Rising damp
 

I have a mid terrace house which only gets used at weekends. I recently
noticed a small area (approx 1 foot above the skirting board) of damp
plaster on an archway between the kitchen and the utility room.

I intend to chop this plaster back to the stone and I believe there is
a chemical additive I can add to the cement mix to stop further damp.

What is this chemical please?

Rising damp
 

john wrote:
I have a mid terrace house which only gets used at weekends. I recently
noticed a small area (approx 1 foot above the skirting board) of damp
plaster on an archway between the kitchen and the utility room.

I intend to chop this plaster back to the stone and I believe there is
a chemical additive I can add to the cement mix to stop further damp.

What is this chemical please?

Waterproofing admixture, available in 2.5L containers from
your local BM. Don't get it or the muck on your skin. That
quantity is magnificently sufficient for your needs, an
eggcupful would be nearer the mark!

Rising damp
 

Rising damp
 

meow2222 wrote:
john wrote:

I have a mid terrace house which only gets used at weekends. I recently
noticed a small area (approx 1 foot above the skirting board) of damp
plaster on an archway between the kitchen and the utility room.

I intend to chop this plaster back to the stone and I believe there is
a chemical additive I can add to the cement mix to stop further damp.

Its a stone house, so this is not an appropriate treatment. What will
happen if you do this is the patch will spread.

Why?

Rising damp
 

Check for any leaking pipes first....(under the floorboards etc). May
be worth removing the skirting, floorboards, cleaning the cr*p out of
the floorspace and inspecting any slate DPC that may be on the
foundation wall.

Rising damp
 

Its a stone house, so this is not an appropriate treatment. What will
happen if you do this is the patch will spread.

Why?

Because the water needs some means of escape. Applying a waterproof coating
will mean the water needs to spread further before it can escape.

The condensation could be caused by several things. It might be because it
is unoccupied and unheated for long periods. It might be a leaking pipe. It
might be penetrating damp, perhaps from piled up earth/concrete on the wall
or broken guttering.

It might be because inappropriate plasters or cement base coats were used.

A modern brick/block house works very differently. The layers used are
designed to work with each other, with the direction of water flow and heat
differentials considered and catered for. Using modern materials designed
for such a system and traditional stone masonry is very hit and miss, unless
some serious thought is used. Just bunging modern waterproof materials onto
a stone surface with no consideration for the type of stone isn't likely to
be effective.

Christian.

Rising damp
 

Christian McArdle wrote:


Christian, please sort out your attributions when replying.


Its a stone house, so this is not an appropriate treatment. What will
happen if you do this is the patch will spread.

Why?


Because the water needs some means of escape. Applying a waterproof coating
will mean the water needs to spread further before it can escape.

or it will be kept in, or it will spread so there's less unit
dampness per unit area...


The condensation

Who said it is condensation?


could be caused by several things. It might be because it
is unoccupied and unheated for long periods.

It's used at weekends.


It might be a leaking pipe.

Not condensation


It might be penetrating damp, perhaps from piled up
earth/concrete on the wall or broken guttering.

Not condensation.


It might be because inappropriate plasters or cement base coats were used.


A modern brick/block house works very differently.

He hasn't said how old the house is - just that he wants to chop
the "plaster" back to the "stone", and that there's an "archway".
Perhaps he'll give some more info., or even a photo! Not much
more to say without a bit more info.


Just bunging modern waterproof materials onto
a stone surface with no consideration for the type of stone isn't likely to
be effective.

So there's no such thing as tanking, then....

Rising damp
 

Just bunging modern waterproof materials onto
a stone surface with no consideration for the type of stone isn't likely
to
be effective.

So there's no such thing as tanking, then....

Yes there is, provided you do so with consideration for the type of
materials involved and have thought about it sufficiently to be sure that
tanking is the correct solution.

Bunging on waterproof plaster with no thought as to the type of materials
and the construction of the house is likely to lead to tears. Perhaps after
consideration, such a treatment might be considered appropriate. Who knows?

Christian.

Rising damp
 

Christian McArdle wrote:
Just
a

to

be

So


Yes
materials
tanking


Christian, is it you or your software that's munging the
attributions like this?

Rising damp
 

Christian, is it you or your software that's munging the
attributions like this?

It normally looks fine when I read it back off the server. I noticed in the
last one, the word "to" got wrapped, but this appears to be the only issue
there. A quick investigation shows that it appears to have happened client
side.

Christian.

Rising damp
 

Christian McArdle wrote:
Christian, is it you or your software that's munging the
attributions like this?

It normally looks fine when I read it back off the server. I noticed in the
last one, the word "to" got wrapped, but this appears to be the only issue
there. A quick investigation shows that it appears to have happened client
side.

I thought it might be Thunderbird, but a glance at Google
("show original") indicates not.

A reply by you to:

a writes:
b wrote:
c said:
I'm c
I'm b
I'm a
CBs reply text here



seems to result in:


I'm c
I'm b
I'm a
CBs reply text here
Christian's reply here

Rising damp
 

I thought it might be Thunderbird, but a glance at Google
("show original") indicates not.

Yes, I'm not a great fan of the

a wrote:
b wrote:
c wrote:

part. Basically because by the second or third poster, it's all cocked up
and someone is claiming the wrong person said something scandalous. I know
the missing attributions annoy some people, but I find the inevitable
misattributions far more annoying and far too common.

Christian.

Rising damp
 

Christian McArdle wrote:
Yes, I'm not a great fan of the

a wrote:

b wrote:

c wrote:


part. Basically because by the second or third poster, it's all cocked up
and someone is claiming the wrong person said something scandalous. I know
the missing attributions annoy some people, but I find the inevitable
misattributions far more annoying and far too common.

So you actually leave them out *deliberately*? That's
really slack. IME mis-attributions are relatively
infrequent. Not attributing anything at all spoils
the thread as badly as combining top/bottom/middle
posting. It's like a load of people in a dark room,
speaking with similar voices, discussing something.
You've no idea who said what.

Rising damp
 

So you actually leave them out *deliberately*? That's
really slack.

I got burnt a few times.

I find that misattributions are extraordinarily common.

Christian.

Rising damp
 

Chris Bacon wrote:
meow2222 wrote:

john wrote:

I have a mid terrace house which only gets used at weekends. I recently
noticed a small area (approx 1 foot above the skirting board) of damp
plaster on an archway between the kitchen and the utility room.

I intend to chop this plaster back to the stone and I believe there is
a chemical additive I can add to the cement mix to stop further damp.


Its a stone house, so this is not an appropriate treatment. What will
happen if you do this is the patch will spread.


Why?

Why? Because it is stated in The Lime Lovers Handbook, a religious
document you may not be familiar with

Rising damp
 

Christian McArdle wrote:

I find that misattributions are extraordinarily common.

So are anograms