How to calculate your sq/m price?

[Woods]

5 days between lime coats could be an issue on jobs here ?

watched the entire thing but where did he mention this? Or why do you wonder about 5 days between coats being an issue? In my experience, once most of the moisture is out of the plaster, which can be 1 to 3 days on masonry and a little longer on strawbales or lath, the plaster won't shrink anymore. After the initial drying the carbonation phase starts. But in my experience, this doesn't affect shrinkage.

Shrinkage isn't even a problem if you got your mix spot on. If you have to much clay or lime in your plaster, shrinkage may cause some cracking to occur. So if you skim the wall before it's completely dry, the shrinkage cracks in the base coat will also crack the skim coat.

But if your mix is on point, you can pretty much skim when the plaster feels solid enough.

In fact, there is a technique where you skim coat with pure lime putty (usually with pigments added) when the base coat is firm but still wet. You skim the wall with an ultra thin coat of buttery smooth lime putty. You essentially skim it "into" the base coat. Timing is very important with this technique, but it works. It saves a lot on material costs because you barely use any lime and you can get a mirror finish in this way. I would also assume this would give a very strong bond since both the base coat and skim coat will carbonate at the same time.

But you can also skim a wall after it is dry and even when it has fully cured. The difference is just that you can't use pure lime because if you skim pure lime at 3mm thickness, you'll get cracks all over. So you need a fine aggregate like marmer dust, chalk, very fine sand added to the lime.

 

[Woods]

@Smudger1

 

[Woods]

Been doing some more research today and I found out that the traditional plastering system is even most cost-effective than I thought. As it turns out, lime was probably only used in base coats/render if the earth mortar was too sandy and didn't have enough clay. If the mortar had too much clay in it, sand was added.

This mortar was then used both in masonry as well as rendering. Pointing and finishing was usually done with pure lime + animal hair when the base coat was not yet fully dry. My guess is that they preferred to add hair to reduce shrinkage rather than very fine sand, chalk or marmer dust since animal hair was more accessible, requiring less labour and/or cost.

So if one has access to dirty sand (loam) from the local quarry that has around 20 - 25% clay in it, you don't even need to add lime for the base coat, making the job much safer. Only the final skimming with lime plaster would require a bit more care.

 

[algeeman]

got to page 2 skipped to page 5
grandad thread

@Danny get these old folk back in line please

 

[Smudger1]

aglee how many meters 2 finishing coats is the most you've done in a day ?

 

[Woods]

Doing some floor screed mix shrinkage tests today:

A: 2:6 (NHL5:sharp_sand)
B: 1:1:6 (NHL5:CaO:sharp_sand)
C: 2:3:3 (NHL5:sharp_sand:loam)
D: 1:1:3:3 (NHL5:CaO:sharp_sand:loam)
E: 1:1:4:4 (NHL5:CaO:sharp_sand:loam)

all have fiber (hay) added to them

Sample B was a bit too wet and it shows how much more it compacts when the screed is wet.

Sample with the best shrinkage factor vs compressive strength ratio wins. My money is on E.

Sample E was also easiest to work with, compacted really nicely, wasn't too saggy, ruled and floated nicely and was easy to trowel. It corresponds to a 1:4 cement:sharp_sand mix. The other samples are all 1:3 binder:aggregate

 

[spread95]

Doing some floor screed mix shrinkage tests today:

A: 2:6 (NHL5:sharp_sand)
B: 1:1:6 (NHL5:CaO:sharp_sand)
C: 2:3:3 (NHL5:sharp_sand:loam)
D: 1:1:3:3 (NHL5:CaO:sharp_sand:loam)
E: 1:1:4:4 (NHL5:CaO:sharp_sand:loam)

all have fiber (hay) added to them

Sample B was a bit too wet and it shows how much more it compacts when the screed is wet.

Sample with the best shrinkage factor vs compressive strength ratio wins. My money is on E.

Sample E was also easiest to work with, compacted really nicely, wasn't too saggy, ruled and floated nicely and was easy to trowel. It corresponds to a 1:4 cement:sharp_sand mix. The other samples are all 1:3 binder:aggregate

Was that 1 section per day? And how much did you charge per section?

 

[Woods]

Was that 1 section per day? And how much did you charge per section?

I should post in a different thread.. can I have my own thread pls?

 

[spread95]

I should post in a different thread.. can I have my own thread pls?

You could call it
modern products don't work for me I want to go back to the 18th century.

 

[essexandy]

aglee how many meters 2 finishing coats is the most you've done in a day ?

That c**t hasn't ever applied two coats, unless it's really cold.

 

[bobski]

aglee how many meters 2 finishing coats is the most you've done in a day ?

There ain't no man in Belgium ever believing the answer.


I have foreseen the future


Get ready....

 

[Woods]

modern products don't work

if you think that's what I think you've missed the point mate. Besides, cement is not even a modern product. It's just a patented version of hydraulic lime which literally exists since the Romans and probably even before.
What we do today though is make inappropriate use of these products.
Concrete foundations? I'm all for it on the condition that we don't put steel in them. If you leave the steel out, they can last as long as the pantheon.

Spread95, my man, you do know what planned obsolesce means don't you? Just in case, I'll leave this here:

Today, most buildings are written off in 30-50 years. This means that after 30 or so years, the owner of the building has paid off its costs. The big industries know this, which is why they typically design their buildings to last 50 years. Because after 50 years, the building has to be destroyed so that something else can be built. And when that happens, they make more sales.

So the concrete lobby deceives governments with scientific papers in favour of reinforced concrete construction. Basically, the industries that have the wealth to pay scientists and universities to write nice things about them are the ones that will influence government policy (construction codes).

If buildings were designed to last 500 years, these big industries would not survive because they've invested in huge amounts of capital (all of their factories, mining operations, logistics, ...). All of this capital is meant to meet HUGE demand. If that demand would taper off, their investments would become a liability very fast...

So in order to keep these factories working at top speed, they need to deceive governments and people like us to design and build according to the principles of manufactured obsolescence.

Got it?

 

[spread95]

if you think that's what I think you've missed the point mate. Besides, cement is not even a modern product. It's just a patented version of hydraulic lime which literally exists since the Romans and probably even before.
What we do today though is make inappropriate use of these products.
Concrete foundations? I'm all for it on the condition that we don't put steel in them. If you leave the steel out, they can last as long as the pantheon.

Spread95, my man, you do know what planned obsolesce means don't you? Just in case, I'll leave this here:
View attachment 80247

Today, most buildings are written off in 30-50 years. This means that after 30 or so years, the owner of the building has paid off its costs. The big industries know this, which is why they typically design their buildings to last 50 years. Because after 50 years, the building has to be destroyed so that something else can be built. And when that happens, they make more sales.

So the concrete lobby deceives governments with scientific papers in favour of reinforced concrete construction. Basically, the industries that have the wealth to pay scientists and universities to write nice things about them are the ones that will influence government policy (construction codes).

If buildings were designed to last 500 years, these big industries would not survive because they've invested in huge amounts of capital (all of their factories, mining operations, logistics, ...). All of this capital is meant to meet HUGE demand. If that demand would taper off, their investments would become a liability very fast...

So in order to keep these factories working at top speed, they need to deceive governments and people like us to design and build according to the principles of manufactured obsolescence.

Got it?

My house is built and plastered with sand and cement, over 60yrs old and will out live me, the next owner will probably knock it down or extend to suit their requirements.
The majority of buildings are demolished to make them bigger.

Expecting a design to last 500 yrs is comical because situations change.
Perhaps your a believer of "future proof" but unfortunately we don't know the future.
New products come out all the time some good, some not so but there's always someone willing to spend and see, making the previous obsolete.

Building companies, and any other company for that matter will use whatever they can to make the biggest profit in the shortest possible time.

I dont think the current companies worry to much about buildings lifespan, with
1.5 million houses supposedly being built In the next 5 yrs and ongoing.
That's enough to keep investors happy for a while.

 

[Woods]

Expecting a design to last 500 yrs is comical because situations change.

then explain why universally, virtually everyone prefers the aesthetics of old architecture vs modern.
Removing some interior walls, improving insulation and replacing windows is still more efficient if you consider the true costs. Using materials that are healthy for us tend to be healthy for the building as well and are usually locally sourced.

Maybe you're just too old to care, but don't you know that proverb: "a man never plants a tree for himself"

Designs have lasted for 500 years and arguing that situations change isn't as relevant as you think. The only relevant point you could make is that building houses that have a lifespan of 50 years is destroying the environment and much more. People, regardless of all the woke propaganda, still prefer to start a regular family. Houses throughout the ages have always been built to accommodate for that. And even if some things change, there's always options to improve upon the original. But rather than tearing it down, you simply improve upon it. We all stand on the shoulders of giants.

 

[spread95]

then explain why universally, virtually everyone prefers the aesthetics of old architecture vs modern.

Most one off houses built in the uk are modern designs. Sites are just done to a price.
Have you a video of virtually everyone preferring to live with old architecture otherwise I don't believe you

 

[Woods]

Most one off houses built in the uk are modern designs.
Have you a video of virtually everyone preferring to live with old architecture otherwise I don't believe you

after watching, read the comment section

 

[spread95]

then explain why universally, virtually everyone prefers the aesthetics of old architecture vs modern.
Removing some interior walls, improving insulation and replacing windows is still more efficient if you consider the true costs. Using materials that are healthy for us tend to be healthy for the building as well and are usually locally sourced.

Maybe you're just too old to care, but don't you know that proverb: "a man never plants a tree for himself"

Designs have lasted for 500 years and arguing that situations change isn't as relevant as you think. The only relevant point you could make is that building houses that have a lifespan of 50 years is destroying the environment and much more. People, regardless of all the woke propaganda, still prefer to start

after watching, read the comment section

Just tell me how many million comments there are I haven't time to read them all if it's virtually everyone in the world.

 

[Monkey Boy]

I should post in a different thread.. can I have my own thread pls?

yes

 

[algeeman]

aglee how many meters 2 finishing coats is the most you've done in a day ?

2nd coat is for the floor

 

[spread95]

Lime Render Cost Breakdown Chart​

Cost Factor	Description	Estimated Cost (Per Square Meter)
Basic Lime Render	Standard lime render mix without additional finishes or colors.	£40 - £50
Premium Lime Render	Higher quality lime render or bespoke mixes.	£50 - £70
Wall Preparation	Cleaning, repairing, and priming the walls before application.	£5 - £15 (additional)
Scaffolding	Required for multi-story buildings or hard-to-reach areas.	£20 - £30 (additional)
Labor Costs	Professional application, including labor and expertise.	Varies, often included in total
Special Finishes	Custom colors, textures, or protective coatings.	£10 - £20 (additional)
Travel and Transport	Costs for the transport of materials and crew to the site.	Varies, location-dependent
Additional Repairs	Any structural or significant wall repairs needed before rendering.	Varies based on wall condition

Note: The costs provided are indicative and may vary depending on your location in the UK, the complexity of the job, and the current market rates.



Looks like I need to come out of retirement at these prices even woody could earn a fortune doing 20m2 a day.

 

[Woods]

Lime Render Cost Breakdown Chart​

Cost Factor	Description	Estimated Cost (Per Square Meter)
Basic Lime Render	Standard lime render mix without additional finishes or colors.	£40 - £50
Premium Lime Render	Higher quality lime render or bespoke mixes.	£50 - £70
Wall Preparation	Cleaning, repairing, and priming the walls before application.	£5 - £15 (additional)
Scaffolding	Required for multi-story buildings or hard-to-reach areas.	£20 - £30 (additional)
Labor Costs	Professional application, including labor and expertise.	Varies, often included in total
Special Finishes	Custom colors, textures, or protective coatings.	£10 - £20 (additional)
Travel and Transport	Costs for the transport of materials and crew to the site.	Varies, location-dependent
Additional Repairs	Any structural or significant wall repairs needed before rendering.	Varies based on wall condition

Note: The costs provided are indicative and may vary depending on your location in the UK, the complexity of the job, and the current market rates.



Looks like I need to come out of retirement at these prices even woody could earn a fortune doing 20m2 a day.

yeah see? That's what I mean... it's absolutely ridiculous. It's just about profit. Product manufacturers pushing a 3 coat system and using WAY too much lime. They use a 1:3 lime:sand for every coat. It's nonsense. Greenwashing horsecrap.

 

[Woods]

the secret of doing good business is being willing to rip people off

@spread95
in most cases, you really just need an earth basecoat and a lime skim. That's how traditionally it has been done all over and those systems lasted for ages and were dirt cheap. It's the same process as sand/cement, but the materials are just a lot cheaper and have much less embodied energy. Oh and most importantly, the materials preserver the building fabric because it allows walls to dry.

 

[Woods]

I've worked with an "eco" plastering crew doing earth plasters and they charge 60€/m2 while using a pump. 1m3 of earth plaster costs 300€, the fiberglass mesh is 2€/m2... I mean, it's just a ripoff. All we did was big ass f**k**g house for rich people. And I wasn't even paid exceptionally well.

And that's the entire reason why I'm here: I want to learn from the sand/cement guys how to work efficient so that these natural plaster systems become available to people with modest income. To stop the overpriced greenwashing and democratise natural and healthy and sustainable traditional plasterwork.

I want to earn a good income by doing good work. Not by ripping people off

 

[spread95]

I want to earn a good income by doing good work. Not by ripping people off

But in effect by earning a good income you are also ripping people off just by not as much.
If your so concerned do it for minimum wage.
when you have jobs done if you ever own a house, you'll get ripped off , its all a game.

 

[Woods]

But in effect by earning a good income you are also ripping people off.

not true. There is a difference between being a glorified sales rep for big industry and being a craftsman. My prices will be competitive and likely cheaper than the competition because I use materials with lower embodied energy (and thus cheaper). But that doesn't mean that my work as a spreader is underpaid. I'll charge what is fair.

I just won't rip off my customers with overpriced materials

 

[spread95]

Fair is a personal judgement.
We see on here some charge £80 a day some £350 a day.
Your fair may not be everyone's.
It can be relative to the customers earnings.
If the customer earns £40 a day to him £80 is a rip off if he earns £400 then £350 a day wouldn't be a problem.
Materials cost whatever they cost but if your happy with a cheap option that works that's great.

 

[Spitandpolish]

not true. There is a difference between being a glorified sales rep for big industry and being a craftsman. My prices will be competitive and likely cheaper than the competition because I use materials with lower embodied energy (and thus cheaper). But that doesn't mean that my work as a spreader is underpaid. I'll charge what is fair.

I just won't rip off my customers with overpriced materials

Mate, charge as much as you can regardless of anyone's income and don't do any favours as a rule. May sound a bit ruthless but they wouldn't do any for you and won't even appreciate whatever you do for them really. Do a good job though, for your own self respect.

 

[Woods]

Fair is a personal judgement.
We see on here some charge £80 a day some £350 a day.
Your fair may not be everyone's.
It can be relative to the customers earnings.
If the customer earns £40 a day to him £80 is a rip off if he earns £400 then £350 a day wouldn't be a problem.

not how it works mate. Governments publish actual guidelines for wages in different sectors. That is always a good indication. Also, what you charge your customer is your wage + materials + indirect costs + 5% profit.
In terms of wage, I currently give myself the official mean income in Belgium.
Your wage is determined by the skill level you have and how long you've been doing it.
If you're a business owner, you have a choice between giving yourself a fair wage that corresponds to your skill level... or you can rip people off and trick them into paying you more than you're worth.

 

[Woods]

Mate, charge as much as you can regardless of anyone's income and don't do any favours as a rule. May sound a bit ruthless but they wouldn't do any for you and won't even appreciate whatever you do for them really. Do a good job though, for your own self respect.

Why can't I just charge what is fair to me? I don't care about their income and I'm not doing favours. But I'm also not going to do a job for someone and deliberately make them pay more than what I need to live comfortably. I would do it to a smug, rich c**t maybe but that's it

 

[essexandy]

I've worked with an "eco" plastering crew doing earth plasters and they charge 60€/m2 while using a pump. 1m3 of earth plaster costs 300€, the fiberglass mesh is 2€/m2... I mean, it's just a ripoff. All we did was big ass f**k**g house for rich people. And I wasn't even paid exceptionally well.

And that's the entire reason why I'm here: I want to learn from the sand/cement guys how to work efficient so that these natural plaster systems become available to people with modest income. To stop the overpriced greenwashing and democratise natural and healthy and sustainable traditional plasterwork.

I want to earn a good income by doing good work. Not by ripping people off

You don't want to learn from us at all. Every time we've told you what we do and how much we can do you either don't believe us or come back with your own b*ll***s methods.
IMHO you're just on here to spout shite and argue with people.
Over and out.

 

[Spitandpolish]

Why can't I just charge what is fair to me? I don't care about their income and I'm not doing favours. But I'm also not going to do a job for someone and deliberately make them pay more than what I need to live comfortably. I would do it to a smug, rich c**t maybe but that's it

You can charge whatever you like mate, that's just my advice to you, as a young bloke starting out .

 

[Woods]

You don't want to learn from us at all. Every time we've told you what we do and how much we can do you either don't believe us or come back with your own b*ll***s methods.
IMHO you're just on here to spout shite and argue with people.
Over and out.

then help me understand. You want me to learn to do as much m2 per day as I can sustain while charging as much as I possibly can?

 

[spread95]

I would do it to a smug, rich c**t maybe but that's it

Now your getting the idea, couple of days on here and your fitting in already.

 

[Spitandpolish]

You don't want to learn from us at all. Every time we've told you what we do and how much we can do you either don't believe us or come back with your own b*ll***s methods.
IMHO you're just on here to spout shite and argue with people.
(Over and out.)

You on yer CB radio again mate, (ten four for a pick up)

 

[spread95]

then help me understand. You want me to learn to do as much m2 per day as I can sustain while charging as much as I possibly can?

If you want to own a nice house, car have holidays and a good life for potential wife, children and dog. Possibly retiring early. Basically yes