Weep Vents
- Thread starter staningrimsby
- Start date
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,281
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
A properly pointed wall will NOT have water running down the inside. We've had 2000 years of habitable dwelling to prove this to be so.
If the pointing is damaged - water will get in.
If windows are improperly sealed - water will get in.
If the roof leaks - then water will get in.
However, it is a fundamental fact of physics that nature doesn't go the long way around which would be the case if a saturated brick leaked on the inside of a wall. Try it with a bit of suitable single skin wall and a hose pipe. Does your garage leak when it rains?. Thought not! That is why the 10 million houses with 'headers' don't leak. Gedditt yet? (probably not).
If the pointing is damaged - water will get in.
If windows are improperly sealed - water will get in.
If the roof leaks - then water will get in.
However, it is a fundamental fact of physics that nature doesn't go the long way around which would be the case if a saturated brick leaked on the inside of a wall. Try it with a bit of suitable single skin wall and a hose pipe. Does your garage leak when it rains?. Thought not! That is why the 10 million houses with 'headers' don't leak. Gedditt yet? (probably not).
Mine doesn't, but I've got a client's whose does. Useless pointing as it turns out, NHBC are going to repoint the whole place. And that's the crux of the matter Guiseppe: a wall may not be suitably pointed, it may suffer from driving rain in an exposed position, in which case water can get through. A solid wall is twice the thickness - at least - of an outer leaf of a cavity, thus the chances of water running on the inside face are less, or did that simple fact of the difference in construction escape you? It happens on half brick walls on rear annexes of terraces - I've seen it and, as far I was aware, it was not due to some ongoing bout of "vicious fingering"...
Yes, Josephine. They are called caves. Although the single leaf construction is/was often much wider than those used in today's modern day construction they were/are susceptible to damp.
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,281
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
So you are finally coming around to my way of thinking. Well done, we are getting there. BTW, if a brick were capable of transmitting water through its fabric to the point that water streams down the inside cavity (defying the laws of physics btw) then don't you think a header just might show signs of damp on the inside wall? Do a google for capillary action or risk a bout of vicious fingering.
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,281
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
Sorry foolish one, but we weren't living in caves in those days - the Romans were living in Villas FFS. Don't post until you've watched at least three series of Time Team.
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,281
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
Yeh, ok Joe, the whole world is wrong and you're right, I made up those extracts from the NHBC Standards, yadayada...
No, me and the world of science is right. That;s why the laws of science are called laws. NHBC standards are written by engineers - and we know how dumb they can be don't we?
By what tortuous route do the neuro networks in your brain connect? Do they connect at all? Do you actually have a brain?
You say that water doesn't run down the inside face of a cavity; I say it can. So do the NHBC, BRegs and any other authority building-related, as well as other posters in the forum. That is why the regs say weepholes and cavity trays are required in cavity work. You say that it doesn't happen in solid walls; I say it is less likely, given the relative thickness compared to a cavity outer leaf, but not impossible. You choose to ignore joints as a source of weakness in the wall structure as a whole; I point out that they can and often are. The only thing about which we seem to be in agreement is that they are not necessary in all the case that current regs insist we put them in.
If that's coming around to your way of thinking, then I'm obviously a banana.
You say that water doesn't run down the inside face of a cavity; I say it can. So do the NHBC, BRegs and any other authority building-related, as well as other posters in the forum. That is why the regs say weepholes and cavity trays are required in cavity work. You say that it doesn't happen in solid walls; I say it is less likely, given the relative thickness compared to a cavity outer leaf, but not impossible. You choose to ignore joints as a source of weakness in the wall structure as a whole; I point out that they can and often are. The only thing about which we seem to be in agreement is that they are not necessary in all the case that current regs insist we put them in.
If that's coming around to your way of thinking, then I'm obviously a banana.
I think that, if you enquire of the NHBC, you will be told that the Standards are not, as you state, the exclusive preserve of engineers, dumb or otherwise, but a conglomeration of information from other sources, including scientists, as well as guys on site. But that wouldn't suit your argument now, would it?NHBC standards are written by engineers - and we know how dumb they can be don't we?
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,281
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
I think that, if you enquire of the NHBC, you will be told that the Standards are not, as you state, the exclusive preserve of engineers, dumb or otherwise, but a conglomeration of information from other sources, including scientists, as well as guys on site. But that wouldn't suit your argument now, would it?NHBC standards are written by engineers - and we know how dumb they can be don't we?
It would actually because we KNOW that well maintained houses don't leak do they? Nor do they transcend the Laws of Physics. Like I said in the beginning - weep vents don't do anything unless there is a rectifiable problem. They are the equivalent of an overflow pipe. Either you are no engineer or you know I am right - which is it?
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,281
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
Hello Mr Fyfe.
In exposed circumstances, whether well maintained or not, they can leak - I've posted NHBC extracts and someone else has posted a situation where he has seen this happen. Hence the need for weepholes and trays. As for their requirement in other areas, we are at least agreed that there would seem to be no obvious need for their inclusion. but then that, at least, would not seem to have ever been a bone of contention - although with you, I'm never too sure.
Ooh, I missed this one. Yes, you're right, site guys are often a mine of information and I have no problem in asking their advice on occasions, not least as they are the ones who actually have to build what I design and detail.
However, you are a totally different case in point.
Perhaps if you dropped your know-it-all manner, then other people, myself included, might be more minded to listen to what it is you have to say. The fact that you brook no argument against your pov just makes you out to be an insufferable, boorish, over-bearing buffoon. I hate to be the one who bursts your bubble, but you really don't know everything.
I've not climbed down, ungraciously or otherwise, about anything. Where did you get that idea?
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
