irish_spread
Private Member
Yes
Damp proofing rip off
- Thread starter irish_spread
- Start date
- Status
they are sponsored links
I dont think anyone can just say it doesnt exist. I also see what people are saying somthing else is at fault i.e block paving being to high or external ground level being to high so what is that problem called (rising damp) as its bridging the damp proof course. so is that not rising damp even if the problem is man made or not.
Also different parts of the country are built on different grounds. If you look at old maps etc. . many places use to be old lakes or marsh land or somthing of that type. so different areas are prone to damp more than others.
so what im saying is if you go to a job there is a damp problem obviously not all problems are the same. take this one for example old home. slate damp course original plaster original skirts etc. . and the bottom of the walls are damp and skirts. you take old plaster of bottom 3ft drill and inject treatment creating a damp proof course. re sand and cement not past your new injection (because will bridge damp proof course) there fore causing rising damp ??? so the damp proof course is stopping the damp rising ????
Also different parts of the country are built on different grounds. If you look at old maps etc. . many places use to be old lakes or marsh land or somthing of that type. so different areas are prone to damp more than others.
so what im saying is if you go to a job there is a damp problem obviously not all problems are the same. take this one for example old home. slate damp course original plaster original skirts etc. . and the bottom of the walls are damp and skirts. you take old plaster of bottom 3ft drill and inject treatment creating a damp proof course. re sand and cement not past your new injection (because will bridge damp proof course) there fore causing rising damp ??? so the damp proof course is stopping the damp rising ????
irish_spread
Private Member
I'm gonna say it once more, rising damp does NOT exist. Went round to the poor old bird today to see what they had done. £2100 for 8m2 of rener and skim, salt neutraliser , skirting renewal etc, total job over £3500. Massive nationwide company. Next time u guys 'spot lol' rising damp just give me your card and pin no :RpS_thumbup:
NPS
Private Member
not being funny or owt but how can it no exist ? if you have damp that everyone has a ground level (puddles after rain, snow rain its self)then it will get in ya house! even if its only 200mm upwards!! now thats rising, is it or is it not?now if it can rise 200mm surely it can rise more? portland cement in the gutters of london
NPS
Private Member
you have her ill do her sister 'cold'
irish_spread
Private Member
Have a look at your garden wall. It's getting covered in rain from every side and is sitting in damp ground. Couple of days after it stops raining how much of it appears damp ???? Bottom couple of inches :RpS_thumbup:
irish_spread
Private Member
Was it rising damp Henry ?
sliemasteve
New Member
QUOTE Every case of "rising damp" I have ever done iis NOT rising damp and I've been doing damp jobs for nearly 30 years. My dads been a plasterer for 50+ years and he agrees.
How do you know? Does rising dampness exist? If it does not why do we have damp proof courses?. If it does exist how could you tell whether it was present or not.
He knows coz hes been doin it for a long time and never seen it, neither have i and neither has his old man and you wont find it on the world wide web.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
damp that starts at ground level ( or below) and works its way upwards has to be rising regardless of whats causing it.
How do you know its not working its way downwards? starting at the bottom if you understand what i mean
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Lads, take it from a Paddy (racist statement I know/heard) There is no such thing as rising damp. Im not a sceptic though, I do believe in fairies. Any word of jj lately ?
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
And Flynnyman says
Ok lads I and some others say it doesnt exist so prove it exists, dont say prove it doesnt, coz proving something doesnt exist is pointless.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
My dad and me have often dug our allotment over and since we have never come across fossils and bits of dinosaurs they don’t exist. And my mate uses special candles in summer to keep mosquitoes and elephants from troubling his barbeques; the absence of mossies and elephants proves that the special candles work.
The first point to make is that you cannot extrapolate from a sample size of one or two ( ie dad and son) to argue a case for the absence of a phenomena. And in any event you can’t prove a negative. As for reasoning the absence of elephants is it the candles or that we are on the wrong continent? Most of us, I speculate, have no or little experience of elephants of course we can see that the absence of elephants at barbeques has nothing to do with candles but it is their everyday absence in UK neighbourhoods. Of candles we do not know if they deter elephants because most of us have little experience and probably no observation of the effect of mossie candles on elephants.
On the other hand if we work in old houses and are observational there are many instances which demonstrate natural phenomena relating to dampness. Dampness is simply water in an inconvenient place. If we haven’t observed this we are likely to still believe that the earth is flat.
Rising dampness exists as can be simply demonstrated in any situation where a gypsum plaster is taken down to a solid floor .. wet the floor and let the wetness run to the plaster- it will rise up the wall. If there is a limitless supply of water to the floor the wetness will rise higher up the wall. A time-lapse demonstration of water rising up a brick is shown at Rising Damp (Salt Damp) - Diagnosis and Treatment.. There is also a description of rising dampness on this site. In addition there is BRE Digest 245 if you have a spare 15 quid as below.f you have a spare £15hopping basket
(0) View the items in your basket
Customers who bought this title also bought:
· Why do buildings crack? (Photocopy only) ~ BRE
· Diagnosing the causes of dampness~ BRE
· Understanding dampness - effects, causes, diagnosis and remedies ~ P Trotman, C Sanders, H Harrison
Title
Rising damp in walls - diagnosis and treatment (new ed.)
Author
Peter Trotman
Date
Oct 12, 2007
Price
£15.00
Stock code
287526
ISBN
978-1-84806-012-8
In houses where rising dampness exists it can be demonstrated by three simple techniques or if one wants to be very specific also by following the instructions in BRE Digest 245.
To test for it with a moisture meter follow the guide of Protimeter its no use looking at the read- out because its calibrated for timber. Electrical salts and chemical tests can then be used to provide added confirmation.
It is perfectly possible to have replastered many houses and not come across rising dampness; but to assert that it does not exist is the same as dismissing the fossil record and agreeing the effectiveness of mossie candles in keeping elephants from BBQ’s: it is defective reasoning to dismiss things which are outside our understanding.
irish_spread
Private Member
Hi slie. I've never seen a hobgoblin and I don't believe they exist, according to your theory they may.....
A "moisture meter " is NOT a moisture meter, it's an electrical conductivity Meter. Try using your "moisture meter " on a plasterboard ceiling, amazing the way damp rises. :RpS_scared:
A "moisture meter " is NOT a moisture meter, it's an electrical conductivity Meter. Try using your "moisture meter " on a plasterboard ceiling, amazing the way damp rises. :RpS_scared:
sliemasteve
New Member
Hello Irish.
Of Hobgoblins I know nothing.
Your point about moisture meters or conductivity meters is one of language. When used in respect of dampness they are commonly referred to as moisture meters since that is their role. They are not calibrated for anything other than timber ( usually). In timber they are accurate. In other materials such as plasterboard, plaster and brick they are useful because they reveal things that cannot always be determined by use of the eye.
In plasterboard they would be useful for finding the wettest area which might be useful in determining the direction from which the moisture comes from. It is the intelligent use of moisture meters that makes them simple and cheap devices for everyday use. They are extremely good at plotting rising damp in wall plaster to the extent that the tide mark, that is the height to which rising damp has risen up a wall can be determined. It is possible to mark these these points with a pencil line to demonstrate the rising damp around a a room or building.
There is no argument about the misuse of them by damp-proof companies but often they simply want to rob the public by dishonesty.
If rising damp does not exist or it cannot be determined with a moisture meter ( or conductivity meter) a rational basis for discussion is to rebut these points with logical argument.
All the evidence supports s the existence of rising damp but it is accepted that dishonest people have used this phenomena to steal money from the public
Of Hobgoblins I know nothing.
Your point about moisture meters or conductivity meters is one of language. When used in respect of dampness they are commonly referred to as moisture meters since that is their role. They are not calibrated for anything other than timber ( usually). In timber they are accurate. In other materials such as plasterboard, plaster and brick they are useful because they reveal things that cannot always be determined by use of the eye.
In plasterboard they would be useful for finding the wettest area which might be useful in determining the direction from which the moisture comes from. It is the intelligent use of moisture meters that makes them simple and cheap devices for everyday use. They are extremely good at plotting rising damp in wall plaster to the extent that the tide mark, that is the height to which rising damp has risen up a wall can be determined. It is possible to mark these these points with a pencil line to demonstrate the rising damp around a a room or building.
There is no argument about the misuse of them by damp-proof companies but often they simply want to rob the public by dishonesty.
If rising damp does not exist or it cannot be determined with a moisture meter ( or conductivity meter) a rational basis for discussion is to rebut these points with logical argument.
All the evidence supports s the existence of rising damp but it is accepted that dishonest people have used this phenomena to steal money from the public
Your english is beautiful but stop bullshitting and show us some proof rising damp exists.
irish_spread
Private Member
All the evidence supports the existence of rising damp ?
what you just said means that wet walls may mean that damp rises. Or maybe it doesn't ?
sliemasteve
New Member
Flynnyman
Sorry mate more bullshit.
Regarding proof that rising damp exists. Damp is wetness or moisture generally of an undesirable nature, it must be because this is it says in an on-line dictionary. Rising we are familiar with as something which starts at a lower level and goes upwards in respect of the subject we are discussing. Rising damp or rising dampness by definition is moisture that rises upwards. However, as a side issue in my experience it moves sideways and downwards if the site situation provides unaffected dry plaster to the side or lower down the wall. This is because moisture will move to any dryer place, up, down or sideways.
I find it difficult to believe that if this subject is approached with an open mind, that the existence of rising dampness can be disputed since it falls within the experience of everyone: on the other hand scepticism is a key component of the scientific approach. My disadvantage is that a one-line denial by you requires a chapter of response from me, assuming you refuse to accept what follows.
If you were to suspend a piece of plasterboard carefully in water it will be observed that water rises up the pb above the surface of the water. The same is true for a lump of Carlite Browning. Since this simple experiment demonstrates that moisture rises in a building material it shows that rising damp/dampness exists and is something which we have practical experience of. If you wish to deny the existence of rising dampness a contrary view to this needs to be explained. If you can't be arsed with an experiment you could look on the Safeguard Chemicals web site where a time me lapse camera sequence shows a brick filling with water by water rising from a lower level. This is a visible demonstration of rising dampness - you may of course deny this and claim it is the result of cheating.
The two most prominent rising dampness deniers are the Lewisham council officer shown in the clip in this thread and Jeff Howell of the Sunday Telegraph. I am a fan of both of them for fighting the commercial abuse of damp-proofing companies. Jeff Howell accepts that rising damp in buildings exists but as a rare event. This leaves one prominent absolute denier- the Lewisham officer. In the clip he uses a carbide tester to sample the brick and tells us that 1.5% or some such figure is indicative of a wall without a significant moisture problem. This sort of comment is accurate insofar as it goes but is only part of the story. Some bricks have no ability to hold a significant amount of water such as an engineering bricks, but the mortar or plaster will often soak up up water such that it can be visibly seen.
In the north of England in my experience on interior walls in houses with stone flag floors where there is clearly no opportunity for penetrating dampness coming through exterior walls, rising dampness and the salts associated are or were a frequently seen. The presence of nitrates and chlorides are easily established. In my opinion the probe type moisture meter criticised by both Jeff and the council officer (LCO) were subject to a one-sided commentary. Protimeter in their guidance explicitly state how to use the device which is not in the manner of some surveyors and damp-proof company operators or of the description of usage given by Jeff Howell or the LCO. The Protimeter directs the operator to the highest levels of salt concentration in the plaster it is this, and the manner in which readings rapidly fall way all-away that provide the first clues to the presence of rising dampness. Confirmation is them by way of a salts test.
The carbide meter will suggest a low level of moisture in many bricks because the saturation moisture level of the brick is low i.e. it might be impossible for an engineering brick to hold 1% of its weight in absorbed water, however this does not stop rising damp to track upwards via the mortar and/or the wall plaster.
Interestingly I once helped an householder defend an action for refusing to pay a damp-proof company invoice. I claimed that the damp-proofing did not work. The company had drilled through the skirting board and had not removed any wall-plaster ( there is no exaggeration in this). In their defence they returned to the property asked me to indicate where the rising dampness was worst, they then drilled the bricks and did a few carbide tests in all cases the readings were less than 5% moisture. In the Small Claims court I argued on the basis of a probe type moisture meter indicating the highest levels of moisture and the presence of nitrates and chlorides in the wall plaster in the manner indicative of rising damp. Part of my argument in court was that a hard well baked brick will always show a low level of moisture but dampness was manifest in the wall plaster what was happening in the brick was of no concern to the householder. The registrar found in our favour.
I once surveyed a house where there was evidence of rising damp in a half brick thick wall between a kitchen and living room. The dampness extended about 600 mm up the wall. The kitchen was being fitted out (phase one of a refurb) and I was asked my opinion. I suggested a replacement to the existing dpc by way of chemical injection or the more costly provision of a new plastic one. The kitchen wall was rendered with a sand/cement/admix to one metre high. The client agreed to a dpc injected from the living room side in phase two. Once the kitchen was completed and decorated the client was so impressed with the builder and how dry the room was that they agreed there was no need for a dpc. In phase two the other sdie of the kitchen living wall was similarly rendered up to one metre. I was called back a few months later, it hadn't taken long for the damp in the wall to rise and show above one metre. The reason is clear previously moisture used to rise up the wall and evaporate out into the atmosphere of the room once this route was stopped by I guess an impermeable render, the damp shot up 300 mm in the course of a few months to exit above the new render with a long continuous wet mark to both rooms. Obviously this is a slightly unusual situation but it is an absolute demonstration of water rising up building materials.
steve
Sorry mate more bullshit.
Regarding proof that rising damp exists. Damp is wetness or moisture generally of an undesirable nature, it must be because this is it says in an on-line dictionary. Rising we are familiar with as something which starts at a lower level and goes upwards in respect of the subject we are discussing. Rising damp or rising dampness by definition is moisture that rises upwards. However, as a side issue in my experience it moves sideways and downwards if the site situation provides unaffected dry plaster to the side or lower down the wall. This is because moisture will move to any dryer place, up, down or sideways.
I find it difficult to believe that if this subject is approached with an open mind, that the existence of rising dampness can be disputed since it falls within the experience of everyone: on the other hand scepticism is a key component of the scientific approach. My disadvantage is that a one-line denial by you requires a chapter of response from me, assuming you refuse to accept what follows.
If you were to suspend a piece of plasterboard carefully in water it will be observed that water rises up the pb above the surface of the water. The same is true for a lump of Carlite Browning. Since this simple experiment demonstrates that moisture rises in a building material it shows that rising damp/dampness exists and is something which we have practical experience of. If you wish to deny the existence of rising dampness a contrary view to this needs to be explained. If you can't be arsed with an experiment you could look on the Safeguard Chemicals web site where a time me lapse camera sequence shows a brick filling with water by water rising from a lower level. This is a visible demonstration of rising dampness - you may of course deny this and claim it is the result of cheating.
The two most prominent rising dampness deniers are the Lewisham council officer shown in the clip in this thread and Jeff Howell of the Sunday Telegraph. I am a fan of both of them for fighting the commercial abuse of damp-proofing companies. Jeff Howell accepts that rising damp in buildings exists but as a rare event. This leaves one prominent absolute denier- the Lewisham officer. In the clip he uses a carbide tester to sample the brick and tells us that 1.5% or some such figure is indicative of a wall without a significant moisture problem. This sort of comment is accurate insofar as it goes but is only part of the story. Some bricks have no ability to hold a significant amount of water such as an engineering bricks, but the mortar or plaster will often soak up up water such that it can be visibly seen.
In the north of England in my experience on interior walls in houses with stone flag floors where there is clearly no opportunity for penetrating dampness coming through exterior walls, rising dampness and the salts associated are or were a frequently seen. The presence of nitrates and chlorides are easily established. In my opinion the probe type moisture meter criticised by both Jeff and the council officer (LCO) were subject to a one-sided commentary. Protimeter in their guidance explicitly state how to use the device which is not in the manner of some surveyors and damp-proof company operators or of the description of usage given by Jeff Howell or the LCO. The Protimeter directs the operator to the highest levels of salt concentration in the plaster it is this, and the manner in which readings rapidly fall way all-away that provide the first clues to the presence of rising dampness. Confirmation is them by way of a salts test.
The carbide meter will suggest a low level of moisture in many bricks because the saturation moisture level of the brick is low i.e. it might be impossible for an engineering brick to hold 1% of its weight in absorbed water, however this does not stop rising damp to track upwards via the mortar and/or the wall plaster.
Interestingly I once helped an householder defend an action for refusing to pay a damp-proof company invoice. I claimed that the damp-proofing did not work. The company had drilled through the skirting board and had not removed any wall-plaster ( there is no exaggeration in this). In their defence they returned to the property asked me to indicate where the rising dampness was worst, they then drilled the bricks and did a few carbide tests in all cases the readings were less than 5% moisture. In the Small Claims court I argued on the basis of a probe type moisture meter indicating the highest levels of moisture and the presence of nitrates and chlorides in the wall plaster in the manner indicative of rising damp. Part of my argument in court was that a hard well baked brick will always show a low level of moisture but dampness was manifest in the wall plaster what was happening in the brick was of no concern to the householder. The registrar found in our favour.
I once surveyed a house where there was evidence of rising damp in a half brick thick wall between a kitchen and living room. The dampness extended about 600 mm up the wall. The kitchen was being fitted out (phase one of a refurb) and I was asked my opinion. I suggested a replacement to the existing dpc by way of chemical injection or the more costly provision of a new plastic one. The kitchen wall was rendered with a sand/cement/admix to one metre high. The client agreed to a dpc injected from the living room side in phase two. Once the kitchen was completed and decorated the client was so impressed with the builder and how dry the room was that they agreed there was no need for a dpc. In phase two the other sdie of the kitchen living wall was similarly rendered up to one metre. I was called back a few months later, it hadn't taken long for the damp in the wall to rise and show above one metre. The reason is clear previously moisture used to rise up the wall and evaporate out into the atmosphere of the room once this route was stopped by I guess an impermeable render, the damp shot up 300 mm in the course of a few months to exit above the new render with a long continuous wet mark to both rooms. Obviously this is a slightly unusual situation but it is an absolute demonstration of water rising up building materials.
steve
FreeD
Private Member
I was speaking to a guy today who does damproofing, he said hes seen man cases in house built with lime mortar. When hes being doing the injections, when he pulled out his bit out was wet on the end. I did check with him that it was the drill bit he was inserting into the hole, and it was.
FreeD
Private Member
Nice one Steve, case study to back it up, welcome to the forum, good to have some1 who actually takes the time to write an interesting and helpful post on here for a change.
im gonna have to re-read this coz it was a lot of bullshit to take in in one go, you never mention condensation you did mention putting plasterboard and browning in water which is obvious what will happen the same a putting a digestive in a cup of tea it dont mean s**t. Explain to me why all of a sudden rising damp will exist when it never has before? Is it something that just turns up? (no pun intended)
irish_spread
Private Member
Sounds like you may work for/as a "rising dampness" company. Dampness will "rise" up through some plasters, eg bonding, browning etc. it does not rise up through the bricks. Try laying a couple of courses of brickwork in a container of some sort filled with water and see if the dampness rises.
Are you also a plasterer?
how come you have come across so many cases of rising damp and decided they need injection and yet I (and thousands of other plasterers ) have managed to "cure" the rising damp without injection ?
Are you also a plasterer?
how come you have come across so many cases of rising damp and decided they need injection and yet I (and thousands of other plasterers ) have managed to "cure" the rising damp without injection ?
sliemasteve
New Member
To Irishspread
Sounds like you may work for/as a "rising dampness" company.
///////////////////
Dampness will "rise" up through some plasters, eg bonding, browning etc.
.
This demonstrates rising damp thus it exists which is what this debate is about
////////////////////////
it does not rise up through the bricks.
You are right in respect of well-baked hard bricks and dense stone but in soft commons especially from the Victorian or Georgian eras not only do they get wet through and through but if you drill them, when fitting skirting board for example, it is sludge that comes down the flutes of the drill bit.
If your assertion was correct there would be no need for dpc’c in buildings. Rising damp does go through bricks but as I have written previously the quality of the brick is an important issue, like engineering bricks for example.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////
Try laying a couple of courses of brickwork in a container of some sort filled with water and see if the dampness rises.
As above. And many older bricks are very porous and absorb moisture through rising dampness. If you want to see it in action look on the Safeguard Chemicals web site where the time lapse film demonstrates water rising up a brick.
However this is not the central debate, in accepting rising damp in plaster it is acknowledging that rising dampness exists.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Are you also a plasterer? I’m in France doing up an old cottage but stopped from rendering the outside for the moment due to the weather. The first time I replastered after a dpc installation was in 1980. The background or qualification of a person is not as important as the logic and merit of their argument.
/////////////////////////////////////
how come you have come across so many cases of rising damp and decided they need injection
It wold not matter if I were a gynaecologist it is the merit of the points put forward that validates a belief
I think that putting a physical barrier barrier in the wall ie typical plastic dpc is much better than chemical injection.
In 1980m I was ripped off by a damp-proofing company and decided to become more knowledgeable than the typical damp proof surveyor
////////////////////////////////
and yet I (and thousands of other plasterers ) have managed to "cure" the rising damp without injection ?
You have failed to read my last post where I provide you with an example of a wall rendered both sides which failed to stop rising damp. Rendering or plastering over a wall with rising damp does not stop rising damp. In fact if you use a non-porous rendering material to both sides of an internal wall you will tend to accelerate rising dampness up the wall
aND if you replastered with Carlight Browning and subsequently all was well, there was no rising dampness in the first instance.
One aspect of which I have no knowledge is the issue of gravity. The forces that promote the rise of water up a wall may at some stage be countered and equalled by the force of gravity, perhaps this usually happens within the normal replastering height of one
Metre; thereby delivering the ‘cure’ by plasterers that you suggest.
As an aside the highest recorded height of rising damp (of which I am aware) goes is over ten metres. I read this in a book, The Conservation of Historic Buildings by Bernard Fieldenn. I am confident he is not a plasterer; should we believe him?
Regards Steve
/////////////////////////////
Sounds like you may work for/as a "rising dampness" company.
///////////////////
Dampness will "rise" up through some plasters, eg bonding, browning etc.
.
This demonstrates rising damp thus it exists which is what this debate is about
////////////////////////
it does not rise up through the bricks.
You are right in respect of well-baked hard bricks and dense stone but in soft commons especially from the Victorian or Georgian eras not only do they get wet through and through but if you drill them, when fitting skirting board for example, it is sludge that comes down the flutes of the drill bit.
If your assertion was correct there would be no need for dpc’c in buildings. Rising damp does go through bricks but as I have written previously the quality of the brick is an important issue, like engineering bricks for example.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////
Try laying a couple of courses of brickwork in a container of some sort filled with water and see if the dampness rises.
As above. And many older bricks are very porous and absorb moisture through rising dampness. If you want to see it in action look on the Safeguard Chemicals web site where the time lapse film demonstrates water rising up a brick.
However this is not the central debate, in accepting rising damp in plaster it is acknowledging that rising dampness exists.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Are you also a plasterer? I’m in France doing up an old cottage but stopped from rendering the outside for the moment due to the weather. The first time I replastered after a dpc installation was in 1980. The background or qualification of a person is not as important as the logic and merit of their argument.
/////////////////////////////////////
how come you have come across so many cases of rising damp and decided they need injection
It wold not matter if I were a gynaecologist it is the merit of the points put forward that validates a belief
I think that putting a physical barrier barrier in the wall ie typical plastic dpc is much better than chemical injection.
In 1980m I was ripped off by a damp-proofing company and decided to become more knowledgeable than the typical damp proof surveyor
////////////////////////////////
and yet I (and thousands of other plasterers ) have managed to "cure" the rising damp without injection ?
You have failed to read my last post where I provide you with an example of a wall rendered both sides which failed to stop rising damp. Rendering or plastering over a wall with rising damp does not stop rising damp. In fact if you use a non-porous rendering material to both sides of an internal wall you will tend to accelerate rising dampness up the wall
aND if you replastered with Carlight Browning and subsequently all was well, there was no rising dampness in the first instance.
One aspect of which I have no knowledge is the issue of gravity. The forces that promote the rise of water up a wall may at some stage be countered and equalled by the force of gravity, perhaps this usually happens within the normal replastering height of one
Metre; thereby delivering the ‘cure’ by plasterers that you suggest.
As an aside the highest recorded height of rising damp (of which I am aware) goes is over ten metres. I read this in a book, The Conservation of Historic Buildings by Bernard Fieldenn. I am confident he is not a plasterer; should we believe him?
Regards Steve
/////////////////////////////
sliemasteve
New Member
Flynnyman says
im gonna have to re-read this coz it was a lot of bullshit to take in in one go,
.
OK
//////////////////////
you never mention condensation
.
To mention condensation would be to digress from the topic but since you ask I mention it below.
/////////////////////////////
you did mention putting plasterboard and browning in water which is obvious what will happen the same a putting a digestive in a cup of tea it dont mean s**t.
.
Of course it does (mean something other than s**t), rising damp is simply one particular manifestation of a phenomena that exists in many situations. To demonstrate rising damp is to show that it exists if it only existed in plasterboard or gypsum plaster that would prove its existence and thus end this particular debate. In accepting the phenomena in gypsum and plasterboard you are acknowledging the existence of rising damp.
//////////////////////////////////
Explain to me why all of a sudden rising damp will exist
Rising damp has always existed whilst this planet has been in its present form; it is a natural phenomenon a bit like gravity. For all I know t existed when we were a lump of hot metal but all of this is a digression it exists in the present, that is the here and now which is what this debate is about.
////////////////////////////////
when it never has before?
You know this is incorrect from your observations about digestive biscuits and your acknowledgement of rising dampness in plasterboard and gypsum.
///////////////////////////////////
Is it something that just turns up? (no pun intended).
.
The Romans mention it two thousand years ago. One observation that older people sometimes make is that when they were children they have no recollection of condensation on their windows whereas it is now a significant problem in their home. Often this is because when they were children they heated their house by a coal fire, this moved large volumes of air through a dwelling, this removed a lot of hot moist air via the chimney. In addition nowadays we have doors and windows that are air-tight or nearly-so this results in much less air movement from the outside to the inside the trapped hot air within the house carries more water, when the house temperature cools, such as at night, the cooler air holds less water, the result is condensatioin forming on the coldest surfaces. Thus the change in how we heat buildings and the stopping of this expensive hot air from escaping is a significant change in how we use buildings from our parents generation.
Less air movement in modern houses probably makes rising damp more apparent for a variety of reasons. The reason rising dampness is more of an issue is the use of moisture meters and the damp industry that has grown around it, in my opinion.
///////////////////////////
Personally I think we have flogged this subject to death.
Regards Steve
im gonna have to re-read this coz it was a lot of bullshit to take in in one go,
.
OK
//////////////////////
you never mention condensation
.
To mention condensation would be to digress from the topic but since you ask I mention it below.
/////////////////////////////
you did mention putting plasterboard and browning in water which is obvious what will happen the same a putting a digestive in a cup of tea it dont mean s**t.
.
Of course it does (mean something other than s**t), rising damp is simply one particular manifestation of a phenomena that exists in many situations. To demonstrate rising damp is to show that it exists if it only existed in plasterboard or gypsum plaster that would prove its existence and thus end this particular debate. In accepting the phenomena in gypsum and plasterboard you are acknowledging the existence of rising damp.
//////////////////////////////////
Explain to me why all of a sudden rising damp will exist
Rising damp has always existed whilst this planet has been in its present form; it is a natural phenomenon a bit like gravity. For all I know t existed when we were a lump of hot metal but all of this is a digression it exists in the present, that is the here and now which is what this debate is about.
////////////////////////////////
when it never has before?
You know this is incorrect from your observations about digestive biscuits and your acknowledgement of rising dampness in plasterboard and gypsum.
///////////////////////////////////
Is it something that just turns up? (no pun intended).
.
The Romans mention it two thousand years ago. One observation that older people sometimes make is that when they were children they have no recollection of condensation on their windows whereas it is now a significant problem in their home. Often this is because when they were children they heated their house by a coal fire, this moved large volumes of air through a dwelling, this removed a lot of hot moist air via the chimney. In addition nowadays we have doors and windows that are air-tight or nearly-so this results in much less air movement from the outside to the inside the trapped hot air within the house carries more water, when the house temperature cools, such as at night, the cooler air holds less water, the result is condensatioin forming on the coldest surfaces. Thus the change in how we heat buildings and the stopping of this expensive hot air from escaping is a significant change in how we use buildings from our parents generation.
Less air movement in modern houses probably makes rising damp more apparent for a variety of reasons. The reason rising dampness is more of an issue is the use of moisture meters and the damp industry that has grown around it, in my opinion.
///////////////////////////
Personally I think we have flogged this subject to death.
Regards Steve
irish_spread
Private Member
Stephen Boniface, former chairman of the RICS has stated that rising damp is a myth.
i can't remember where but I recently watched a video where an independent research team set up an experiment under controlled conditions where dozens of different types of bricks and brick/mortar combinations were payed in soaking damp areas over a period of years. No evidence of rising damp.
every case of "rising damp" diagnosed by surveyors that I have treated using s+c with salt neutralisers and eradicating the cause of the damp have been 100% succesful.
Safegaurd are a company that invents and sells chemical dpc s. I reckon they may be a bit biased. Don't forget Marlboro cigarettes are good for you:RpS_thumbup:
If people insist on a chem dpc after I tell them they'd be better off getting the bricks blessed by a faith healer I will gladly take their money and inject. The difference between me and a rising damp company is that I'll tell the customer the truth.
End of
i can't remember where but I recently watched a video where an independent research team set up an experiment under controlled conditions where dozens of different types of bricks and brick/mortar combinations were payed in soaking damp areas over a period of years. No evidence of rising damp.
every case of "rising damp" diagnosed by surveyors that I have treated using s+c with salt neutralisers and eradicating the cause of the damp have been 100% succesful.
Safegaurd are a company that invents and sells chemical dpc s. I reckon they may be a bit biased. Don't forget Marlboro cigarettes are good for you:RpS_thumbup:
If people insist on a chem dpc after I tell them they'd be better off getting the bricks blessed by a faith healer I will gladly take their money and inject. The difference between me and a rising damp company is that I'll tell the customer the truth.
End of
- Status