# Scratchin My Head on a Brick Repair



## tkle (Apr 15, 2006)

There's a couple fixes,the best and probably cheapest probably is to tear it down.Either way the back of the brick can be notched to receive an angle iron.Temporary support will have to be built in both cases also.Engineer drawings will ease your liability.
Trust Tsc,it's not structural.


----------



## stacker (Jan 31, 2006)

Tscarborough said:


> Trust me, that is not structural. The main wall is structural, that crap is a poor example of "design". FYI, those supports added to the other house will do nothing except prevent bowing of the false arch.


i agree 100% there is nothing structural there.no engineer,no arctitech,ok so i cant spell,would have designed a wall like that to be load bearing.its there for look,and looks only.and maybe for a place to get out of the rain:blink:.


----------



## laybrick (Jul 2, 2006)

I cant grasp the purpose that it serves? Couldn't you have just arched the garage door itself and left that out?


----------



## Tscarborough (Feb 25, 2006)

A designer modified standardised plans, and instead of doing something that would involve an engineering stamp, he pasted that junk on in front of the structural wall.


----------



## lukachuki (Feb 11, 2005)

laybrick said:


> Couldn't you have just arched the garage door itself and left that out?


Trust me this is not my work, I've just been called to come up with a solution before it kills someone. Thanks to everyone for the great replies, you are a helpful bunch. It still kills me that you guys are willing to comment and share this type of wisdom for free. :notworthy


----------



## lukachuki (Feb 11, 2005)

tkle said:


> Either way the back of the brick can be notched to receive an angle iron.


tkle
You lost me there!


----------



## reveivl (May 29, 2005)

If that was structural it would've been on the ground long ago.


----------



## firemike (Dec 11, 2005)

> If that was structural it would've been on the ground long ago.


BINGO!


----------



## stacker (Jan 31, 2006)

lukachuki said:


> Thanks to everyone for the great replies, you are a helpful bunch. It still kills me that you guys are willing to comment and share this type of wisdom for free. :notworthy


ok so we will start charging you!:whistling


----------



## mickeyco (May 13, 2006)

I've got to say this because it's bugging me, I know I'm probably going to catch some grief, but I going to do it anyhow (as usual).

Let me start off by saying that I'm not questioning anybody's skill, knowledge or experience but I think in this case there is a logical approach to the problem without making any assumptions (we all know what can happen when assumptions are made). Some of you seem dead set on assuming the arch is not structural, while I agree that is most likely the case, I wouldn't bet on it. To me, the people assuming and stating that it's not structural are in essence trying to dissuade the OP from properly investigating and accessing the situation. I think it's presumptuous to state with any degree of certainty that it is not structural having only seen a couple of pictures, not knowing how the house is constructed (trusses or rafters, cantilever or overhang, true brick or veneer brick) and the fact that it can easily be verified at the HO expense with a little investigating. Just because something is aesthetic (or is supposed to be) doesn't mean it's not structural, I wouldn't assume anything without verifying it for myself. Tell an electrician the power is off to a circuit and see if he/she dives right in without using a wiggy or tick tracer to verify it. The fact that it hasn't collapsed doesn't prove anything and could prove to be just luck. If you asked me the day before yesterday if you could use a 2 x 4 to support a second floor deck and structure, I'd have said, no it'll collapse, but that's before I saw a picture of just that, posted by framerman yesterday (http://www.contractortalk.com/showthread.php?t=26338 ). Take a look at this one: http://www.contractortalk.com/showthread.php?t=23558 , you wouldn't believe some idiot would leave that mess, but there it is. Working in the construction industry for many years I have seen plenty of structures standing that shouldn't be, yet I'm surprised all the time with the shoddy construction being done as more and more unqualified people are building homes. What I'm saying is that, although the responses stating that it is not structural are based on experience and knowledge, and are most likely right, they are just speculation and the OP needs to verify it for himself. Before you guys tear me up I'd like to remind you of an old proverb, "If you don't have anything nice to say..........". 


Below is a picture of some homes out here that were deemed structurally sound until one collapsed and they came up with this aesthetically pleasing monstrosity to brace the walls, all was not as it seemed.


----------



## Tscarborough (Feb 25, 2006)

I don't disagree with your logic, but I do disagree with your conclusion. As a rule, when dealing with homeowners or DYI, I would not offer an opinion on something like that other than to get an inspector to look at it. 

That arch is too flat to offer any structural support vertically, as well as being 1 wythe wide and unsupported laterally. FYI, I would assume that home was built by a builder, with stamped plans (since there are at least 2 copies of it); while that deck has either been altered or stratchbuilt (I go with altered).


----------



## Tscarborough (Feb 25, 2006)

Here is a very good article about arches. The only thing in this technical note by the Brick Institute of America that I do not fully agree with are some of the flashing details.

http://www.bia.org/BIA/technotes/t31.htm


----------



## tkle (Apr 15, 2006)

If that arch is structural,I'd just tear down the house.Even if it was just supporting the extra overhang.Scary thought.


----------



## Tscarborough (Feb 25, 2006)

Technically, it IS a structural arch, but it is NOT a structural wall. And as a structural arch, it has already failed. (Just to keep the terminology straight)


----------



## tkle (Apr 15, 2006)

lukachuki said:


> tkle
> You lost me there!


Notch the back of the arch horizontally 3 quarters the depth of the brick from support to support,insert your angle iron,then epoxy in place.This works good over doorways and windows just using mortar.It hides the iron.


----------



## AustinDB (Sep 11, 2006)

I agree about the supports stuck in-they're not going to help much. If he installed I-beams vertically which bolted both walls together, that would aid in support...but the engineer is the one to make the final call. My guess is when the wall settles, it would bow out b/c of the pivot point created-the only thing holding it back being the woodwork.


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Tscarborough said:


> FYI, those supports added to the other house will do nothing except prevent bowing of the false arch.












To me, they (the braces) look like they will:
a) Pivot as the brick comes crashing down - only on bolt per connection
b) Remain in place as everything comes crashing down around them

Either way(braced or not)...it looks scary.


----------



## 6stringmason (May 20, 2005)

Walk away Tim.... slowly walk away.


----------



## RAY MERCHANT (Aug 6, 2007)

take it down build with the center of the arch in the middle
with more of a rise. if they dont want to take it down i woudnt mess with it


----------



## RAY MERCHANT (Aug 6, 2007)

its of center any way


----------



## RAY MERCHANT (Aug 6, 2007)

the only thing the bracees are going to do is cause more of a head ach when it does fall


----------



## dirt diggler (May 14, 2006)

i just figured out what movie SixString's avatar is from

god, im dense ... or uncultured


:laughing:


----------



## Vermaraj (Mar 6, 2007)

The brick arch can be stabilized using a product that is common in seismic zones. Basically a fiberglass mesh is applied to the back of the brick and then the mesh is embedded in a thickened epoxy paste. 

In the end the brick wall is transformed into a very flexible solid sheet. It should have no problem supporting its own weight with a few tie ins to the header. The system is used extensively in areas like San Francisco where older structural brick buildings are very vulnerable or veneer walls are susceptible to collapse. 

Now whether or not you want to tackle this job is a separate question. PEs out in California would be well versed in this technology and probably sign off in a heartbeat. Not sure where this job is located.


----------



## firemike (Dec 11, 2005)

> i just figured out what movie SixString's avatar is from


Don't keep the rest of us dense and uncultured people in the dark..............


----------



## lukachuki (Feb 11, 2005)

Vermaraj said:


> The brick arch can be stabilized using a product that is common in seismic zones. Basically a fiberglass mesh is applied to the back of the brick and then the mesh is embedded in a thickened epoxy paste.
> 
> In the end the brick wall is transformed into a very flexible solid sheet. It should have no problem supporting its own weight with a few tie ins to the header. The system is used extensively in areas like San Francisco where older structural brick buildings are very vulnerable or veneer walls are susceptible to collapse.
> 
> Now whether or not you want to tackle this job is a separate question. PEs out in California would be well versed in this technology and probably sign off in a heartbeat. Not sure where this job is located.


Now that's an interesting idea. Do you know of a tradename or a brandname?


----------



## Tmrrptr (Mar 22, 2007)

Yah, I'm w 6string... that looks really stoopid. Tear it out or walk away!
r


----------



## Tscarborough (Feb 25, 2006)

Vermaraj, I can see where that would be an effective remediation for certain details and small areas, but I think it is problematical for practical use. Can you point me to further reading/technical info on using an embedded carbon mesh for structural support?


----------



## mickeyco (May 13, 2006)

Tscarborough said:


> Vermaraj, I can see where that would be an effective remediation for certain details and small areas, but I think it is problematical for practical use. Can you point me to further reading/technical info on using an embedded carbon mesh for structural support?


I saw that stuff on a TV show, I thought it was This Old House, but I'm not 100% sure though, I did a search and didn't find anything yet. If I remember correctly they applied it to walls that were damaged from an earthquake that had cracks. I'm not sure if all the damage was repaired before the application, but you would think it would have to be structurally sound to apply it. It's driving me nuts trying to remember, maybe it'll come to me after I stop trying to remember. I do remember seeing the Rhino Lining (or a different bed liner material) being used for a similar application.


----------



## mickeyco (May 13, 2006)

Found this, still not what I was looking for:
http://www.engr.csufresno.edu/~aelzeiny/FoamReport/FoamReport.htm


----------



## Vermaraj (Mar 6, 2007)

I have a binder in the office. Will post the details on Monday morning. 

As I recall the wall does not need to be structurally sound, because the mesh and the epoxy will be much stronger than the mortar joint. Also, I believe the mesh is kevlar not fiberglass like I mentioned above. I could be wrong on that.


----------



## Ry'se B'ye (Aug 30, 2007)

The Masonry advisory council website has an article on re-anchoring masonry walls, but it's not a single wythe wall like the one in the question. and having 2 ft of foam might not be esthetically pleasing to the customer. And I don't know if I'm way off, but would having a sheet of kevlar epoxied to the back of the brick not alter the expansion properties, and damage the brick or joints?


----------



## lukachuki (Feb 11, 2005)

Vermaraj said:


> I have a binder in the office. Will post the details on Monday morning.
> 
> As I recall the wall does not need to be structurally sound, because the mesh and the epoxy will be much stronger than the mortar joint. Also, I believe the mesh is kevlar not fiberglass like I mentioned above. I could be wrong on that.


Looking forward to details!


----------



## bobcaygeonjon (Aug 30, 2007)

*My 2 cents*

Looking at the arch face on the probable cause you can see is that the formwork used during construction was'nt rounded. IE I can see about 4 flat spots. I am convinced that it is not structural but it is probably best to just treat it as so anyway. Therefore tell the HO that it must be re-built with a lintol and if he questions you further then insist on an engineer to come up with a soulution.
Think about it. The lintol is your formwork ready set up and you dont have to come back to strip out later. Why wouldnt you use one in the first place? :thumbup:


----------



## mickeyco (May 13, 2006)

Just saw the show that used fiberglass and epoxy to strengthen brick walls, it wasn't This Old House (although I thought I saw a segment about this on TOH). It was on Modern Marvels on the History channel, it is titled "Bricks, a history bricks and brickmaking?, the fiberglass and epoxy segment was towards the end. I just happen to catch the end, it was on at 6:00 pm Central Time, they usually replay them later that same night again but I didn't see a listing for it. Maybe some of the west cost guys will be able to catch it.


----------



## Bigbricklayer (May 14, 2006)

I remember seeing that show although it was a while back but I remember seeing the same stuff you saw I just don't remember anything about it. But at least you have someone to back up your story (mickeyco):thumbsup:


----------



## Sonoran West (Oct 5, 2007)

Here's exactly what I would have done. I would have laughed, shook my head, shook the HO's hand and said, "No thanks, I don't want any part of this!" And then left. Period. I wouldn't waste ANY time finding out anything more. Move on.


----------



## lukachuki (Feb 11, 2005)

PM'd to me from Vermaraj and reposted w/ permission.

Thanks Vermaraj!!!

This article outlines the idea:
http://www.concretenetwork.com/anne_balogh/fortress.htm

Companies that sell the epoxy and Kevlar:
http://www.compositeswest.com/CWselection.html
http://www.fortressstabilization.com/products.php

Technical Paper that explains the process (chapter 4)
www.concrete.org/COMMITTEES/pdf/TempDoc/440.XR_to_TAC.pdf


----------



## lukachuki (Feb 11, 2005)

Sonoran West said:


> Here's exactly what I would have done. I would have laughed, shook my head, shook the HO's hand and said, "No thanks, I don't want any part of this!" And then left. Period. I wouldn't waste ANY time finding out anything more. Move on.


Thats you, which is fine. I kinda like trying to help customers, I sometimes even learn something. What I have found that even if the job is crap and doesn't pan out, there is sometimes other good paying jobs attached. For example after talking to this particular HO for awhile I also learned that he has water under his house, well it turns out that he has no perimeter drains around his footings and no waterproofing on the masonry. This is work that we do as well. If I would've just shook his hand and left I would've never had opportunity at his other work.

Lots of examples of this. Earlier this year did a small $2500.00 wall that I wasn't crazy about doing due to all the other "bigger" projects we had going. We completed his wall and he was happy. His neighbor calls and gives us a $80,000 project off of the good referral. Would've never happened if I had given in to my laziness and said sorry buddy your wall is to small.

I guess I've just learned not to "despise the small things" because you never know where they will lead.


----------



## Tscarborough (Feb 25, 2006)

That is very interesting reading. Other than one cite of a study for stabilization of monumental arches, it does not discuss the specific problem on your project. The method is used to increase shear and flexural properties, neither of which are the (primary) issue with this flat arch. 

I do see applications in my area and will not hesitate to suggest the method.


----------

