Current bathroom walls are of mixed stone and brick. Previous attempts
at wall tiling have produced poor results, with tiles frequently blown
off by damp. consequently the existing shower area is a shambles.

I'm considering stripping the wall surface back to the original
limestone and putting a fully enclosed quadrant shower cabinet in the
corner.

I can't decide whether it's best to fit it fairly tight to the wall,
then make the best of bodging the gaps, or to leave as much space as
possible between the cabinet and wall to allow for cleaning and
maintenance access (which won't be a lot).

Maybe if it is fitted fairly close to the stone walls and an effective
way of sealing the gaps is found an air brick could be fitted into
each of the wall areas covered by the shower cabinet walls, to help
prevent
unwanted dampness and mould occurring.

Any advice would be most appreciated.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

You really want to cure your damp problems first. If you are already down to the brickwork, I would cover the wall part of the shower enclosure with aqua panels mounted on battens which allow you to pack the battens out vertical. Using battens will leave an air gap which will help ventilate behind the aqua panels and help with your damp problems. Use treated timber for the battens and plastic wedges for packing to minimise transmission of damp through the wall. You can then tile directly onto the aqua panels.

Richard

wrote in message ...

Current bathroom walls are of mixed stone and brick. Previous attempts
at wall tiling have produced poor results, with tiles frequently blown
off by damp. consequently the existing shower area is a shambles.

I'm considering stripping the wall surface back to the original
limestone and putting a fully enclosed quadrant shower cabinet in the
corner.

I can't decide whether it's best to fit it fairly tight to the wall,
then make the best of bodging the gaps, or to leave as much space as
possible between the cabinet and wall to allow for cleaning and
maintenance access (which won't be a lot).

Maybe if it is fitted fairly close to the stone walls and an effective
way of sealing the gaps is found an air brick could be fitted into
each of the wall areas covered by the shower cabinet walls, to help
prevent
unwanted dampness and mould occurring.

Any advice would be most appreciated.


Have a look here
http://www.ipsluk.co.uk/designer_panels/wall-panels/

Then decide how best to form a frame and use expanded foam behind the sheets

On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 10:08:44 -0700 (PDT), Tricky Dicky
wrote:

You really want to cure your damp problems first. If you are already down to the brickwork, I would cover the wall part of the shower enclosure with aqua panels mounted on battens which allow you to pack the battens out vertical. Using battens will leave an air gap which will help ventilate behind the aqua panels and help with your damp problems. Use treated timber for the battens and plastic wedges for packing to minimise transmission of damp through the wall. You can then tile directly onto the aqua panels.

Richard

It's an old stone cottage. I've been reading about modern damp
proofing options as opposed to the need to let traditional stone walls
breathe, so I have a dilemma.

I'm currently tempted to strip the bathroom walls back to the bare
stone and either leave them that way, or get them re plastered with
traditional lime plaster, then paint with a breathable paint.

I haven't read of a way to successfully tile such a wall without using
modern damp proofing methods which then apparently has a knock on
effect of increasing the overall damp problem by not allowing the
walls to breathe fully.

I'd quite like to Aqua panel the walls then tile because that's the
sort of finish I'm used to. But I'm not sure if this would be the best
approach. I guess the air space between the Aqua panels and the old
stone wall could be adequately ventilated to prevent any build up of
moisture.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 18:24:54 +0100, "Nthkentman"
wrote:

[...]

Have a look here
http://www.ipsluk.co.uk/designer_panels/wall-panels/

Then decide how best to form a frame and use expanded foam behind the sheets

Thanks. The panels look good. Are you suggesting using battens for
framework then filling the voids behind the panels with expanding
foam, or using the expanding foam in place of the battens to overcome
the unevenness of the stone walls?

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

The panels NKM recommended need a suitable substrate to be glued on be it a plastered wall or dry lined wall according to the fitting guides. With damp coming through the walls there is not much that will adhere to the wall. Have you had someone to look at the cause in solid stone walls re-pointing can alleviate much of the problem. If the wall is below ground level then tanking is the probably the most cost effective. The only problem with tanking is you cannot pierce the wall surface in anyway even a screw hole can compromise the tanking. You seem to suggest there is a difference of opinion as to wether to damp proof such a wall or let breathe naturally, if you opt for the latter then you are relying on ventilation to remove the damp. As I see it you will need to construct some sort of structure that provides an air gap what you cover that with is up to you but whatever you put in contact with the wall if it absorbs water it will simply transfer the damp further in.

Richard

On 09/07/2014 20:46, Tricky Dicky wrote:
The panels NKM recommended need a suitable substrate to be glued on
be it a plastered wall or dry lined wall according to the fitting
guides. With damp coming through the walls there is not much that
will adhere to the wall. Have you had someone to look at the cause in
solid stone walls re-pointing can alleviate much of the problem. If
the wall is below ground level then tanking is the probably the most
cost effective. The only problem with tanking is you cannot pierce
the wall surface in anyway even a screw hole can compromise the
tanking. You seem to suggest there is a difference of opinion as to
wether to damp proof such a wall or let breathe naturally, if you opt
for the latter then you are relying on ventilation to remove the
damp. As I see it you will need to construct some sort of structure
that provides an air gap what you cover that with is up to you but
whatever you put in contact with the wall if it absorbs water it will
simply transfer the damp further in.

Richard


Is the damp coming through from outside, or has it got behind the tiles
from shower use?

On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 12:46:18 -0700 (PDT), Tricky Dicky
wrote:

The panels NKM recommended need a suitable substrate to be glued on be
it a plastered wall or dry lined wall according to the fitting guides.

Yes, I saw this when I read the PDF associated with the fitting of the
panels. It mentioned no option for fitting the panels to a framework
of battens, though I suppose this would be possible unless the boards
aren't rigid enough.

With damp coming through the walls there is not much that will adhere to the wall.
Have you had someone to look at the cause in solid stone walls re-pointing
can alleviate much of the problem.

I get the definite impression that tiles popping off the internal
walls is a very common feature of old, rough stone walled cottages,
though there'll be exceptions.
The pointing on the outside looks pretty good, though its coated with
Dulux Weathershield, which may not be the ideal masonry paint for the
situation.


If the wall is below ground level then tanking is the probably the most cost effective.
The only problem with tanking is you cannot pierce the wall surface in anyway even a screw hole can compromise the tanking.

It's possible that the outside ground level is a little higher than
the internal floor and this could be adjusted.
My first choice was initially some form of tanking but the more I read
on the subject the more uncertain I became about this as a solution.

You seem to suggest there is a difference of opinion as to wether to damp proof such a wall or let breathe naturally,
if you opt for the latter then you are relying on ventilation to remove the damp. As I see it you will need to construct some sort of
structure that provides an air gap what you cover that with is up to you but whatever you put in contact with the wall
if it absorbs water it will simply transfer the damp further in.

Yes, bare, rough stone internal walls in the bathroom doesn't feature
in any of the brochures and mags I've seen, perhaps for good reason.
I would probably be prepared to take that option though. The question
would then remain as the whether the new shower "pod" would best be
fitted tight to the wall corner or left with an accessible space.

Perhaps alternatively the bare stone wall of the bathroom could be
lime plastered square and smooth to aid in easier fitting of sanitary
ware. But are "breathable" lime plaster walls really a practical cure
for the problem?
I've made one or two costly mistakes in my d-i-y time, but the
potential for error here seems greater than usual.

Richard

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 07:40:35 +0100, stuart noble
wrote:

On 09/07/2014 20:46, Tricky Dicky wrote:
The panels NKM recommended need a suitable substrate to be glued on
be it a plastered wall or dry lined wall according to the fitting
guides. With damp coming through the walls there is not much that
will adhere to the wall. Have you had someone to look at the cause in
solid stone walls re-pointing can alleviate much of the problem. If
the wall is below ground level then tanking is the probably the most
cost effective. The only problem with tanking is you cannot pierce
the wall surface in anyway even a screw hole can compromise the
tanking. You seem to suggest there is a difference of opinion as to
wether to damp proof such a wall or let breathe naturally, if you opt
for the latter then you are relying on ventilation to remove the
damp. As I see it you will need to construct some sort of structure
that provides an air gap what you cover that with is up to you but
whatever you put in contact with the wall if it absorbs water it will
simply transfer the damp further in.

Richard


Is the damp coming through from outside, or has it got behind the tiles
from shower use?

Most of the areas of tile failure are well away from the current
shower cubicle. So it's likely that most of the damp is coming through
the walls from outside, or up out of the ground maybe. Some parts of
the external walls are rendered and while this looks pretty well
intact, it might be of a type that prevents the stone wall from drying
out as well as it might.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 9:02:47 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 12:46:18 -0700 (PDT), Tricky Dicky wrote

The panels NKM recommended need a suitable substrate to be glued on be
it a plastered wall or dry lined wall according to the fitting guides.
Yes, I saw this when I read the PDF associated with the fitting of the
panels. It mentioned no option for fitting the panels to a framework
of battens, though I suppose this would be possible unless the boards
aren't rigid enough.
With damp coming through the walls there is not much that will adhere to the wall.
Have you had someone to look at the cause in solid stone walls re-pointing
can alleviate much of the problem.
I get the definite impression that tiles popping off the internal
walls is a very common feature of old, rough stone walled cottages,
though there'll be exceptions.
The pointing on the outside looks pretty good, though its coated with
Dulux Weathershield, which may not be the ideal masonry paint for the
situation.
If the wall is below ground level then tanking is the probably the most cost effective.
The only problem with tanking is you cannot pierce the wall surface in anyway even a screw hole can compromise the tanking.
It's possible that the outside ground level is a little higher than
the internal floor and this could be adjusted.
My first choice was initially some form of tanking but the more I read
on the subject the more uncertain I became about this as a solution.
You seem to suggest there is a difference of opinion as to wether to damp proof such a wall or let breathe naturally,
if you opt for the latter then you are relying on ventilation to remove the damp. As I see it you will need to construct some sort of
structure that provides an air gap what you cover that with is up to you but whatever you put in contact with the wall
if it absorbs water it will simply transfer the damp further in.
Yes, bare, rough stone internal walls in the bathroom doesn't feature
in any of the brochures and mags I've seen, perhaps for good reason.
I would probably be prepared to take that option though. The question
would then remain as the whether the new shower "pod" would best be
fitted tight to the wall corner or left with an accessible space.
Perhaps alternatively the bare stone wall of the bathroom could be
lime plastered square and smooth to aid in easier fitting of sanitary
ware. But are "breathable" lime plaster walls really a practical cure
for the problem?
I've made one or two costly mistakes in my d-i-y time, but the
potential for error here seems greater than usual.

Tiles are impermeable, though the grout isnt. I'd be looking first at the causes of the damp, then tackling the shower produced damp. A dehumidifier is an efective way to handle shower produced damp in bathrooms, but of course its not going to dry out a tiled wall.

Gypsum, water & (tile) cement react to form ettringite, hence why most damp tiles pop off.

Waterproof paint on the outside is certainly not a good thing in such cases.. You need the evaporation of damp.


NT

I really think you need to find what is the cause of your damp problems, is it coming through the walls, through the ground or due to use as a bathroom? It will cost to get a consultant but is probably cheaper than trial and error.

Richard

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 01:43:34 -0700 (PDT), Tricky Dicky
wrote:

I really think you need to find what is the cause of your damp problems, is it coming through the walls, through the ground or due to use as a bathroom? It will cost to get a consultant but is probably cheaper than trial and error.

Richard

I think you're probably right about the consultant, so I'd better not
read anymore web based scare stories about damp experts.

There's very likely some moisture coming through the wall and some up
from the ground. The extent to which the large areas of glazed tiling
on the internal walls is contributing to the problem is the most
significant factor, I imagine. But imagination isn't the best guide.

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 01:26:05 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

[...]
Tiles are impermeable, though the grout isnt. I'd be looking first at the causes of the damp, then tackling the shower produced damp. A dehumidifier is an efective way to handle shower produced damp in bathrooms, but of course its not going to dry out a tiled wall.

A dehumidifier would probably be a big help. I'll get one of those.

Gypsum, water & (tile) cement react to form ettringite, hence why most damp tiles pop off.

The only easily observable indication that the walls are damp, without
using a meter, is that patches of tiles keep popping off.
My recent thinking has been, " No tiles, no tile problems".
It probably wouldn't end there though.

Waterproof paint on the outside is certainly not a good thing in such cases. You need the evaporation of damp.

Well, it's Dulux Weathershield on top and goodness knows what else
underneath. Do you think a power washer will blast it back to bare
stone? After which it might be better whitewashed, or the modern
equivalent.



NT

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 09:02:47 +0100, wrote:



Yes, bare, rough stone internal walls in the bathroom doesn't feature
in any of the brochures and mags I've seen, perhaps for good reason.
I would probably be prepared to take that option though. The question
would then remain as the whether the new shower "pod" would best be
fitted tight to the wall corner or left with an accessible space.

If the damp coming through the wall can be solved and you still want
to put the enclosure close to the wall perhaps you could fill the gap
with something decorative. layers of different coloured sands, small
sea shells ,decorative gravels or a combination of similar materials.

G.Harman

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 10:25:32 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 01:43:34 -0700 (PDT), Tricky Dicky wrote:

I really think you need to find what is the cause of your damp problems, is it coming through the walls, through the ground or due to use as a bathroom? It will cost to get a consultant but is probably cheaper than trial and error.

I think you're probably right about the consultant, so I'd better not
read anymore web based scare stories about damp experts.

I'm convinced he's wrong re consultants. They invariably end up recommending inappropriate & overpriced measures for PPs.


There's very likely some moisture coming through the wall and some up
from the ground.

why? Normally with a solid dpc-less wall the evaporation exceeds the rain ingress, so water doesnt get in from outside. And BRE testing has shown that rising damp is a rarity, so not likely.


The extent to which the large areas of glazed tiling
on the internal walls is contributing to the problem is the most
significant factor, I imagine. But imagination isn't the best guide.

Ideally you wan a porous outside and an impermeable inside like tiles in a damp location like a bathroom.


NT

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 10:36:39 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 01:26:05 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Tiles are impermeable, though the grout isnt. I'd be looking first at the causes of the damp, then tackling the shower produced damp. A dehumidifier is an efective way to handle shower produced damp in bathrooms, but of course its not going to dry out a tiled wall.
A dehumidifier would probably be a big help. I'll get one of those.
Gypsum, water & (tile) cement react to form ettringite, hence why most damp tiles pop off.
The only easily observable indication that the walls are damp, without
using a meter, is that patches of tiles keep popping off.
My recent thinking has been, " No tiles, no tile problems".
It probably wouldn't end there though.
Waterproof paint on the outside is certainly not a good thing in such cases. You need the evaporation of damp.
Well, it's Dulux Weathershield on top and goodness knows what else
underneath. Do you think a power washer will blast it back to bare
stone?

I dont know. You tell me

After which it might be better whitewashed, or the modern
equivalent.

Modern exterior paints are more or less impermeable, not what you want. I'd stick with traditional lime, its time proven, cheap, easy to work with and effective. It lasts quite well too. The only gotcha is its caustic, handle with suitable care.

Simple lime & water often works nicely. When it doesnt, adding 1% linseed oil can make it stickier.


NT

On 09/07/2014 18:49, wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 10:08:44 -0700 (PDT), Tricky Dicky
wrote:

You really want to cure your damp problems first. If you are already down to the brickwork, I would cover the wall part of the shower enclosure with aqua panels mounted on battens which allow you to pack the battens out vertical. Using battens will leave an air gap which will help ventilate behind the aqua panels and help with your damp problems. Use treated timber for the battens and plastic wedges for packing to minimise transmission of damp through the wall. You can then tile directly onto the aqua panels.

Richard

It's an old stone cottage. I've been reading about modern damp
proofing options as opposed to the need to let traditional stone walls
breathe, so I have a dilemma.

I'm currently tempted to strip the bathroom walls back to the bare
stone and either leave them that way, or get them re plastered with
traditional lime plaster, then paint with a breathable paint.

I haven't read of a way to successfully tile such a wall without using
modern damp proofing methods which then apparently has a knock on
effect of increasing the overall damp problem by not allowing the
walls to breathe fully.

I'd quite like to Aqua panel the walls then tile because that's the
sort of finish I'm used to. But I'm not sure if this would be the best
approach. I guess the air space between the Aqua panels and the old
stone wall could be adequately ventilated to prevent any build up of
moisture.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com


I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound
wrote:

[...]
I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 04:53:41 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 10:36:39 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 01:26:05 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Tiles are impermeable, though the grout isnt. I'd be looking first at the causes of the damp, then tackling the shower produced damp. A dehumidifier is an efective way to handle shower produced damp in bathrooms, but of course its not going to dry out a tiled wall.
A dehumidifier would probably be a big help. I'll get one of those.
Gypsum, water & (tile) cement react to form ettringite, hence why most damp tiles pop off.
The only easily observable indication that the walls are damp, without
using a meter, is that patches of tiles keep popping off.
My recent thinking has been, " No tiles, no tile problems".
It probably wouldn't end there though.
Waterproof paint on the outside is certainly not a good thing in such cases. You need the evaporation of damp.
Well, it's Dulux Weathershield on top and goodness knows what else
underneath. Do you think a power washer will blast it back to bare
stone?

I dont know. You tell me

OK, but first I need to get a pressure washer.

After which it might be better whitewashed, or the modern
equivalent.

Modern exterior paints are more or less impermeable, not what you want. I'd stick with traditional lime, its time proven, cheap, easy to work with and effective. It lasts quite well too. The only gotcha is its caustic, handle with suitable care.

Simple lime & water often works nicely. When it doesnt, adding 1% linseed oil can make it stickier.

That's quite reassuring. I've read similar advice on the web but I was
hoping to verify it in this NG. Thanks for doing that.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:42:16 +0100, wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 09:02:47 +0100, wrote:



Yes, bare, rough stone internal walls in the bathroom doesn't feature
in any of the brochures and mags I've seen, perhaps for good reason.
I would probably be prepared to take that option though. The question
would then remain as the whether the new shower "pod" would best be
fitted tight to the wall corner or left with an accessible space.

If the damp coming through the wall can be solved and you still want
to put the enclosure close to the wall perhaps you could fill the gap
with something decorative. layers of different coloured sands, small
sea shells ,decorative gravels or a combination of similar materials.

G.Harman

That sounds like fun and fortunately it's only a ten minute walk to
the beach.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:35:43 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound wrote


I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

Sucking lots of water laden air into that space sounds less than useful to me.


NT

On 10/07/2014 17:35, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound
wrote:

[...]
I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack


It has the advantage of isolating your shower from the structure of the
building

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 11:39:23 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:35:43 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound wrote


I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

Sucking lots of water laden air into that space sounds less than useful to me.


NT

I can see how there would be something of a trade-off which might
reduce the overall drying effect but it might be better than having
areas of stagnant damp air behind the shower cubicle. At the end of
the extraction run there would be more of a drying effect too.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 19:56:50 +0100, stuart noble
wrote:

On 10/07/2014 17:35, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound
wrote:

[...]
I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack


It has the advantage of isolating your shower from the structure of the
building

That seems important to me under the circumstances.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:04:55 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 11:39:23 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:35:43 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound wrote

I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

Sucking lots of water laden air into that space sounds less than useful to me.

I can see how there would be something of a trade-off which might
reduce the overall drying effect but it might be better than having
areas of stagnant damp air behind the shower cubicle. At the end of
the extraction run there would be more of a drying effect too.

In winter, with a cavity the wall is going to be cooler than the room air. You spend 10 mins in the shower, passing warm saturated air over the cold wall, which will thus become much wetter. You then spend perhaps another 5 minutes passing warm nearly saturated air over it, making it even wetter. This is not getting you where you want to go, quite the opposite.


NT

On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:06:48 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 19:56:50 +0100, stuart noble
On 10/07/2014 17:35, mikehalmarack wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound

I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

It has the advantage of isolating your shower from the structure of the
building

That seems important to me under the circumstances.

I'm wondering what Stuart means by that


NT

On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 02:50:12 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:04:55 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 11:39:23 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:35:43 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound wrote

I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

Sucking lots of water laden air into that space sounds less than useful to me.

I can see how there would be something of a trade-off which might
reduce the overall drying effect but it might be better than having
areas of stagnant damp air behind the shower cubicle. At the end of
the extraction run there would be more of a drying effect too.

In winter, with a cavity the wall is going to be cooler than the room air. You spend 10 mins in the shower, passing warm saturated air over the cold wall, which will thus become much wetter. You then spend perhaps another 5 minutes passing warm nearly saturated air over it, making it even wetter. This is not getting you where you want to go, quite the opposite.


NT

OK, I'm convinced.
So it would be better to have any extraction taking place elsewhere,
perhaps with some kind of extraction ducting to the main extraction
point taken from behind the shower cubicle.
Then again, would this also introduce damp air into the void?
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

On 11/07/2014 10:52, wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:06:48 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 19:56:50 +0100, stuart noble
On 10/07/2014 17:35, mikehalmarack wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound

I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

It has the advantage of isolating your shower from the structure of the
building

That seems important to me under the circumstances.

I'm wondering what Stuart means by that


NT


Only that the dampness could be a more wide ranging problem, and the OP
may want a decent shower in the meantime.

wrote in message
...
Current bathroom walls are of mixed stone and brick. Previous attempts
at wall tiling have produced poor results, with tiles frequently blown
off by damp. consequently the existing shower area is a shambles.

I'm considering stripping the wall surface back to the original
limestone and putting a fully enclosed quadrant shower cabinet in the
corner.

I can't decide whether it's best to fit it fairly tight to the wall,
then make the best of bodging the gaps, or to leave as much space as
possible between the cabinet and wall to allow for cleaning and
maintenance access (which won't be a lot).

Maybe if it is fitted fairly close to the stone walls and an effective
way of sealing the gaps is found an air brick could be fitted into
each of the wall areas covered by the shower cabinet walls, to help
prevent
unwanted dampness and mould occurring.

Any advice would be most appreciated.

I've used tanking slurry with great reults a few times over penetrating damp
walls.

Take off all loose materials and plaster, get down to bare brick or stone.

Mix the slurry (cement based with additives etc) with water to the
consistency of thick paint.

Paint on the entire wall making sure you've covered everything.
Leave for 24 hours and give it another coat if you've got any left, a 25kg
bag will cover about 20m2, so if your wall is 10m2, you'll get two coats on
it easily, if you use too much for the first coat and you've not enough left
to second coat the entire thing, just 2 coat where the damp is worst.

Leave for another 24 hours, do not penetrate the tanking with screws etc.
Dry line with normal p-boards and dry lining adhesive or render with
sand/cement, then you can do anything you want.
The slurry is breathable...about £50 for a 25kg bag .

I use biokil crown:
http://www.biokilcrown.co.uk/csi/154...slurry_tds.pdf

On Friday, July 11, 2014 3:37:00 PM UTC+1, Phil L wrote:
mike wrote in message
...

Current bathroom walls are of mixed stone and brick. Previous attempts
at wall tiling have produced poor results, with tiles frequently blown
off by damp. consequently the existing shower area is a shambles.

I'm considering stripping the wall surface back to the original
limestone and putting a fully enclosed quadrant shower cabinet in the
corner.

I can't decide whether it's best to fit it fairly tight to the wall,
then make the best of bodging the gaps, or to leave as much space as
possible between the cabinet and wall to allow for cleaning and
maintenance access (which won't be a lot).

Maybe if it is fitted fairly close to the stone walls and an effective
way of sealing the gaps is found an air brick could be fitted into
each of the wall areas covered by the shower cabinet walls, to help
prevent
unwanted dampness and mould occurring.

Any advice would be most appreciated.
I've used tanking slurry with great reults a few times over penetrating damp
walls.
Take off all loose materials and plaster, get down to bare brick or stone..
Mix the slurry (cement based with additives etc) with water to the
consistency of thick paint.
Paint on the entire wall making sure you've covered everything.
Leave for 24 hours and give it another coat if you've got any left, a 25kg
bag will cover about 20m2, so if your wall is 10m2, you'll get two coats on
it easily, if you use too much for the first coat and you've not enough left
to second coat the entire thing, just 2 coat where the damp is worst.
Leave for another 24 hours, do not penetrate the tanking with screws etc.
Dry line with normal p-boards and dry lining adhesive or render with
sand/cement, then you can do anything you want.
The slurry is breathable...about �50 for a 25kg bag .
I use biokil crown:
http://www.biokilcrown.co.uk/csi/154...slurry_tds.pdf

This sort of standard builder's approach is what SPAB cautions against. Anyway its not penetrating damp. The OP could do with reading up the theory on how period properties handle water vapour, otherwise might end up causing further problems with this sort of approach.


NT

On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:04:58 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 02:50:12 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:04:55 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 11:39:23 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:35:43 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound wrote

I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

Sucking lots of water laden air into that space sounds less than useful to me.

I can see how there would be something of a trade-off which might
reduce the overall drying effect but it might be better than having
areas of stagnant damp air behind the shower cubicle. At the end of
the extraction run there would be more of a drying effect too.

In winter, with a cavity the wall is going to be cooler than the room air. You spend 10 mins in the shower, passing warm saturated air over the cold wall, which will thus become much wetter. You then spend perhaps another 5 minutes passing warm nearly saturated air over it, making it even wetter. This is not getting you where you want to go, quite the opposite.

OK, I'm convinced.
So it would be better to have any extraction taking place elsewhere,
perhaps with some kind of extraction ducting to the main extraction
point taken from behind the shower cubicle.
Then again, would this also introduce damp air into the void?

I cant work out what you mean, its not clear. Nor why you'd run a duct to the void.


NT

On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:20:55 AM UTC+1, stuart noble wrote:
On 11/07/2014 10:52, wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:06:48 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 19:56:50 +0100, stuart noble
On 10/07/2014 17:35, mikehalmarack wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound

I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

It has the advantage of isolating your shower from the structure of the
building

That seems important to me under the circumstances.

I'm wondering what Stuart means by that


NT

Only that the dampness could be a more wide ranging problem, and the OP
may want a decent shower in the meantime.

It probably is. The op probably does. What did you mean by 'isolating your shower from the structure of the building' ?


NT

wrote in message
...
This sort of standard builder's approach is what SPAB cautions against.
Anyway its not penetrating damp. The OP could do with reading up the theory
on how period properties handle water vapour, otherwise might end up causing
further problems with this sort of approach.

How do you know it's not penetrating damp?
Considering the ground outside is higher than inside, it's fairly obvious
that it is, which is why he'd be better off using a mixture designed for
cellars.

Forget SPAB, they don't have to live in these places and watch mushrooms
grow out of the walls, so it's fine for them to say, 'open a window and all
will be well'.

The slurry is breathable, which allows the wall to dry out naturally once
the source of damp is eliminated

On Friday, July 11, 2014 7:25:47 PM UTC+1, Phil L wrote:
wrote in message
...

This sort of standard builder's approach is what SPAB cautions against.
Anyway its not penetrating damp. The OP could do with reading up the theory
on how period properties handle water vapour, otherwise might end up causing
further problems with this sort of approach.

How do you know it's not penetrating damp?
Considering the ground outside is higher than inside, it's fairly obvious
that it is,

at ground level sure, but the rest of the damp problem is unlikely to just be due to that.

which is why he'd be better off using a mixture designed for
cellars.

that's simply illogical. The best solution is to bring the ground level back to suit the building's original design.


Forget SPAB, they don't have to live in these places and watch mushrooms
grow out of the walls, so it's fine for them to say, 'open a window and all
will be well'.

Obviously they dont give such silly advice.

The slurry is breathable, which allows the wall to dry out naturally once
the source of damp is eliminated

What would it achieve then? Its an inappropriate approach that demonstrates a failure to comprehend the cause of the problem.


NT

On 11/07/2014 10:50, wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:04:55 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 11:39:23 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:35:43 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound wrote

I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

Sucking lots of water laden air into that space sounds less than useful to me.

I can see how there would be something of a trade-off which might
reduce the overall drying effect but it might be better than having
areas of stagnant damp air behind the shower cubicle. At the end of
the extraction run there would be more of a drying effect too.

In winter, with a cavity the wall is going to be cooler than the room air. You spend 10 mins in the shower, passing warm saturated air over the cold wall, which will thus become much wetter. You then spend perhaps another 5 minutes passing warm nearly saturated air over it, making it even wetter. This is not getting you where you want to go, quite the opposite.


NT


Not what I had in mind. When the shower fan is running, the cubicle is
at a slightly lower pressure than the outside, and the fan is pulling
warm damp air and discharging it outside. If you also have a few small
holes in the top of the panel adjacent to the wall, air will also flow
from that space into the shower cubicle and hence outside. Replacement
air gets into the space either from under the floor (warm and dry) or
the loft (cool and dry). In either case you should not be introducing
particularly damp air to the space.

On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:17:06 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:04:58 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 02:50:12 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:04:55 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 11:39:23 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:35:43 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:57:25 +0100, newshound wrote

I have plain aquapanel, with ventilation between that and the stone,
behind my kitchen base units and dishwasher / washing machine for
exactly this reason.

For my shower, I have melamine faced plywood spaced off from the bare
stone, but that bit of wall is dry, I would certainly try to ventilate
it if it wasn't. You could perhaps arrange for your shower extractor fan
to draw air from the interspace.

I don't know if this is the best possible option but it certainly
seems like one I can visualise, relate to and achieve.

Sucking lots of water laden air into that space sounds less than useful to me.

I can see how there would be something of a trade-off which might
reduce the overall drying effect but it might be better than having
areas of stagnant damp air behind the shower cubicle. At the end of
the extraction run there would be more of a drying effect too.

In winter, with a cavity the wall is going to be cooler than the room air. You spend 10 mins in the shower, passing warm saturated air over the cold wall, which will thus become much wetter. You then spend perhaps another 5 minutes passing warm nearly saturated air over it, making it even wetter. This is not getting you where you want to go, quite the opposite.

OK, I'm convinced.
So it would be better to have any extraction taking place elsewhere,
perhaps with some kind of extraction ducting to the main extraction
point taken from behind the shower cubicle.
Then again, would this also introduce damp air into the void?

I cant work out what you mean, its not clear. Nor why you'd run a duct to the void.


NT

I was just having a Heath Robinson type brainstorm fantasy about
placing the extractor elsewhere then running a duct from it to suck
the air from the space between the shower cabinet and the wall. But
life is already complicated enough.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 22:25:21 +0100, newshound
wrote:

[...]
In winter, with a cavity the wall is going to be cooler than the room air. You spend 10 mins in the shower, passing warm saturated air over the cold wall, which will thus become much wetter. You then spend perhaps another 5 minutes passing warm nearly saturated air over it, making it even wetter. This is not getting you where you want to go, quite the opposite.


NT


Not what I had in mind. When the shower fan is running, the cubicle is
at a slightly lower pressure than the outside, and the fan is pulling
warm damp air and discharging it outside. If you also have a few small
holes in the top of the panel adjacent to the wall, air will also flow
from that space into the shower cubicle and hence outside. Replacement
air gets into the space either from under the floor (warm and dry) or
the loft (cool and dry). In either case you should not be introducing
particularly damp air to the space.


Thanks for that explanation. I'm going to see if I can do this.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack

The slurry is breathable, which allows the wall to dry out
naturally once the source of damp is eliminated

What would it achieve then? Its an inappropriate approach that
demonstrates a failure to comprehend the cause of the problem.



We'll leave the OP to decide whether the bee you have in your bonnet
about these things is in any way constructive

On Saturday, July 12, 2014 11:18:11 AM UTC+1, stuart noble wrote:

The slurry is breathable, which allows the wall to dry out
naturally once the source of damp is eliminated

What would it achieve then? Its an inappropriate approach that
demonstrates a failure to comprehend the cause of the problem.

We'll leave the OP to decide whether the bee you have in your bonnet
about these things is in any way constructive

It is constructive to point out poor advice. Hopefully the OP will learn how PPs handle water vapour. If not, will follow spab's sensible advice. The exterior paint is one part of the problem, raised ground levels another - beyond that we dont know what else is going on with the house.


NT

On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 11:18:11 +0100, stuart noble
wrote:



The slurry is breathable, which allows the wall to dry out
naturally once the source of damp is eliminated

What would it achieve then? Its an inappropriate approach that
demonstrates a failure to comprehend the cause of the problem.



We'll leave the OP to decide whether the bee you have in your bonnet
about these things is in any way constructive

The conflict of opinion is not really surprising. I read numerous
articles from both camps on the web. One claims rising damp doesn't
exist, the other says squirt rubber and plastic all over the place to
overcome it.

At least here, there were opinions expressed about my specific
problem, although the exact same differences seem to have cropped up.
Lots of good and helpful info though. I'm sure that by the time I've
mulled it over a bit, I shall have moved on considerably toward a
solution. Thanks all.
--

Regards,

Mike Halmarack