On Monday, January 28, 2013 4:14:17 PM UTC, harry wrote:
On Jan 28, 8:19*am, John Rumm wrote:

On 28/01/2013 07:44, harry wrote:



















On Jan 27, 9:37 pm, John Rumm wrote:

On 27/01/2013 19:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:



On 27/01/13 13:10, Kenny wrote:

Tim Watts wrote ...



OK - ignore part of my earlier question...



But I still wonder if it was the occupiers who fitted these or the

council?



As they were tied into the wall, they must have been put up when the

houses were built. *There is flushing along the wall above the joint.



that doesn't follow at ALL.

easy enouh to add flashing and tie into an existing structure.



And what is more, it will actually weaken the wall[1] making it less

able to withstand exactly the kind of force it was going to exert on it.



[1] Raking half of a whole mortar course to insert the edge of the flashing.



Masonry walls stand by gravity so it makes little difference.



Actually it makes quite a significant difference. Pulling a brick out

with mortar on all sides is far harder than pulling out one that has a

section of mortar above it removed and replaced with something that is

ductile and self lubricating.



--

Cheers,



John.



/================================================== ===============\

| * * * * *Internode Ltd - *http://www.internode.co.uk* * * * * *|

|-----------------------------------------------------------------|

| * * * *John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk * * * * * * *|

\================================================= ================/



The bricks have not pulled out.

The whole wall has tipped over.

It was not heavy enough to counter the weight of snow.

If it had been a two storey building there would have been no problem.

Looking at the one in Corby before the collapse, the end of the canopy closest to the road has virtually no bricks above the support.