The Art of Brickwork

Progress, Volume X, Issue 3, 1 November 1914, Page 85

The Art of Brickwork

By H. NEWTON VANES, A.R.1.8.A., of Dunedin

( Continued from October issue) POINTING The colour and style of the pointing is closely allied to “Bonding.” The same principles which applied under the previous heading being equally applicable here. Tuck pointing is, very fortunately, at last going out of date in this part of the world, and not before it has ruined the appearance of many a brick wall. In my opinion, nothing can be said in its favour. Some would argue perhaps that it is very neat and tidyso is a stuccoed wall painted red and with black or white joints lined upon it. The better tuck pointing is done and the newer it is, the more it resembles a painted imitation brick wall. If it is not done well, and as it becomes older, the true joints begin to show up and the false joints to fall off, resulting in a piebald conglomeration of truth and sham. Other methods of jointing are by weathering, striking, keying or flushing, and this, of course, can be done in various colours. In the case of cleaned down and pointed work, there is a diversity of opinion as to the best colour to use. Personally, I much prefer a white or cream coloured joint. A grey cement coloured stopping is cold, and does not go with the red colour of the brick. A black joint is, I think, rather heavy and sombre, though it seems to give a good solid appearance to the wall. It certainly has this advantage that, where bricks are uneven in size and have the arrises somewhat chipped, the uneven and ragged joint is not so noticeable; whereas, with a light joint, these defects show up rather badly. The colour of the joint depends largely both on the above conditions and on the adjoining materials and surfaces, and, naturally, on the colour of the brick itself. In domestic work it is very usual to have a fair expanse of white and cream-coloured rough cast adjoining the brickwork. Personally, I think that black pointing in this case is most unsightly, there being no uniformity between the two materials. Now,

if the jointing is about the same colour as the rough cast, the two surfaces blend together very much better and do not give that objectionable cast iron effect. In the same way, I think nothing is nicer for residential work than a crisp red brick jointed in white with white painted wood-work. In all wall treatments, I think we should aim at making one surface or material melt into another, and so obtain solidity and unity— highly important factors which seem to be totally ignored in the designing of many of our buildings. SIZE OF INDIVIDUAL BRICK AND THICKNESS OF JOINT The remaining ' two points are so very closely allied that I shall not endeavour to treat them under their separate heads, but rather group them together. The thickness of the joint depends very largely on the size of the brick, and it is this latter point which I think requires our very careful attention. 1 consider that, apart from the extreme irregularity of our ordinary Dunedin clay brick, the standard size— the word “standard” can be applied to such a varying quantity— fundamentally wrong, and it is time that this Institute moved in the matter of establishing a good workable standard size of brick. Not only does the size of brick vary for each of the main centres in the Dominion, but the size adopted by each of the manufacturers in each town varies. Evidently, the same state of affairs existed in England, for in 1904 the 8.T.8.A. and the Civil Engineers had a conference with the Brickmakers’ Association, and a standard size of brick was agreed upon. This is an age of standardization, and it seems only reasonable that the size of the most used of all building materials should be standardized. As things are at present, it is impossible to prepare stone details with any degree of accuracy, until the job is let and the contractor has made up his mind from which yard he will obtain his bricks. Even when this is settled, there is considerable speculation as to the size of brick that will really arrive on the job. The other day I measured a few bricks at random out of a cart-load from one maker, and found that there was just on d inch variation in the thickness of a few samples. The English standard allows only Jg- inch variation. Apart from the variation, the average size is, in my opinion, too large. The brickwork here runs somewhere about 12| inches to the four courses, while in Christchurch for instance it is about 13| inches. It is quite an arithmetical problem to determine where the joints will come, and the setting out of all heights becomes quite a complicated business. Standard English brickwork runs 4 courses to the foot, and therefore not only is a great deal of unnecessary work saved in the preparation of details, but every opportunity is afforded of making a better job, as once the brickwork is started the architects and contractor know exactly at what height any course will come. The following is the R.1.8.A. standard:— Length Minimum ... 8J ... Maximum ... 9 Height „ ... 2§ ... „ ... 2D Width „ ... 4A ... 4| 6 Joint Maximum ... a ... Minimum ... t\ This makes a total of 4 bricks and 4 joints to the foot.

With the quality of bricks we have here, I do not think that such a thin joint is practicable, except, of course, with sand bricks. In the matter of uniformity of size, the local sand brick is unquestionably superior to our clay brick, and one is very favourably impressed with the readiness of the makers of the sand brick to meet architects as far as possible in their ideas of size and colour.

It is a pity that the sand brick is not a better colour, for, as far as regularity is concerned, it is far ahead of the clay brick. With the even sized sand brick, the English joint would be quite practicable, but the size of our clay bricks varies to such an abnormal extent that the T s 7 inch joint would be reduced to next to nothing in places. I think the width of joint depends on the class of brick being used, just as in setting tiles it is usual to make a thin joint when using a neatly shaped ordinary enamelled tile, whereas fire-clay tiles look much better set with a wide joint.

In deciding what size our stock brick should be, all these things must be considered. I think that the idea of having four courses to the foot is a splendid one, but for this setting out the first thing to settle is the thickness of the joint, as of course the thickness of the actual brick depends on this. I recall a new brick building in London designed by Mr. Lutyens in which he used 2 inch thick bricks with a flush joint about 1 inch thick, and the effect was very fine indeed. This, and many other examples which I have seen of good work with thick joints, has given me the impression that we would get a much better effect with our ordinary wire-cut if we used a much thicker joint than is generally the case. I see no constructional objection to a thick joint if the mortar is good, and we are well supplied in Dunedin with all the materials that are required to make excellent mortar. Without uneven bricks and a thin joint it is almost impossible to keep the perpends directly above one another, and the variation in the thickness of the joint caused by the difference in the thickness of the bricks is much more marked with a thin joint than it would be with a thick one.

Another way in which the irregularity of the arris may be to a certain extent hidden, is by recessing the joint. In much old work, the joints are worn away, and this, I think, rather enhances the appearance. It is open to argument as to whether this would make a good weather-proof job, but there are many examples of this class of jointing in America, where the climate is quite as rigorous as our own. I have also noticed that many of our Dunedin brick buildings that are now pointed, looked very much better when the mortar was raked out than they do now with all the joints flushed up. The slovenly appearance of a considerable portion of Dunedin brickwork, is, I think, largely attributable to the jointing. The bricks as supplied by the manufacturers are certainly not what they should be, but, nevertheless, I think more might be made of them than is being done at present. I think you will all agree that it is time that this Institute seriously considered the question of bricklaying as far as Dunedin, if not the whole of the Dominion, is concerned, with the object of standardizing the size

of the bricks and reviewing the whole procedure of laying them, and in the words of Macßeth "If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly."