Traditional Masonry.... Stonework.. pic update page 2

[magicmistertea]

beautiful work !
I notice that you have no expansion joints in the long wall ,which visually of course would ruin the venacular aesthetic. What mortar mix did you use with the granite ?

ahhh well spotted !!
the wall is actually built with blocks with expansion joints every 6m... the stonework facing is built with an NHL 3.5 lime mixed at at ratio of 5 parts sand to 2 parts lime... due to the flexability of this mortar there is no need for expansion joints in the facework.... clever ehh !!!
This wall was over seen by a surveyor specialsing in listed buildings... and i also checked with the lime suppliers about the need for expansion joints... both of them said this construction would be fine.

 

[magicmistertea]

As a qualified Drystone waller I'll pass comment on the free standing walls rather than the buildings.

So... I'm not sure whereabouts you're building so I can't comment on how well it fits in with the local style. I'm guessing you're in Cornwall though in which case a 'Herring-Bone' style could've been an option.

I'm not keen on the final appearance of the faced concrete block boundary wall. As a rule all your bigger and taller stones should be near the bottom, with each course getting progressively smaller until you achieve your final height. Having the mortar flush with your stone face also doesn't look great in my opinion.

Your other smaller walls amongst which happen to incorporate the brick pillars are a big improvement. Some of you're coursing is still a bit random as in there are some big blocks near to the top, with some irregularity to your coursing. In appearance it's kind of somewhere between random limestone and coursed gritstone walling.

That granite is fairly uniform in shape so it should be relatively easy to keep each course pretty even and horizontal, which helps to ensure you cross all your joins too. You've a few running joins but nothing to worry about, particularly as you've used mortar. Running joins in a drystone wall would be a major structural problem.

I do like the double row cobbled capping you've done, and that buttress is quite neat.

hi dry stone paul... thanks for your comments mate.. allthough i take you comments on board im afraid i would disagree about the large stones at the bottom and then getting smaller as they go up...I do try to put the really large stones at the bottom... but then then i think the rest of the wall needs an even mix of sizes. I have worked with many masons..picking up a few styles from each..... and i am also a qualified craft mason NVQ L2/3 heritage skills...
I personally think if you start with big stones at the bottom and then get smaller the wall can tend to look weirdly diminishing... i much prefur the look of the same size random stones all the way to the top.
allthough im allways keen to check out pics and styles of other work but the most important thing for me is first structual and then it has to please the eye.
as far as herringbone goes in this area ( cornwall) it is only ever really used in drystone walls... which none of these are..

and i do agree with you about the pointing not looking as good when it is flush.... but it does help keep the windriven rain out of the wall.. and when building with lime mortar it is standard practice all over the country to keep it fairly flush with the stonework... like i said this is due to keeping the water out of the wall avoiding problems with damp/frost damage.
Oh and yea there are a few vertical joints running over a course or two... but to be honest when im on a deadline/price, and the job needs to get done... this is enevitable sometimes...
cheers though got a few things to think about... constructive criticism is welcome

 

[peanut]

beautiful work !
I notice that you have no expansion joints in the long wall ,which visually of course would ruin the venacular aesthetic. What mortar mix did you use with the granite ?

ahhh well spotted !!
the wall is actually built with blocks with expansion joints every 6m... the stonework facing is built with an NHL 3.5 lime mixed at at ratio of 5 parts sand to 2 parts lime... due to the flexability of this mortar there is no need for expansion joints in the facework.... clever ehh !!!
This wall was over seen by a surveyor specialsing in listed buildings... and i also checked with the lime suppliers about the need for expansion joints... both of them said this construction would be fine.

I really had no doubts ! very nice work

 

[drystonepaul]

The herring bone suggestion was as much a question really. I've seen it as a dry stone walling and dyking style and wondered whether it could be replicated easily in a mortared wall. I guess it all depends on the prevalent stone and available time/money. I realise slate would be a more suitable candidate for that particular style.

In terms of running joints, I tend to be over critical due to the importance of avoiding them in drystone walling. Unfortunately my eye is accustomed to looking for them due to the way I look at walls. I've been guilty of a few too though when a job needs finishing and my eye's not been in it.

Also while on the subject of drystone walling, the need to keep larger and heavier stones towards the base of the wall is very much a structural consideration rather than an aesthetic one.
To an extent I would've thought that it's also a structural consideration in mortared walls, particularly with lime mortar.
The later photos of the double row capped wall do look very nice with a little variation in course depth, it's just the longer faced boundary wall which has a 'crazy paving' look I'm not keen on. I've no doubt it will be more than durable enough as the load will be on the block-work rather than the stone-work, so if it's purely a cosmetic facing I guess I personally would prefer it to be more aesthetically pleasing.

Again though, mortar is much more forgiving in terms of adding some structural integrity. The mortar will always be the weakest part of any wall however.

For a drystone wall I'd have to use all the lengths running into the heart of the wall for strength, rather than running the lengths along the face for a quicker build. A load bearing or retaining drystone wall would take at least five times as much stone as has been used there. So cost will of course be a determining factor on end product.

Anyway, just to be clear, this is critique not criticism and I am impressed with the quality of work shown. I'm comparing notes rather than making complaint.

It's good to see your work.