Tile removal mess
 

In article ,
antgel writes:
Further to my recent thread about my SDS tile removal ripping off lots
of the paper on the plasterboard surface:

The paper is actually part of the structural integrity of
the board -- it will be significantly weakened if that's
damaged.

Given that lining with new paper would look bad if only done where the
tiles were, would I be any better off with a thin layer of plaster?
(Some of the area will be retiled, so it doesn't matter, but much will
be painted.)

A reskim always looks better than lining paper in my view.

--
Andrew Gabriel

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
antgel wrote:

Further to my recent thread about my SDS tile removal ripping off lots
of the paper on the plasterboard surface:

Given that lining with new paper would look bad if only done where the
tiles were, would I be any better off with a thin layer of plaster?
(Some of the area will be retiled, so it doesn't matter, but much will
be painted.)

Antony

I would be surprised if SDS tile removal on plasterboard left a surface
which you do much with - other than perhaps sticking more tiles on it. Since
plasterboard is dirt cheap why not cut your losses, and rip it out and
replace it.
--
Cheers,
Set Square
______
Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid.

In article , "antgel"
says...
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
antgel writes:

Further to my recent thread about my SDS tile removal ripping off lots
of the paper on the plasterboard surface:


The paper is actually part of the structural integrity of
the board -- it will be significantly weakened if that's
damaged.


Given that lining with new paper would look bad if only done where the
tiles were, would I be any better off with a thin layer of plaster?
(Some of the area will be retiled, so it doesn't matter, but much will
be painted.)


A reskim always looks better than lining paper in my view.

Does the whole wall need to be reskimmed or can it just cover the
formerly tiled area? I ask as if it's (1), I'm not doing it, but if
it's (2), I'll have a crack. :)

Obviously there will be a difference in level of the skimmed and
unskimmed parts - you can't feather the edge of a skim coat to hide
it. Probably easiest to cut out the manky board and replace with new
- a taped seam in the board will be easier to hide. Or you could
cover the whole lot with new board.

In article ,
antgel writes:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

A reskim always looks better than lining paper in my view.

Does the whole wall need to be reskimmed or can it just cover the
formerly tiled area? I ask as if it's (1), I'm not doing it, but if
it's (2), I'll have a crack. :)

If you are skimming a wall, it's best to do it all unless
it's a very big wall and the area needing skimming is small.
You can't feather a plaster edge by just making it thin to
nothing, so you're going to have a line where the skimming
stops unless there's already a step in the wall surface which
is the tickness of the plaster skim.

You don't need to skim behind tiles at all.

--
Andrew Gabriel