chemical stripping is much kinder to the original structure.

 

[RestorationWoman]

Wow! Thank you all for such great response.

Please rest assured that everything that is being done to restore Crossley Hall to it's former glory is with all the relevant permissions of the local Planning office and Conservation Officer and it would seem every other body that has an interest (which is not inconsiderable!!!) and with the greatest of care.

I feel the need to explain a little more. The Hall is not at all habitable, artfully applied black and white paint makes it look deceiving.

The Hall has seen very little change over it's life, the electricity consisted of a pot fuse box and twin cord flex, it has never had a heating system other than open fires. The brick and the windows, which are from around 1850, which we will restore and re-use, are the only real changes in 400 years!

The steel building around the Hall is an experimental alternative to scaffolding and tenting. It's a building we are going to reuse on site.

The brick infill panels are all circa 20thC and are held together with modern cement which is trapping moisture, which has badly rotted the frame. Not all panels will be replaced as some can be repaired and it is in these that we will use traditional methods of wattle and daub, most of which are internal. I have seen some videos and will certainly have a go. Unfortunately over the last fifty years or so, a lot of the timber frame has been 'repaired' with cement also.

For me, normally, the use of a poultice is the preferred method of stripping oak timber, but I'd had read about dry ice and I think a test area will be needed to assess how invasive it is.

Thanks again for your tips.

Caroline

 

[LadyArowana]

The steel building around the Hall is an experimental alternative to scaffolding and tenting. It's a building we are going to reuse on site

Hello and welcome to the forum. An interesting project, the protective building is a great concept.

 

[Keithj]

Welcome!

A fascinating project! It's a rewarding task - when it's all done. Have fun!

I started five years ago with a Grade II cottage that had been seriously vandalised with concrete and expanding foam, and when that was done set to work on a Grade I church. We sent in the completion certificate on the church on Friday (Good Friday - seems appropriate somehow). Having a rest for a few weeks before the next project

 

[Penners]

We sent in the completion certificate on the church on Friday.

Congratulations, Keith! That must give you a huge sense of satisfaction.

 

[Keithj]

Oh, it did! You should see the size of the file that's going into the top cupboard in the vestry!

The next phase is improvements - loo, kitchen, meeting room, lighting and AV. That file's already bigger and we don't even have the faculty yet. I got exasperated enough with the negative attitude of some of the conservation bodies when we proposed LED lighting that I suggested candles and oil lamps. They've meanwhile been to that London and seen LED in action (one diocese allows only LED for new installations) and reluctantly agreed in principle albeit with a list of stipulations.