1940’s Prefab’s – Simple but effective!

Despite a desperate need for housing it is interesting that a planned, strategic approach was taken to the design and functionality of prefabricated housing in the 1940’s.

Source: Prefab at Avoncroft Museum - Source: Own

A number of years ago I visited Avoncroft Museum of Historic Buildings (Link), which is situated near junction 1 of the M42 in Bromsgrove in the West Midlands. The Museum currently has over thirty different buildings/structures which have been rescued and re-built over the last five decades including a timber framed merchant’s house, a windmill, a church and a granary to name but a few. Although these and other buildings are absolutely fascinating, the building that really caught my attention was the 1940’s prefab. There was something about the speed of construction and the simplicity and layout of the structure that made the building stand out from the rest. For those reading this article who are unfamiliar with prefabricated buildings, these are basically factory built components that are assembled (put together) on site.

Nowadays, prefabrication is something that is commonly used for new built construction, and offers efficiencies in terms of thermal performance, speed, improved quality as well as cost efficiencies. In the 1940’s very little consideration would have been given to any of these factors, with the exception of speed of construction. Originally designed as temporary structures with a maximum lifespan of 10 years, prefabs were identified in the 1944 Housing Act as a means of providing accommodation quickly in towns and cities that had been bombed heavily in World War II. Prior to the introduction of the Housing Act in 1944 the UK Government identified the need to provide temporary houses and set about achieving this through an initiative called the ‘Temporary Houses Programme’ (THP). The summary below from Epsom and Ewell History Explorer (Link) explains the planned approach to housing shortage and how design played a key part in its success.

Source: Kitchen within Avoncroft Prefab - Source: Own

As early as May 1943 the Government decided to invest in a prototype, temporary steel bungalow, which became known as the ‘Portal Bungalow’, named after the then Minister of Works, Lord Portal. The Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, promised 500,000 temporary new homes, although only 156,623 were actually produced  (between 1945 and March 1949). The houses would be prefabricated in sections, in factories no longer needed for war production, transported to where they were needed and ‘bolted’ together on site, in a fraction of the time it would take to build a conventional house.

As steel was needed for the war effort, and therefore in short supply, no steel prefabs were actually made. Nevertheless, the steel ‘Portal’ prototype, used as a starting point, provided inspiration to private firms who were then commissioned to design and produce their own versions, but within specific guidelines.

All were to have two bedrooms, the floor area was to be 635 square feet, and to allow transportation from the factory, each component part could be no bigger than 7½ feet wide. The most important stipulation was that they all had to make use of the government-approved ‘heart-unit’. A back-to-back kitchen, bathroom, fire place with back boiler, airing cupboard and toilet. The design of the unit kept plumbing to a minimum. Only the relatively few imports (8,462) from the USA did not use the ‘heart-unit’.

There were thirteen types from eleven different manufacturers (one from the USA). Although they were all based on the same concept, each manufacturer had their own detailed designs, and decided which materials they would use. The materials were chosen from concrete, asbestos-cement, steel, wood and aluminium or a combination of several, as decided by each manufacturer.

Source: Bedroom within Avoncroft Prefab - Source: Own

Despite a desperate need for housing it is interesting that a planned, strategic approach was taken to the design and functionality of prefabricated housing in the 1940’s. If you ever have the privilege of visiting a 1940’s prefab you will be able to see for yourself how these speedily constructed dwellings were able to provide a functional layout incorporating basic facilities for a family at that time. Granted, there would not have been the level of thermal comfort or possibly space that most modern houses can offer however, I am sure that those who lived in prefabs in the 1940’s would have been more than happy with their living conditions.

Although many prefabs have long since been removed and replaced with more modern structures there are still many of examples of prefabs that remain, of which many are now listed (protected). This really stands as a testament to a well thought out approach to meet an urgent need for housing at the time. Given our current need for new housing I wonder if our current decision makers could learn any lessons from such an approach?

Source: Second Bedroom within Avoncroft Prefab - Source: Own

Source: Bathroom within Avoncroft Prefab - Source: Own

Iconic World War II image - Source: http://fortiesknitter.blogspot.co.uk/

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family?who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Japanese Knotweed - Not a weed to ignore!

Japanese Knotweed is a serious consideration for Lenders, Developers, Purchasers, Landowners, Planners and Surveyors. The impact of the discovery of Japanese Knotweed on land and buildings can prove to be significant.

Source: Charles Lyndon

Anyone who has a garden will be more than aware of the speed in which weeds will grow, which if left uncontrolled can become unsightly and overgrown very quickly. Having acquired an overgrown allotment a few years ago, which I spent many hours clearing and digging I can tell you with authority that weeds are almost impossible to eradicate and therefore need to be regularly controlled. Most varieties of weeds are harmless if regularly managed, with the exception of the odd thorny or irritant types of weeds. There is however one particular type of weed that has received increased publicity over recent years, due to the size and rate of growth. There are plenty of opinions in relation to the risk and the extent of damage that Japanese Knotweed can cause to buildings/structures and there are plenty of examples of people affected by it which has resulted in denial of mortgage applications, disputes with insurers and extensive costs in trying remove or control its growth. On the other side of the coin, recent research by AECOM challenges popular opinion and suggests ‘Japanese knotweed is no more of a threat to buildings than other plants’. The research of members of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and the Property Care Association (PCA) who have interacted or dealt with Japanese Knotweed in one way or another found that ‘Only between 2% and 6% of respondents reported any co-occurrence of Japanese knotweed and structural damage to buildings. Our paper also concluded that where Japanese knotweed is associated with damage, it is likely that the plants will have exacerbated existing damage, rather than being the initial cause of the damage’. The results of the research are interesting and well worth a read; (Link).

Despite research by AECOM and others that suggest that Japanese is not the problem that the media would have us believe, we do live in a risk averse society. To those who buy/sell/rent and generally live in property I suspect that they will be un-swayed in their opinion and instead choose to panic at the mere mention of the words Japanese Knotweed in a similar way to which many people react to the words ‘Asbestos’ or ‘Subsidence’ etc. For those involved with property surveys and inspections it is essential to be able to identify Japanese Knotweed and to be able provide appropriate advice. This article is therefore written to provide some basic information about Japanese knotweed which can be used to supplement further reading.

Japanese Knotweed (Latin name - Fallopia japonica) was introduced into the UK as an ornamental plant by the Victorians. It originated from Asia in countries such as Northern China and Japan where it grew in harsh habitats on the slopes around volcanoes. When introduced into the UK the conditions were far more fertile than those in Asia allowing the plant to thrive. Japanese Knotweed is a Perennial Plant, meaning that it will grow for many seasons with the plant dying back in the winter and re-growing the following spring. Japanese Knotweed is capable of growing 10cm per day and it is highly invasive and capable of exposing weaknesses in buildings, foundations, concrete and tarmac. It has the capability of regenerating from minute rhizomes (a root or creeping stem), therefore there is a significant risk of spreading the plant from digging and other disturbance. Effective removal of Japanese Knotweed therefore requires a specialist, which as you would expect can be expensive.

As stated previously, Japanese Knotweed is a serious consideration for Lenders, Developers, Purchasers, Landowners, Planners and Surveyors. The impact of the discovery of Japanese Knotweed on land and buildings can prove to be significant. Land values can be reduced to take into account remediation works. It is therefore worth knowing how to identify Japanese Knotweed to firstly establish its presence and if identified how to deal with it. Devon County Council provided an excellent guide to the identification of Japanese Knotweed which is summarised below. The original link to the article is no longer active however the images and information below are still relevant:

How to identify Japanese Knotweed

  A Typical Japanese Knotweed Leaf

In the early spring red/purple shoots appear from the ground and grow rapidly forming canes. As the canes grow the leaves gradually open and turn green:

The plants are fully grown by early summer and mature canes are hollow with a distinctive purple speckle and form dense stands up to 3 metres high:

The plant flowers in late summer and these consist of clusters of spiky stems covered in tiny creamy-white flowers:

During the late autumn/winter the leaves fall and the canes die and turn brown. The canes remain standing throughout the winter and can often still be seen in new stands in the following spring and summer:

The rhizome is the underground part of the plant. It is knotty with a leathery dark brown bark and when fresh snaps like a carrot.  Under the bark it is orange or yellow.  Inside the rhizome is a dark orange/brown central core or sometimes it is hollow with an orange, yellow or creamy outer ring, although this is variable:

Japanese Knotweed and the Law

In 2016, the Environment Agency withdrew its Japanese Knotweed Code of Practice due to new government guidelines. This was replaced in March 2017, by the Invasive Non-Native Specialists Association (INNSA) new Code of Practice. Access to the new code is not as straightforward as the EA Code however you can request a copy from the following: (Link)

Below is a summary of the raft of legislation that relates to Japanese Knotweed which is taken from the Environment Agency’s Japanese Knotweed original Code of Practice.
  
Japanese Knotweed is classified as controlled waste and its disposal is strictly regulated. For example soil containing Japanese Knotweed roots/rhizomes is classified as contaminated waste and can only be taken to a licensed landfill site. Failure to dispose of Japanese Knotweed appropriately may lead to prosecution under section 34 of the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1990.  Also, although it is not a criminal offence to have Japanese Knotweed on your land, allowing it to grow onto neighbouring land may constitute a nuisance and as such may provide grounds for a civil action from those affected.

Other relevant legislation includes Section 14(2) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 states that '…if any person plants or otherwise causes to grow in the wild any plant which is included in Part II of Schedule 9, he shall be guilty of an offence'. Japanese knotweed is one of the plants listed in Schedule 9. Also, waste must be transferred to an authorised person, in other words a person who is either a registered carrier or exempted from registration by the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011. A waste transfer note must be completed and signed giving a written description of the waste as per regulation 35 of the Waste Regulations. The Hazardous Waste Regulations 2005 contain provisions about the handling and movement of hazardous waste.

Japanese Knotweed continues to receive an increased amount of negative publicity which makes it increasingly important for those undertaking property surveys and inspections and giving property advice to be able to identify its presence and give appropriate and proportionate advice.  This article should serve as a good starting point and hopefully generate interest for further reading and research for built environment and related professions. 

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Basement Construction - Part 2 – Waterproofing

Nobody will want to deal with water ingress into a basement, especially when construction is well advanced, or even worse when the basement is occupied and in use. It is therefore necessary to carefully select an appropriate water proofing system, as failure to carry out thorough investigations and careful design can prove disastrous and particularly expensive!

Source: http://www.northernvirginiabasementwaterproofing.com/

In my previous article I discussed the growing popularity of basement construction and highlighted a number of factors that require consideration during their design. Undoubtedly one of the most significant issues in relation basement construction is how to keep the internal environment dry and therefore exclude sub-surface water. The impact of water and particularly hydrostatic pressure was highlighted: ‘Water in the ground has the ability to exert a lot of force onto the structure of the basement depending on the head or height of the water. This is something known as hydrostatic pressure. This is better defined as ‘the pressure at a point in a fluid at rest due to the weight of the fluid above it’. Basement design therefore needs to take into account the height of the water table because that will influence the amount of hydrostatic pressure that a basement structure will be exposed to. The method of waterproofing will also need to be designed to consider hydrostatic pressure’.

Nobody will want to deal with water ingress into a basement, especially when construction is well advanced, or even worse when the basement is occupied and in use. It is therefore necessary to carefully select an appropriate water proofing system, as failure to carry out thorough investigations and careful design can prove disastrous and particularly expensive! There are many specialist companies and waterproofing products on the market who offer a variety of different solutions for dealing with water ingress into basements however for the purposes of this article I will provide examples of a number of well established methods of basement waterproofing. Selection will vary depending on factors, such as ground conditions, the height of the water table, the method of basement construction, the proposed use of a basement and as ever, cost.

Source: http://quality-waterproofing.com/

When considering an appropriate way of waterproofing a new basement it is advisable to review the recommendations within BS8102:2009 ‘Code of Practice for Protection of Below Ground Structures Against Water from the Ground’. The standard advises on the types of waterproofing available and confirms the performance grade to be achieved:

Type of Waterproofing:

Type A (Barrier) protection - A barrier to water ingress is applied to the inner or outer surface of the structure

Type B (Structurally Integral) Protection - The structure is formed as a watertight construction and requires no additional protection

Type C (Drained) Protection - Water entering the structure is received by planned cavities or voids and safely removed

Grades of Waterproofing Protection:

Grade 1 - Some water seepage and damp is tolerable depending on the intended use. Car parking, plant rooms etc.

Grade 2 - No water penetration is acceptable. Damp areas are tolerable depending on the end use. Plant rooms, workshops etc.

Grade 3 - No dampness or water penetration is acceptable - Ventilated residential and commercial

Type A (Barrier) Protection relies totally on a waterproofing membrane to keep water permanently out of the internal basement environment. Concrete and blockwork are typical examples of materials used in basement construction, however these materials are highly porous, particularly in concealed enclosed environments such as below ground. Masonry materials have the ability to absorb high volumes of water, which once saturated will seep through to the internal environment. Barrier protection, often referred to as tanking is a method which prevents water saturating through the basement wall with the provision/application of an impervious membrane to the internal or external face of the wall. Tanking can also be provided within the structure, something referred to as sandwich tanking, although this method is less commonly used.

In my early years working as a labourer for a ground works Contractor, I remember a particularly project where I was required to paint the external face of a number of in-situ concrete constructed lift shafts, at their bases, with a liquid bitumen paint, which was referred to as ‘black jack’. At the time, I never really understood why it was necessary to paint concrete walls that were going to be buried in the ground, until someone explained that what I was doing was providing waterproofing protection.

Nowadays there are many products on the market in the form of brush applied surface coverings, trowel applied renders and rolled sheet applied materials such as elastomeric which are used for tanking solutions for basements. The success of a tanking method will be determined by the selection of the correct method as well as the quality of the installation. Many tanking solutions require installation by approved contractors and although these systems may seem expensive, it is worth considering the likely disruption and excessive cost of trying to rectify water ingress to a basement when it is occupied!

Type B (Structurally Integral) Protection relies on the basement structure itself to be robust enough to resist water ingress. In most cases the external basement structure will be constructed with concrete which must be designed to minimise joints as well as being cast with plenty of reinforcement to reduce the risk of cracking. It is not uncommon for concrete basements designed to achieve structural integral protection to include additional waterproofing measures to provide a barrier against water and water vapour. This may include the introduction of waterproofing admixtures into the concrete mix in order to help reduce porosity and drying shrinkage.

Structural integral protection will nearly always have a cooler internal surface temperature compared to other forms of waterproofing and such will be more prone to the effects of condensation. It is therefore necessary to additionally consider control of atmospheric moisture with the possible installation of controlled ventilation fans and de-humidifiers.  Clearly the design solution will depend upon grade and proposed use of the basement and additional measures may not be required in all situations

Type C (Drained) Protection takes the view that some water will be allowed through the external basement structure, however it will be dealt with or controlled when it arrives.  Drained protection may be a possibility in heavily waterlogged ground, possibly with a high water table or where for other reasons it will prove difficult to prevent moisture entering into an internal basement environment.  Any water that enters into the basement is gathered and disposed of in an appropriate way.

Drained protection usually takes the form of a raised floor and an additional membrane or wall installed/constructed in front of the main basement structure with a small cavity in between. Any water that finds its way through the main basement wall will seep behind the cavity (wall and floor), where through design the water will be channelled to a sump, which is basically a low point that will collect water, which is then usually pumped away from the basement.  Internally, there may be water entering the basement but this is concealed within the cavity. Therefore the internal basement environment remains dry.

As you would expect there are a number of disadvantages with the use of drained protection: Due to the installation of as wall and floor cavity there could be a loss in floor to ceiling height and useable space and pumps will need regular maintenance. There is also a possibility that high hydrostatic pressure will result in excessive amounts of water through the basement structure, which may not be able to be effectively drained. This will however be avoided with suitable design.

It is clear that waterproofing of a basement takes careful consideration, where the method of waterproofing should be determined by the range of different factors discussed above. Failure to understand ground conditions, including the impact of water in the ground, together other site conditions/restraints may result in the selection of a waterproofing system that is not fit for purpose. It is therefore always worth seeking specialist advice as remedial works will often prove to be very expensive.

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Basement Construction - Part 1 - Design Considerations

When considering whether to construct a basement it is first worth weighing up the advantages and disadvantages, and then also thinking about a number of design considerations which will undoubtedly impact on the construction method, waterproofing, safety, usability and ultimately, costs

Source:Homebuilding & Renovating

An article in the London Evening Standard from 2013 (link) highlighted the growing popularity of basement construction, particularly where land is at a premium or restricted above ground. The scale of the proposed basement construction in the article was extensive to a point where it generated a section 106 contribution of £825,000!:

A millionaire hedge fund boss digging out a basement eight times the size of a typical London home has been ordered to pay £825,000 towards affordable housing in his area.
Kensington & Chelsea council planners said the two-storey, 9,160sq?ft basement — complete with cinema room, swimming pool and whirlpool spa — is the biggest they have been asked to approve. The scale of the extension, below two large Notting Hill villas which have been turned into a single family home, means it has fallen foul of rules that normally apply only to major commercial developments.

The fashion for digging out super-size basements to create so-called ‘iceberg homes’ in London, and the prospect of years of disturbance during excavation, has pitted residents against each other in some streets ......... neighbours are said to be horrified by the scale of the works which will involve scores of lorry loads of earth being removed from the site. One said: “It will certainly be one of the ‘iceberg houses’ and sadly, our house will probably be the Titanic.” The number of applications for subterranean spaces in Kensington & Chelsea has soared in recent years.......

Although the news article identified above is a rather extreme example of a residential basement construction it does demonstrate an alternative way of providing valuable useable space when above ground construction may be restricted or unavailable. Basement construction is still considered a less conventional method of adding space compared to above ground construction and is often instigated by those who are prepared to challenge the conventional norm and think outside the box. There are however many examples of residential buildings throughout the UK where basements were constructed as a normal part of the building process. Houses built during the Victorian period provide a typical example of where basements were commonly constructed and nowadays, these Victorian basements are often converted and refurbished to made them part of the useable habitable space within a dwelling.

When considering whether to construct a basement it is first worth weighing up the advantages and disadvantages, and then also thinking about a number of design considerations which will undoubtedly impact on the construction method, waterproofing, safety, usability and ultimately, costs.

Source: Source: http://basementwaterproof.com/

Clearly basements can add space and value to a property and it could also be argued that security can be less of an issue as there will be less accessible entry points into a basement, as by its very nature the structure in buried in the ground. Also, as long as the basement is waterproofed appropriately (something I will be discussing in my next article), and insulated correctly, you could argue that a basement can be made energy efficient more readily that an above ground building. Conversely, the perceived disadvantages and the impact that these may have on costs will prevent a lot of people proceeded beyond the initial enquiry stage when considering basement construction.

One of the key things to consider is that by placing an enclosed structure such as a basement in the ground you are subjecting the structure to a number of different forces. The first is the presence of water in the ground. Water is a naturally occurring element in the ground and the level of this water will vary from location to location. Many will be familiar with the term ‘water table’ which can be understood as the layer below which the ground is completely filled up (or saturated) with water. Try to imagine a basement like a boat which is surrounded by water in the ground. The problem is that boats leak, and so do basements!  A basement is unlikely to sink like a boat, but because the basement is an enclosed structure it has the ability to hold a lot of water if the basement is not adequately waterproofed. Water in the ground also has the ability to exert a lot of force onto the structure of the basement depending on the head or height of the water. This is something known as hydrostatic pressure.  This is better defined as ‘the pressure at a point in a fluid at rest due to the weight of the fluid above it’. Basement design therefore needs to take into account the height of the water table because that will influence the amount of hydrostatic pressure that a basement structure will be exposed to.  The method of waterproofing will also need to be designed to consider hydrostatic pressure.

In order to design and construct a basement correctly it is first necessary to establish ground conditions. This will require a thorough ground investigation which although will have a cost attached to it, is essential at the very early stages of a project. This will also highlight the type of ground and any contaminants present together with information of water in the ground and importantly the height of the water table. Other design considerations will include; protection and stability to adjacent structures, basement depth, boundary issues including Party Wall etc. Act implications, method of excavation, temporary support, method of construction in addition to exclusion of ground water. Of course all of this will have an impact on costs and there is no getting away from the fact that constructing a basement can be very expensive.

In my next article I will consider a number of methods of waterproofing of basements and explain that the correct choice of which method to use is crucial to ensure that the internal environment within a basement remains dry.

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Dry Rot – An ‘Intelligent’ Fungus requiring intelligent diagnosis

The reason that dry rot is often so devastating is because of its ability to travel long distances as it searches for more and more timber to remove moisture from

Source: Dynamic Property Care UK

As a Building Surveyor there are certain words that you know, just by saying them will strike fear and panic into the majority of members of the public. Words such as subsidence or asbestos are examples, which regularly appear in the news due to significant cost or health implications. In many cases however, potential subsidence or the identification of asbestos often result in relatively simple and cost effective solutions although it seems to be a natural human reaction to automatically think the worst. The ‘term’ dry rot is also generally well known by members of the public, however unlike subsidence and asbestos the implications of the discovery of dry rot is more often than not serious, depending upon the stage at which it is actually identified.

I was recently watching a well know property renovation programme on TV a few weeks ago where the Presenter had identified what looked to be dry rot on the ground floor of semi-detached three-bedroom residential property. Although, I agree that what he was looking at did appear to be dry rot, his description included, ‘feeding off concrete’ which is completely inaccurate as well as some of his terminology being confusing and wide of the mark. TV programmes should be mindful of the information that they provide, as it is possible, dare I say likely, (just by the nature of the amount of viewers), that someone will act on what they are being told which could result in loss/damage. In order to identify if or where dry rot may be present, it is useful to understand the conditions that dry rot needs to grow and thrive.

Dry rot is a fungus, often referred to as an ‘intelligent fungus’. The reason dry rot is referred to as intelligent is because of its ability to travel across non-timber surfaces and to take moisture from timber. What is left behind is dry friable timber that can easily be broken up with moderate hand pressure.  The reason that dry rot is often so devastating is because of its ability to travel long distances as it searches for more and more timber to remove moisture from. It is worth noting that when the dry rot fungus travels across non-timber surfaces such as bricks, mortar, concrete etc. it is just using these as a route or bridge to find other timber. Dry rot does not ‘feed’ off these types of surfaces but carries moisture with it in strands which allows it to grow and spread. If left untreated dry rot has the ability to affect vast amounts of timber within a building, often resulting in extensive specialist remedial works which are not cheap to deal with.

Dry rot is a living fungus which will continue to grow by feeding off timber, which it will completely destroy be removing all of its moisture. Without being too technical, there are four primary stages in the dry rot lifecycle. The first stage is Spores. The spores are constantly present in the atmosphere however are only activated in certain conditions, which require timber and moisture. For dry rot to thrive its ideal environment will include timber with a moisture content of between 22% and 25%, warm humid temperatures of between 240 and 300, poorly ventilated areas and dark concealed spaces. This is why dry rot will often spread undetected in basements, floor voids, roof voids, behind plasterboard in timber stud walls and the like. As the spores start to become more concentrated they develop into small white strands known as Hyphae, which look a little like small white cob-webs. These are reasonably easy to identify and a good indication of dry rot.

Source: Midas Property Developments

As the hyphae feeds off the timber it will extract further moisture from the timber as it continues to grow and become more concentrated in volume to a point where the hyphae mass develops into the next stage of the dry rot cycle, know as Mycelium. Visible large white mycelium strands can travel large distances in search of more timber and as previously stated can travel across non-timber surfaces in order to find new timber. In suitable conditions, mycelium will continue to exist and grow at a considerable rate within a building. Fungi prefers dark and damp areas with little or no air movement, therefore where these conditions change and threaten the fungus; its natural response is to create a Fruiting Body (Sporophore), and this is the final stage of the dry rot lifecycle. Visually the fruiting body can take a number of forms, however will generally appear in ‘mushroom like’ form. The fruiting body is the fungi's response to a threat to its survival and its reaction is to throw out spores into the air which can be transferred to other vulnerable areas within the building, which allows them to germinate and create a new attack of dry rot, thus restarting the dry rot life cycle right from the very beginning.

The dry rot lifecycle described above demonstrates how the fungus can spread so quickly and how much damage that can be caused if left undetected. It is possible to treat dry rot however this requires specialist knowledge and something that should not be attempted ‘on the cheap’.  If all traces of dry rot are not dealt with then all that will happen is the fungus will continue to grow and spread and start to affect any new timber that may have been installed. The steps below provide an indication of remedial works to deal with dry rot, however please bear in mind that this is indicative only and specialist advice should be sought in all situations:

1.   Deal with the moisture source
2.   Brush down any exposed masonry to remove visible surface fungal growth
3.   Deep-drill masonry at regular centres and irrigate with fungicidal wall solution
4.   Sterilise all exposed masonry surfaces with fungicidal wall solution
5.   Remove all affected timber including a minimum of 1m past the last identifiable location
6.   Dispose all affected timber from site
7.   Provide new treated and primed timber where previously removed
8.   Spray all new and adjacent timbers including cut ends with fungicidal spray
9.   Re-plaster where required using a cement and sand render mix
10. Ensure adequate ventilation is used

Dry Rot is easy to misdiagnose and I would always recommend that you engage the services of a professional such as a Building Surveyor for advice and guidance. Take a look at the excellent video below from Brick Tie Preservation.

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the?copyright notice at the end of the blog.

The Romans - The Original Master Builders - Part 2

I doubt that the modern buildings that we are constructing today will leave a similar legacy to that of the Romans. If we could make the same positive impact that the Romans made to the built environment then we will leave behind a similar positive lasting legacy for our future generations

A Roman Hypocaust - Source: www.pages.drexel.edu

In my last article I demonstrated how the Roman occupation of the UK left a lasting impression on our built environment and how the introduction of new building techniques allowed larger, bolder buildings to appear, the like of which had never been seen before in the UK. I also explained that the location of towns and cities was carefully planned to make optimum use of the natural resources available in a particular location, and how gravity was used to provide fresh flowing water into towns and cities often using lead pipes, sometimes over great distances incorporating aqueducts which make use of masonry constructed arches. For the rich and important in Roman society their homes and other buildings became status symbols. The size of the building, the inclusion of mosaics and painted plastered walls, under floor heating and fresh running water would demonstrate how rich and powerful the occupant was.  

Larger Roman houses were designed around a central atrium. You can see from the image that a Roman atrium would have no roof and would therefore be open to the elements. A recess or trough would be built into floor which would collect rainwater, which would be used for many different things including drinking and washing. You could say that this is an early form of rainwater harvesting! something that is becoming increasingly popular today. Various rooms would then be designed directly off the atrium for which the amount and use of the rooms would depend on the size and status of the building. Larger Villas/houses would incorporate a second atrium, something referred to as a Peristylium, which would include a garden area and would also be designed to have rooms access directly off it. The orientation of the building would be designed so that Peristylium would be able to catch as much sun as possible, however for comfort, in warm weather the courtyard would also incorporate trees to provide much needed shade. 

A Peristylium - Source:The Desert Sun

If you ever watch programmes such as Time Team (for those who do not know, this is a TV programme where Archaeologists, Geo-Technical Engineers and Historians have three days to unearth and re-construct a particular building/structure), you will see that there is always a great deal of excitement when they suspect they have unearthed a mosaic. The reason for the excitement is because this will often tell the Archaeologists that they have found a significant or high-status building. Mosaics were usually constructed within floors however wall mosaics were also used.  Making an elaborate mosaic was a task that would require the skills of a master mosaic craftsman would set out the picture/design while others would complete the actual work of making the mosaic. Small pieces of stone or clay would be used to create the image of the mosaic which would often depict a historical event, have a cultural or spiritual meaning, possibly depict an animal or even be an elaborate geometric design. Some of the best examples of Roman mosaics in the UK can be seen at Fishbourne Palace in West Sussex where Archaeologists discovered a number of elaborate mosaics which they have dated back to AD75 – 80, making them the oldest discovered mosaics in the UK. The mosaics at Fishbourne Palace provide a good insight into the skill that would have been necessary (to design and construct), remember over nearly 2000 years ago, to produce such elaborate designs. 

Arguably, one of the most innovative ‘inventions’ that was introduced by the Romans was under floor heating. It is staggering to believe that this would have been possible at the time however palaces, bath houses and high status buildings would often incorporate under floor heating, which was provided by a system know as a hypocaust. A hypocaust comprised a raised floor which would typically incorporate a two foot (600mm), void underneath. The void would be created by the stone floor surface being supported off pedestals (small columns). Heat would then be introduced into the void by a furnace, where a person (usually a slave) would ensure that a fire was continually burning.  As the heat would built in the floor void the stones forming the floor surface would start to absorb this heat, which through conduction would eventually increase the temperature at the floor surface, this would heat the rest of the room as well as the floor. Furnaces were reasonably large and therefore took up a lot of space so the Romans usually designed these to be out of sight and therefore located them in an adjoining room.  

The Romans were so ingenious they even thought about ventilation!  As you would image the furnaces used for the under floor heating system would also create a lot of smoke/fumes, which needed to be directed away from the internal spaces. The Romans dealt with this by building spaces into walls, known as flues, to provide a safe path for escaping smoke and fumes. Excavations at Ashtead Villa in Surrey revealed that the Romans used box flues to vent hypocaust systems. ‘Box-flues are hollow box-like tiles set into walls to allow hot air from an under floor hypocaust to heat the room walls’  Source: www.thenovium.org

Roman hollow box tiles - Source: http://www.thenovium.org

There is no doubt that Roman Architecture and Roman Engineering was well ahead of its time, evidenced by the vast array of buildings and structures that still exist today in many parts of the World. Within this and my previous article I have briefly discussed a small number of Roman techniques such as rainwater harvesting, the use of mortar, the use of arches, under floor heating, ventilation etc. for which although technology has developed, these are still used extensively today. I doubt that the modern buildings that we are building today will leave a similar legacy. If the earth still exists in 2000 years (a completely separate discussion!), what conclusions will the people of that time draw about us and the built environment we are creating now? If we can make the same positive impact that the Romans made to the built environment then we will leave behind a similar positive lasting legacy for our future generations. I suspect however that very little of the World we are creating today will remain compared proportionally to the amount of Roman remains that exist today. This really tells its own story. If I am around in 2000 years I will be more than happy to be proved wrong!

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

The Romans - The Original Master Builders - Part 1

There was nothing random about the location of Roman villages and towns. Even before construction would commence the Romans would carefully select where towns and villages would be sited. These were carefully planned to make optimum use of natural resources such as food, water, timber, stone etc. in a particular location

The Colosseum - Source: Gizmodo

One of the wonderful things about living in the UK is our diverse history and what this history has left behind as a reminder of different historical period. This is no better demonstrated than in our built environment where there exists many wonderful buildings/structures that provide us with an insight into bygone cultures, politics, classes, lifestyles, technologies and the like. It is only by looking at our historic built environment that we can fully appreciate the skills and ingenuity of the people of their time. Our predecessors would not have had access to modern building equipment and modern techniques that are available today. Nowadays with the use of things like digital laser measuring equipment and off site manufacturing we are able to work to high levels of accuracy allowing us to design to extremely tight tolerances, something I am sure our predecessors would never have ever dreamed of. Therefore, next time you look at an older buildings, possibly a heritage building, just take a few moments to appreciate the skill, ingenuity and blood and sweat that would have been necessary at the time of construction in order for the building to be robust enough to be standing, often hundreds or even thousands of years, after completion. 

From a built environment point of view in the UK, a significant period in history was from circa 43AD to 410AD, which is when the Romans occupied large parts of the UK as well as most of mainland Europe. At the time the Romans were extremely powerful and were able to take occupation of pretty much anywhere they wanted due to their superior military skills and power. The Romans brought with them technical skills and building techniques never seen before in the UK. This allowed them to stamp a lasting mark on the UK, for which the large amounts of remaining Roman buildings, structures, roads and remains bare testimony too even today, nearly 2500 years after they were first built!

Roman Road - Source: realmofhistory.com

Firstly, let me dispel a myth - most would associate Roman buildings as large masonry constructed villas, with painted plastered walls, mosaic floors and running water etc. This is largely down to the media as when a film or documentary about the Romans is broadcast, this is what is usually portrayed, however these larger masonry structures were inhabited primarily by the rich and powerful, and the reality was that most people during the Roman occupation lived in timber constructed buildings similar to the Celts who preceded them. It is from the larger masonry villas and structures that more advanced building techniques were introduced into the UK.

There was nothing random about the location of Roman villages and towns. Even before construction would commence the Romans would carefully select where towns and villages would be sited. These were carefully planned to make optimum use of natural resources such as food, water, timber, stone etc. in a particular location. Security was also a key consideration where the Romans would ensure that the location and orientation of their towns and villages provided a secure environment as possible for those who would occupy these settlements. Early Roman towns were fortified around their perimeter with an earth ramp (embankment) and a wooden fence, however these were replaced in and around the 3rd century with much more robust stone walls, towers and gates.

Prior to the invasion of the UK, the Romans had spent hundreds of years building large, bold palaces, temples, bath houses and elaborate towns and cities throughout their ever expanding empire. The jewel in the crown was Rome itself which boasted buildings such as the Colosseum (completed circa 80 AD), the original St. Peter’s Basillica (completed circa 349 AD) and the Pantheon (completed circa 125 AD).  These types of buildings demonstrated that the Romans had exceptional architectural and engineering skills, the like of which had never been seen before.

Source: http://www.bible-history.com/maps/06-roman-empire.html

Larger buildings started to emerge in the UK where the Romans introduced limestone mortar which comprised of a mixture of lime, sand, gravel and water, to bind stones together to form walls, arches and vaults. Other mixtures were used to form mortar depending upon available raw materials in a particular location, however when set the completed wall/structure would be extremely strong and durable, which is evident from the many remaining Roman buildings and remains that still exist today.

Sanitation was also a priority as the Romans realised the importance of hygiene in reducing illness and death in the general population. Running water, drains and sewers were therefore considered as very important during the planning of Roman towns and cities. Gravity was a great ‘asset’ which the Romans would use to channel water from springs and other natural water courses, sometimes over considerable distances. This emphasises the earlier point that the Romans were meticulous in planning of the location of towns and cities to ensure that they would have a watercourse close by which was at a height (level) which would allow them to use gravity as a natural transporter of fresh water.

In my next article I will discuss Roman buildings in more depth and demonstrate how the Romans incorporated under floor heating into their palaces and bath houses, how the Romans included plastered and painted walls and how mosaics were used as status symbols by the rich and famous.  

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.