|
Home > Archive > Building and Construction > April 2006 > masonry construction
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
masonry construction
|
|
| CRHRAS 2006-04-13, 12:21 am |
| This is a newbie question I know but, I've noticed that alot of the builders
here frame up a house and then lay one layer of brick around the framed
structure. My question is why do they do it this way instead of using a
wider layer of brick and embedding the lumber in the masonry ? Is the only
advantage cost ?
Thanks for reading...
| |
|
| The walls (lumber) internally support the brick walls externally. The brick
never touches the lumber to allow air to vent between the two to vent off
water/humidity. The brick is tied to the lumber (walls) with a metal strip
every so often supporting the brick. One layer of brick can't stand much
punishment inwards our outwards.
Another more brick use method is obviously not cost effective, and cheaper
labor-wise. Increased cost is obvious as you already obviously know.
If the lumber (walls) are filled with brick, there is no way to insulate the
walls. Or remove any water/humidity therein.
Find "weep hole".
http://www.google.com/
--
Jonny
"CRHRAS" <crhras@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:R8j%f.46648$_S7.26739@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> This is a newbie question I know but, I've noticed that alot of the
> builders here frame up a house and then lay one layer of brick around the
> framed structure. My question is why do they do it this way instead of
> using a wider layer of brick and embedding the lumber in the masonry ? Is
> the only advantage cost ?
>
> Thanks for reading...
>
| |
| sanjian 2006-04-13, 9:21 am |
| CRHRAS wrote:
> This is a newbie question I know but, I've noticed that alot of the
> builders here frame up a house and then lay one layer of brick around
> the framed structure. My question is why do they do it this way
> instead of using a wider layer of brick and embedding the lumber in
> the masonry ? Is the only advantage cost ?
>
> Thanks for reading...
Understand that I am a construction student, so take nothing I say as
definative.
One of the problems with brick is that mortar really isn't glue. It
actually forms a mechanical key between the two bricks. So you're going to
require several wythes of masonry (rows measured from front to back) to take
the wind loads. Plus you're going to need some way to manage water when you
eventually get cracking in the mortar, as well as at any openings in the
face of the building, if it's not perfectly sealed, or when the seal
eventually fails. Solid brick doesn't allow for that. And, even then,
you're going to need to have studs so that you can have a place to put
insulation, wiring, and other services, as well as hang the drywall on. In
the end, it's easier and cheaper just to do wood framing and give it a brick
face.
| |
| Budweiser 2006-04-13, 11:21 am |
|
"sanjian" <millerkb@vt.edu> wrote in message
news:e1ler0$ei5$1@solaris.cc.vt.edu...
> CRHRAS wrote:
>
> Understand that I am a construction student, so take nothing I say as
> definative.
>
> One of the problems with brick is that mortar really isn't glue. It
> actually forms a mechanical key between the two bricks. So you're going
> to require several wythes of masonry (rows measured from front to back) to
> take the wind loads. Plus you're going to need some way to manage water
> when you eventually get cracking in the mortar, as well as at any openings
> in the face of the building, if it's not perfectly sealed, or when the
> seal eventually fails. Solid brick doesn't allow for that. And, even
> then, you're going to need to have studs so that you can have a place to
> put insulation, wiring, and other services, as well as hang the drywall
> on. In the end, it's easier and cheaper just to do wood framing and give
> it a brick face.
>
So how do we cope with all brick,part brick part timber,construction in the
UK sanijan?
Masonary (brickwork) will take far greater loadings than timber ever will,
both in lateral (wind) and horizontal (deadload), granted it is not as
flexible (movement) as timber is.
Do you understand the reason most houses in the USA are of timber
construction??--what do you have most of readily available as a construction
resource?--timber or clay?
when it gets windy your houses fall over,mine has stood proud since 1834.
| |
| tbasc@bellsouth.net 2006-04-13, 8:21 pm |
| I'm living in an 1834 house too.
Mine is mortis and tennon wood.
No sheathing.
No nails.
It's standing pretty proud too.
And that after a major earthquake and a few hurricanes.
A lot of masonry buildings in town display "earthquake bolts" used to
draw the structure together after the earthquake.
TB
| |
|
| You answered your own question.
--
Jonny
"sanjian" <millerkb@vt.edu> wrote in message
news:e1ler0$ei5$1@solaris.cc.vt.edu...
> CRHRAS wrote:
>
> Understand that I am a construction student, so take nothing I say as
> definative.
>
> One of the problems with brick is that mortar really isn't glue. It
> actually forms a mechanical key between the two bricks. So you're going
> to require several wythes of masonry (rows measured from front to back) to
> take the wind loads. Plus you're going to need some way to manage water
> when you eventually get cracking in the mortar, as well as at any openings
> in the face of the building, if it's not perfectly sealed, or when the
> seal eventually fails. Solid brick doesn't allow for that. And, even
> then, you're going to need to have studs so that you can have a place to
> put insulation, wiring, and other services, as well as hang the drywall
> on. In the end, it's easier and cheaper just to do wood framing and give
> it a brick face.
>
| |
| tmurf.1@juno.com 2006-04-14, 11:21 am |
| There is only one reason the cost of labor and material. A well
designed and well built masonry house will last a very long time.
| |
| R'zenboom 2006-04-17, 8:21 pm |
|
> "sanjian" <millerkb@vt.edu> wrote in message
> news:e1ler0$ei5$1@solaris.cc.vt.edu...
In other countries, it's common to have all-brickwork walls, and maybe only
timber roof trusses.
[color=darkred]
yea. time/material cost.
[color=darkred]
to[color=darkred]
roof & intermediate floors give enough restraint for this... [the wall
itself is heavy,too.]
[color=darkred]
openings[color=darkred]
There's a common solution for this : cavity wall construction ...you only
need two 'wythes' for this.
[color=darkred]
Insulation installed in cavity , or omitted [ cavity wall is more insulating
than the solid.]
Generally theres only wiring & plumbing pipes in the wall, in cavity or in
channels purpose-cut with a grinder - the common tho' messy solution.
[color=darkred]
ah, you don't need that!
just 'render' with cement plaster, and maybe finish with a gypsum plaster
layer for smoothness.
[color=darkred]
give[color=darkred]
>
--
R'zenboom
| |
| sanjian 2006-04-17, 10:21 pm |
| R'zenboom wrote:
>
> In other countries, it's common to have all-brickwork walls, and
> maybe only timber roof trusses.
Well, as I said, I'm still learning all this. We've pretty much only gone
through a rough foundations course in our first year, while we were busy
knocking core courses out of the way. And, unfortunately, my time in the
navy was as a Machinist's Mate, not a Builder (makes me think maybe I should
consider Utilitiesman when I go reserves).
| |
| Glenn 2006-04-18, 11:21 am |
| They still have Seabee's?
I was one in 1950. 
"sanjian" <millerkb@vt.edu> wrote in message
news:e21car$agg$1@solaris.cc.vt.edu
> R'zenboom wrote:
>
> Well, as I said, I'm still learning all this. We've
> pretty much only gone through a rough foundations course
> in our first year, while we were busy knocking core
> courses out of the way. And, unfortunately, my time in
> the navy was as a Machinist's Mate, not a Builder (makes
> me think maybe I should consider Utilitiesman when I go
> reserves).
| |
| Matt Barrow 2006-04-18, 11:21 am |
|
"Glenn" <pilcheg@kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:6j61g.241$1J4.33@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> They still have Seabee's?
>
> I was one in 1950.
You'll love this one!!
http://www.grouchymedia.com/other_v...ntion/index.cfm
Keep a hankie ready at the end!
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO
| |
| sanjian 2006-04-18, 5:21 pm |
| Glenn wrote:
> They still have Seabee's?
Yep. But they can't have beards anymore (which disappoints me, since I'd
like to keep mine). That ended in the late '80s. Probably changed quite a
bit, though. Like Surveyor is now Engineering Aid, and they added Senior
Chief and Master Chief Petty Officer to the enlisted paygrades.
> I was one in 1950.
I may be, soon. I just have to figure out which rating to pick. Unlike
last time, I've been actually studying what they do. I got bit in the XXX,
last time, by the fact that Machinist's Mates don't do what machinsts do on
the outside (that would be Machinery Repairmen... who don't actually repair
machinery).
|
|
|
|
|