In article ,
tdacon wrote:

"Greg Guarino" wrote in message
...

Anyway, I have no experience finding studs in that kind of
construction. The walls are too rigid for me to just sound them out
with my fist. I don't own a stud finder, but I might buy one if it's
of any use in that kind of wall. I'm not eager to drill a series of
holes that I'll need to repair, and then match the paint.


If you want to go looking for studs, here's the stud finder you want to use.

http://www.garrettwade.com/product.asp?pn=25T23.01

Makes a tiny hole, less than 1/32 in diameter, that you can fill with a
little smear of toothpaste, or just leave if it's in an inconspicuous place.
Never needs batteries :-)


That looks like a great idea, but have you ever tried it on a real plaster
wall? In my own 1920's era (and former 1880's era) home, there's no way
you could push a wire or pin through the original plaster. It was tough
even to hammer a very thin nail into.



--
Often wrong, never in doubt.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

Larry W wrote:
In article ,
tdacon wrote:
"Greg Guarino" wrote in message
...

Anyway, I have no experience finding studs in that kind of
construction. The walls are too rigid for me to just sound them out
with my fist. I don't own a stud finder, but I might buy one if it's
of any use in that kind of wall. I'm not eager to drill a series of
holes that I'll need to repair, and then match the paint.


If you want to go looking for studs, here's the stud finder you want to use.

http://www.garrettwade.com/product.asp?pn=25T23.01

Makes a tiny hole, less than 1/32 in diameter, that you can fill with a
little smear of toothpaste, or just leave if it's in an inconspicuous place.
Never needs batteries :-)

That looks like a great idea, but have you ever tried it on a real plaster
wall? In my own 1920's era (and former 1880's era) home, there's no way
you could push a wire or pin through the original plaster. It was tough
even to hammer a very thin nail into.


Of course, nails are intended to squeeze between wood fibers.

On 2/10/13 9:57 AM, RP wrote:
On Saturday, February 9, 2013 9:16:55 AM UTC-5, Greg Guarino wrote:
This is not really a woodworking question, but I figure someone here

can answer it.



My Dad is 92 and needs to grab onto things to climb the stairs. But

for a short section of the stairway in their house, there's no

sensible thing to grab.



Their house is plaster on lath if memory serves. Wood strips, I think,

not wire. [This is an ancient memory. My parents had a larger closet

made when I was a very young boy and I was allowed to bash away at the

plaster for a little while. I remember being disappointed when I came


Locate the nail holes in the baseboard and you will know where the studs are.

RP


If they even shot the studs. They could've shot the bottom of the
baseboard into the sole plate and then uses angled nails to hold the top
into the plaster. Heck, most lath is plenty thick/strong enough to hold
finish nails, so if I were nailing trim to lath, I might not even bother
with studs.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 2/10/2013 12:43 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
If they even shot the studs. They could've shot the bottom of the
baseboard into the sole plate and then uses angled nails to hold the top
into the plaster. Heck, most lath is plenty thick/strong enough to hold
finish nails, so if I were nailing trim to lath, I might not even bother
with studs.

Hell, in this day and age, and judging by some of the Open Houses I've
visited in the past few years, and the likelihood your average "trim
carpenter" never saw a piece of wood before getting here, and the
average builder either not knowing or giving a ****, a finish nail in
the drywall suffices, if they aren't being watched/supervised.

.... a sill plate? Wot?

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:34:43 -0800 (PST), Greg Guarino
wrote:

On Feb 9, 11:58*pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 20:50:16 -0800 (PST), Greg Guarino









wrote:
On Feb 9, 11:04*pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 06:57:10 -0800 (PST), Greg Guarino

wrote:
OK. Was 16" "standard" before there was sheetrock? (and yes, I'm aware
that even if it was, I might not find that spacing) The house was
built in 1939, I think. My house has plaster walls as well, but over
"plasterboard"; like sheetrock, but with a grid of holes for the
plaster to grab onto. Their house is just plaster on lath.

My 1939 California bungalow in Vista was built using full 2" x 3"
rough sawn cedar and redwood studs on 24" centers. It also had knob
and tube wiring which looked like a busy Union Telegraph Center in the
attic. 1/4" ply topped the studs for the walls and ceilings, and the
floor was full 1" thick by 4" (or 5"?) wide pineywood.

In demos, I've seen plaster over chicken wire, plaster over lath, and
plaster over chicken wire over lath, but all had studs behind them.
I think most were built 24" OC and built before WWII. *Lath is spaced
to provide a place for the plaster to overflow behind it and lock it
to the wood. *I haven't seen your holey lath before.

It was apparently called "rock lath" or "button board". Here's a
photo:

http://starcraftcustombuilders.com/i...terWall/Perfor...

Whoa! *Dat ain't lath like I know it. *They're long, thin strips.
Interesting. 18x36" strips? *It's downright weird.

I found this:

"Gypsum or rock lath is a pre-manufactured plaster board, generally 16
inches by 48 inches in size, and 3/8 inch thick. Rock lath became
popular in the 1930s as a less expensive alternative to wood lath. It
is nailed directly to the wall studs and receives two coats of plaster
over it. The rock lath is called the first coat and replaces the wood
lath and the brown coat of the previous wet plaster system. The
second coat is a cement plaster about 1/4 inch to 3/8 inch thick. The
finish coat is then applied, which is comprised of hard finish
plaster, and is approximately 1/8 inch thick."

Here's a photo of what this kind of wall looks like from the inside:

http://inspectapedia.com/interiors/P...th014-DJFs.jpg

In my house the first coat of plaster is darker, more grey, than it
looks in that picture. But the "fingers" of plaster protruding through
are very much like what is shown.

I'm surprised there aren't more pronounced fingers. That mixture must
stick better than the regular plaster we use now.


I can tell you from experience that that first coat of "cement
plaster" is some pretty rough stuff. I used a regular sheetrock Roto-
Zip bit to cut out around an electrical box (why, you ask?). It worked
well for the first two inches then stopped dead, like I'd hit an
object behind the wall. I pulled the bit out of the wall and inspected
it. A 1/4" or so of the bit had been worn down to a 1/16" thickness,
exactly where it had been in contact with the grey "cement plaster".

UFR!


The positives and negatives are pretty much like what you can read
online. The walls feel nice and solid, much moreso than sheetrock. But
yes, cracks can sometimes develop. I haven't had too much problem with
that, but here and there I've had to make a repair.

So here's the "why" about cutting around the electrical box. I had a
location with two 3-way switches, one above the other. They were of
the old "despard" type, which uses a plaster ring that is unsuitable
for any current switch. So I had to cut out a piece of wall large
enough to remove the whole double-gang plate. But the fun was only
beginning. It turned out that the existing box had screw thread
locations that are also no longer standard (they were inset from the
corners of the box about an inch). And get this, the box was NOT
located against a stud. It had an arm that went off to one side
several inches which was then affixed to the nearest stud. So
replacing the whole box would have required much more damage and much
more repair. If the builders weren't already dead I might have had to
kill them.

I ended up tapping threads into the corners of the *rear* panel of the
box and using long screws to hold the new plaster ring on. Followed by
an education in how to repair a hole in a plaster wall. Another "2
hour job" that took a weekend.

Condolences. That sounded like a real PITA.

--
In an industrial society which confuses work and productivity, the
necessity of producing has always been an enemy of the desire to create.
-- Raoul Vaneigem

On 2/10/13 1:49 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/10/2013 12:43 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
If they even shot the studs. They could've shot the bottom of the
baseboard into the sole plate and then uses angled nails to hold the top
into the plaster. Heck, most lath is plenty thick/strong enough to hold
finish nails, so if I were nailing trim to lath, I might not even bother
with studs.

Hell, in this day and age, and judging by some of the Open Houses I've
visited in the past few years, and the likelihood your average "trim
carpenter" never saw a piece of wood before getting here, and the
average builder either not knowing or giving a ****, a finish nail in
the drywall suffices, if they aren't being watched/supervised.

... a sill plate? Wot?


I've removed baseboard from floors that would've been more difficult to
take off if they'd been adhered with velcro. :-)

On the other hand, I've cross-nailed crown where there was no wood to be
found and had to later use a prybar to remove it. Yes, I've had to
remove my own work. I like clients who change their minds every few
years. :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

"Swingman" wrote in message
...
On 2/9/2013 8:57 AM, Greg Guarino wrote:
K. Was 16" "standard" before there was sheetrock? (and yes, I'm aware
that even if it was, I might not find that spacing) The house was
built in 1939,

Depends ... 16" OC, for a 2x4 studs in platform framed is "standard" in
most codes dating far back; 24"OC is "standard" for 2x6 studs.

If the house is two story, and has balloon framing, which is not uncommon
in houses of that vintage, you may find it closer to the latter (24").

I have a quick story.
I helped a buddy rehab the old family homestead place to live in. It was
documented in the family to 180 years old in 1985. That makes it almost 210
years old, now.
Anyway, built with lumber cut off of the property. Cedar studs and poplar
joists and rafters. ALL at EXACTLY 16 inches on center. Amazing.
Perimeter beam, balloon frame, studs 19 feet long.
On the other hand, I have worked on many much younger houses with totally
random spacing, also.
Go figure.
--
Jim in NC

On Sunday, February 10, 2013 12:07:58 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 07:57:59 -0800 (PST), RP wrote:



On Saturday, February 9, 2013 9:16:55 AM UTC-5, Greg Guarino wrote:

This is not really a woodworking question, but I figure someone here



can answer it.







My Dad is 92 and needs to grab onto things to climb the stairs. But



for a short section of the stairway in their house, there's no



sensible thing to grab.







Their house is plaster on lath if memory serves. Wood strips, I think,



not wire. [This is an ancient memory. My parents had a larger closet



made when I was a very young boy and I was allowed to bash away at the



plaster for a little while. I remember being disappointed when I came





Locate the nail holes in the baseboard and you will know where the studs are.



I thought baseboard was nailed into the bottom plate.

As a rule, I put a nail in the bottom plate and one in the stud on a typical 3 1/2" baseboard. On a 5 /2" baseboard I put 1 nail in the bottom plate and 2 in the stud. That's how I roll and I do a ~lot~ of trim.

RP