Trawling this newsgroup for advice on extending the life of timber fence
posts I came across one suggestion to “concrete some pipe into the
ground, put the post in and pack it with pea shingle”. Has anyone
successfully tried this?

Compared to a post set directly in concrete it would seem to provide
better drainage and in years to come it would be much easier to extract
a rotted post and drop in a new one. However, I wonder if there is some
“gotcha” that has stopped this technique being popular.

Jon McD

In message , Jon McD
writes

Trawling this newsgroup for advice on extending the life of timber
fence posts I came across one suggestion to €œconcrete some pipe into
the ground, put the post in and pack it with pea shingle€�. Has anyone
successfully tried this?

Soaking the lower 2' in preservative, irrespective of the post suppliers
claims, is the first move.

I use crushed rubble or whatever small stuff comes to hand.

I think pea shingle might be too *fluid* and not give the support you
need. The purpose of the concrete/whatever backfill is to increase the
effective post diameter and stiffen the post in the soil.

regards
--
Tim Lamb

Jon McD wrote:

Trawling this newsgroup for advice on extending the life of timber fence
posts I came across one suggestion to “concrete some pipe into the
ground, put the post in and pack it with pea shingle”. Has anyone
successfully tried this?

Compared to a post set directly in concrete it would seem to provide
better drainage and in years to come it would be much easier to extract
a rotted post and drop in a new one. However, I wonder if there is some
“gotcha” that has stopped this technique being popular.

Jon McD

I think probably a little cement with gravel/shingle would give you the
best of both worlds. Easy to break up if the post rots but firm enough
not to wash away. I don't know what the "pipe" would be for

This is basically the way I put the posts for my gazeebo into the
ground.
Stone is better than pea shingle as it locks together better. It also
allows water to drain away from the wood. If you set a post in
concrete, you are basically making a bucket. This will fill with water
that can't escape and the wood rots.

John

On Mar 10, 8:18 pm, Jon McD wrote:
Trawling this newsgroup for advice on extending the life of timber fence
posts I came across one suggestion to "concrete some pipe into the
ground, put the post in and pack it with pea shingle". Has anyone
successfully tried this?

Compared to a post set directly in concrete it would seem to provide
better drainage and in years to come it would be much easier to extract
a rotted post and drop in a new one. However, I wonder if there is some
"gotcha" that has stopped this technique being popular.

Jon McD

When you extract the old post, all the pea shingle falls to the bottom
of the pipe and it's a bugger getting it out when you want to drop the
new post in.

MBQ

On 11/03/2008 11:35, Man at B&Q wrote:

When you extract the old post, all the pea shingle falls to the bottom
of the pipe and it's a bugger getting it out when you want to drop the
new post in.

That's what the old nearly knackered hoover in the shed is for isn't it?
That, and sucking the mud out of the stop-cock in the street (I got some
strange looks doing that last year).

On Mar 11, 11:53*am, Andy Burns wrote:
On 11/03/2008 11:35, Man at B&Q wrote:

When you extract the old post, all the pea shingle falls to the bottom
of the pipe and it's a bugger getting it out when you want to drop the
new post in.

That's what the old nearly knackered hoover in the shed is for isn't it?
That, and sucking the mud out of the stop-cock in the street (I got some
strange looks doing that last year).

If it's one with a water meter, complain to your supplier that you
can't read the meter. We got a free replacement.

MBQ

On Mar 10, 8:18 pm, Jon McD wrote:
Trawling this newsgroup for advice on extending the life of timber fence
posts I came across one suggestion to "concrete some pipe into the
ground, put the post in and pack it with pea shingle". Has anyone
successfully tried this?

Compared to a post set directly in concrete it would seem to provide
better drainage and in years to come it would be much easier to extract
a rotted post and drop in a new one. However, I wonder if there is some
"gotcha" that has stopped this technique being popular.

Jon McD

In addition to the other suggestions I'd also coat the buried part
especially end grain with bitumen paint. Otherwise it'll soak up water
and remain wet for longer.

cheers,
Pete.

"Pete C" wrote in message
...
On Mar 10, 8:18 pm, Jon McD wrote:
Trawling this newsgroup for advice on extending the life of timber fence
posts I came across one suggestion to "concrete some pipe into the
ground, put the post in and pack it with pea shingle". Has anyone
successfully tried this?

Compared to a post set directly in concrete it would seem to provide
better drainage and in years to come it would be much easier to extract
a rotted post and drop in a new one. However, I wonder if there is some
"gotcha" that has stopped this technique being popular.

Jon McD

In addition to the other suggestions I'd also coat the buried part
especially end grain with bitumen paint. Otherwise it'll soak up water
and remain wet for longer.

cheers,
Pete.

Noticed the Highways use a similar technique - but use expanding foam to set
the pole or crash barrier into a pipe concreted into the ground.

"John" wrote in message
news

"Pete C" wrote in message
...
On Mar 10, 8:18 pm, Jon McD wrote:
Trawling this newsgroup for advice on extending the life of timber fence
posts I came across one suggestion to "concrete some pipe into the
ground, put the post in and pack it with pea shingle". Has anyone
successfully tried this?

Compared to a post set directly in concrete it would seem to provide
better drainage and in years to come it would be much easier to extract
a rotted post and drop in a new one. However, I wonder if there is some
"gotcha" that has stopped this technique being popular.

Jon McD

In addition to the other suggestions I'd also coat the buried part
especially end grain with bitumen paint. Otherwise it'll soak up water
and remain wet for longer.

cheers,
Pete.

Noticed the Highways use a similar technique - but use expanding foam to
set the pole or crash barrier into a pipe concreted into the ground.

See this:
http://www.rainbowtech.net/uploads/m...ing%20Foam.pdf

John wrote:
This is basically the way I put the posts for my gazeebo into the
ground.
Stone is better than pea shingle as it locks together better. It also
allows water to drain away from the wood. If you set a post in
concrete, you are basically making a bucket. This will fill with water
that can't escape and the wood rots.


AFAIA tanalised timber can't really rot - at least not for 30 odd years
anyway.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

The message
from "The Medway Handyman" contains
these words:

Stone is better than pea shingle as it locks together better. It also
allows water to drain away from the wood. If you set a post in
concrete, you are basically making a bucket. This will fill with water
that can't escape and the wood rots.


AFAIA tanalised timber can't really rot - at least not for 30 odd years
anyway.

Fence posts usually fail at ground level.

--
Roger Chapman

On 12 Mar, 08:06, Roger wrote:
The message
from "The Medway Handyman" contains
these words:

Stone is better than pea shingle as it locks together better. It also
allows water to drain away from the wood. If you set a post in
concrete, you are basically making a bucket. This will fill with water
that can't escape and the wood rots.

AFAIA tanalised timber can't really rot - at least not for 30 odd years
anyway.

Fence posts usually fail at ground level.

--
Roger Chapman

Failure at ground level is absolutey correct and the reason was
discovered by Ed Baines at ICST in the mid '70s where he discovered
that there was a wicking action of nitrogen salts from the buried end
grain up to the ground level where it evaporated away the water
leaving a nitrogen-enriched area of wood waiting for first the
precursor stainers then the wood rotting fungi. It was at that point
that the oxygen, moisture content and micronutrients were all right
for the degradation to take place. Too low in the ground and its
anaerobic - too high and the moisture content is not high enough.
As what is the best approach clearly it depends on the water table and
other factors but if you can follow the earlier suggestion of sealing
the end grain (addtionally have it tanalised) and NOT cut a new sharp
bit if already tanalised), having a draining medium AND painting or
wrapping a material (such as polythene) around the stake or fence post
at ground level and for say 300 mm below you will inhibit fungal
growth considerably.
I prefer a physical membrane "glued" to the post with say bitumen such
that water entry is minimised from above and side penetration of the
hyphal strands from the soil is eliminated

They will get there in the end but it will take time

Tanalised fence posts are normally (if I remember correctly) treated
to 8kgs per m3 and have a design life of 50 years
"normal" tanalising was about 4 kgs I seem to remember but am open to
correction

chris

John wrote:
snip
Noticed the Highways use a similar technique - but use expanding foam to
set the pole or crash barrier into a pipe concreted into the ground.

See this:
http://www.rainbowtech.net/uploads/m...ing%20Foam.pdf


And the use of ordinary (AKA "canoe") foam? Might not set as fast, but
given suitable interim support, do you think it would be dense/strong
enough for a garden fence or similar?

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

Failure at ground level is absolutey correct and the reason was
discovered by Ed Baines at ICST in the mid '70s

Did he discover the wheel as well?

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:06:49 GMT, Roger
wrote:

The message
from "The Medway Handyman" contains
these words:

Stone is better than pea shingle as it locks together better. It also
allows water to drain away from the wood. If you set a post in
concrete, you are basically making a bucket. This will fill with water
that can't escape and the wood rots.


AFAIA tanalised timber can't really rot - at least not for 30 odd years
anyway.

Fence posts usually fail at ground level.


In my experience of fence repairs ( which is in miles ) .... tanalised
posts seemed to go brittle and break off at ground level. I would
doubt a 4 inch round would stay upright anywhere near 30 years. We
used to boil posts in creosote filled tanks and leave simmering for 24
hours ..... we would give a guarantee of 30 years for those.

Emil Tiades wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:26:18 GMT, Stuart Noble
wrote:

Failure at ground level is absolutey correct and the reason was
discovered by Ed Baines at ICST in the mid '70s
Did he discover the wheel as well?

The wheel was rather useless until a real clever guy discovered the
second wheel.

And a really clever genius discovered (invented?) the axle?

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

The message
from contains these words:

Fence posts usually fail at ground level.


In my experience of fence repairs ( which is in miles ) .... tanalised
posts seemed to go brittle and break off at ground level. I would
doubt a 4 inch round would stay upright anywhere near 30 years. We
used to boil posts in creosote filled tanks and leave simmering for 24
hours ..... we would give a guarantee of 30 years for those.

A good deal more experience than me but I have reset wonky fences where
the posts could have been 20 years or more older and have lost less than
10% from breakages plus the occasional odd one that didn't survive a
further mauling.

--
Roger Chapman