We have a basement below about one-third of the house and its usefulness
for storage is limited by damp, and resulting mould spores.
We've tried to combat this by using a de-humidifier but I suspect the net
result of this is to accelerate the rate at which water is vapourising
through the walls.
Would we have more success by installing one or more extractor fans to pull
air through? The floor area in question is about 45 square metres, split
between two rooms, with a ceiling height of about 2 metres. The remaining
space under the house is just crawl space, although fairly generous in
headroom. The house was built around 1910.

TIA,

Peter

nog wrote in message ...
We have a basement below about one-third of the house and its usefulness
for storage is limited by damp, and resulting mould spores.
We've tried to combat this by using a de-humidifier but I suspect the net
result of this is to accelerate the rate at which water is vapourising
through the walls.
Would we have more success by installing one or more extractor fans to pull
air through? The floor area in question is about 45 square metres, split
between two rooms, with a ceiling height of about 2 metres. The remaining
space under the house is just crawl space, although fairly generous in
headroom. The house was built around 1910.
Unless you can seal off the moisture source, I think any of the above will
be a waste of time

nog wrote in message .. .

We have a basement below about one-third of the house and its usefulness
for storage is limited by damp, and resulting mould spores.
We've tried to combat this by using a de-humidifier but I suspect the net
result of this is to accelerate the rate at which water is vapourising
through the walls.
Would we have more success by installing one or more extractor fans to pull
air through? The floor area in question is about 45 square metres, split
between two rooms, with a ceiling height of about 2 metres. The remaining
space under the house is just crawl space, although fairly generous in
headroom. The house was built around 1910.


Yes, and much cheaper to run. Downside is youd lose any heat down
there, and heat isnt free.

Better than fan is unfanned ventilation: if you can arrange it its
silent, reliable and costs nothing to run. Need 2 openings for the air
to blow through, 1 opening isnt gonig to achieve much - same with fan.

If its just a case of the dehumidifier not being effective enough, I
imagine a ceiling fan on low would help a fair bit - have never tried
that, but I would thihk it would.

Another option is to tar the walls, then the space would be far more
useful. There are also clear waterproofing compounds available for
sound substrates.

Regards, NT

nog wrote in message .. .
We have a basement below about one-third of the house and its usefulness
for storage is limited by damp, and resulting mould spores.
We've tried to combat this by using a de-humidifier but I suspect the net
result of this is to accelerate the rate at which water is vapourising
through the walls.
Would we have more success by installing one or more extractor fans to pull
air through? The floor area in question is about 45 square metres, split
between two rooms, with a ceiling height of about 2 metres. The remaining
space under the house is just crawl space, although fairly generous in
headroom. The house was built around 1910.

TIA,

Peter

It is best to eliminate the damp at source. If it is coming through
the walls and floor, get it tanked. I read in a building magazine a
number of years ago, that it is feasible to build stud frame walls and
floors that do not touch the walls. Any part of the frame that does
must have poly damp course behind and only stainless steel screws used
to fix anything against the walls and floors.

The only down side was that the surrounding earth would give warmth or
make it cool in summer.

There are other methods, like digging around the house and pouring
hard core, or poly on top the surrounding earth that diverts the rain
water away from the walls.

The external work are the more long lasting. The internal stud walls
makes the place nice.

On 24 Aug 2004 05:36:50 -0700, timegoesby wrote:

nog wrote in message .. .
We have a basement below about one-third of the house and its usefulness
for storage is limited by damp, and resulting mould spores.
We've tried to combat this by using a de-humidifier but I suspect the net
result of this is to accelerate the rate at which water is vapourising
through the walls.
Would we have more success by installing one or more extractor fans to pull
air through? The floor area in question is about 45 square metres, split
between two rooms, with a ceiling height of about 2 metres. The remaining
space under the house is just crawl space, although fairly generous in
headroom. The house was built around 1910.

TIA,

Peter

It is best to eliminate the damp at source. If it is coming through
the walls and floor, get it tanked. I read in a building magazine a
number of years ago, that it is feasible to build stud frame walls and
floors that do not touch the walls. Any part of the frame that does
must have poly damp course behind and only stainless steel screws used
to fix anything against the walls and floors.

The only down side was that the surrounding earth would give warmth or
make it cool in summer.

There are other methods, like digging around the house and pouring
hard core, or poly on top the surrounding earth that diverts the rain
water away from the walls.

The external work are the more long lasting. The internal stud walls
makes the place nice.

Thanks for the input (also Stuart and NT).
Tanking sounds ideal, although I suspect it would be a bit ambitious in
terms of cost when measured against the benefit - the area is really bonus
space but it would be nice to be able to make better use of it.
Next year, I qualify for the Staywarm energy tariff so I may look at
plumbing a couple of small rads down there. That, together with a bit of
air turbulence, may be enough.

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:40:52 +0100, nog wrote:

Thanks for the input (also Stuart and NT).
Tanking sounds ideal, although I suspect it would be a bit ambitious in
terms of cost when measured against the benefit - the area is really bonus
space but it would be nice to be able to make better use of it.
Next year, I qualify for the Staywarm energy tariff so I may look at
plumbing a couple of small rads down there. That, together with a bit of
air turbulence, may be enough.

Hi,

Came across this which may be of help:

http://www.eabassoc.co.uk/Answer%206.htm

cheers,
Pete.

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:43:05 +0100, Pete C wrote:

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:40:52 +0100, nog wrote:

Thanks for the input (also Stuart and NT).
Tanking sounds ideal, although I suspect it would be a bit ambitious in
terms of cost when measured against the benefit - the area is really bonus
space but it would be nice to be able to make better use of it.
Next year, I qualify for the Staywarm energy tariff so I may look at
plumbing a couple of small rads down there. That, together with a bit of
air turbulence, may be enough.

Hi,

Came across this which may be of help:

http://www.eabassoc.co.uk/Answer%206.htm

_Very_in-ter-est-ing_! Thanks Pete.