Restoration of a river stone wall

[bidouille23]

Bonjour,

a bit of a bad mood can be, which was not particularly intended obamot, but by dint of reading all kinds of proposals that does not help understanding (personal opinion), actually it annoys me a little .. .. a little , but it happened ...

[seb1000]

The reach is another problem but here it does not seem to be the case with regard to the photos, but I can be wrong actually .. Seb alone can say it .... or take photos for show the situation ...

bah photos, I want to redo it, but it will not give much more

it is a river, all that is most natural, which flows through the heart of the village between the houses (and the grounds).

I also went through all your very informative links.
but some have an intellectual utility, but not practical in my case because it is difficult to measure certain parameters of wall weight, sliding coefficients ...
and I invested in the lime book.

my excavation was delayed, I hurt my back .... by opening the shutters ...
today it's better, I'm going to start digging.

[chatelot16]

not far from my home the village of pranzac is crossed by a small river the bandiat that those who do not know the mill believe natural ... but not this small river bordered by wall which resemble your photo is an artificial course which goes d from one mill to another, the level of which is more or less constant

the natural river, the old bandiat passes to the true bottom of the valley, and its level is very variable: there is no wall or construction at the edge

many small rivers jump from mill to mill ... even when the mill has disappeared the dams still have the, and some end of the river, are lined with walls, because the dam has increased the level

[seb1000]

It is true that the subsequent developments may have masked ancestral installations ...

would have to do research to find out ...

afterwards the river goes from one lake to another lake, and it seems to follow the line of greatest slope, in a "natural" way

[seb1000]

good I disbursed (the terrace side) over the entire length on 50 cm wide between 50 and 80cm deep for the moment: it's done pretty well, it took me about 1:30 for 4m long.

so: what have I observed?

house side: on the right on the photo taken from then the terrace.
after 10 / 20cm of earth, there were a lot of pebbles from 2cm to 10cm, then a layer of stones from 15cm to 40cm (5 to 20kg), then again a lot of pebbles, with earth: 90% of pebbles and 10% earth.
it reminds me of a drainage, which would have been invaded by the earth over time.
the layer of stone seems to extend away from the river, and it will seem strange perhaps, but it looks like the earth is very little packed between these stones, and in places there seems to be some air: holes as big as your finger, maximum wrist in places. -> like Gruyère a little, and this under 30 to 40 cm.
I tend to conclude that the drainage around the house is good.

I stopped near the house about 60cm deep because I came across a huge stone that protrudes 1,50m from the wall: probably the foundation of the house. so I'm not trying too hard to scratch around this huge stone.

the further you go from the house (so going to the left in the photo), the less there are small stones, and the more soil there is. the only common point being the layer of large stones.

more visual:


the disbursed part of the wall seems to me well curved towards the river in the middle of the wall: which corresponds to the deformation on the river side.

[Obamot]

Ok, thanks for this info, so let's resume!

I'm back with my photos!

so, i'm having trouble expressing myself maybe, so a little correction:
the wall has had its feet in the water for centuries probably, so I will tend to trust the ancients and when I look closely at the foot of the wall on the river side (so my feet in the water), I seem to see the top of the stone row of a fairly large tailel

and precision:
the wall is curved (seen from above) to follow the river, so what can make believe that the mu is excruciatingly domed everywhere, is only an impression due to this original curvature (at least I hope so)

photos :
river side, front view from the neighbor's house, from which the 14cm deep crack can barely be distinguished.


side view from my terrace, leaning slightly over the water


profile view feet in the water


view of the crack with my hand to serve as a "scale" to represent you the dimensions


view from my terrace, the other side of the wall

Hello,

Usually I do not give a technical opinion, but there it is necessary, without that it engages me of responsibility on a structural calculation, since there, I will take again ideas already evoked by others, starting sure a repair well done in the following way:

1) it is an old wall, wide and already well anchored in the site.
2) some say that it would have been assembled with lime or what do I know, this point is indeed to be clarified on the spot with someone whose job it is. But I doubt that it is, because I do not see how it would have been possible to do that in water, because of the principle of capilarity (lime likes to drink from the fleet, no ... so over time ... it's pretty bad)!
3) moreover, it seems from the photos that we can see cement remains from a previous repair.
3) as far as foundations are concerned, there is no reason to question it given the location.
4) to know the inclination of the wall, it's simple, you need a plumb line (which can be made with anything by putting a sufficient mass at the end of a wire ...!)

Well, starting from there and looking at the photos, I would say that it is better not to touch anything in depth! But it is necessary to repair this wall by successive and continuous slices, starting from the base, VERY delicately and on the most limited areas possible (by slices of 50 cm high). So each step, could take its seat on the previous tinkering (and so on). And of course, this must be done with top quality hydro cement. Obviously, I would contain this repair thanks to a metal mesh cast in cement, so as a) to a) serve as a reinforcement, b) to properly contain the whole repair on the whole wall c) better resist corrosion and even possible floods that could wash the base of the wall!

And this is where the good news is: the most fragile point, which is at the level of the stream, does not seem to have been reached! Fortunately, the base is therefore still healthy! Of course, if there is a neighbor who has an end of the wall, it would be better to coordinate the work by a decision and an overall overall repair (it will be more solid, better distributed, and part of the costs could thus be shared between several, which would drastically reduce the individual share => we bring that once the equipment is on site, it is only one site, etc etc ...)

In one place, we see a sort of anchor with an iron bar sticking out. I would therefore try to place rods in the wall at an angle, driving them laterally (horizontally) into the ground, to contain the repair. They will go what they will, because there is a pebble behind, but it will always be taken!

If we do not want to keep the aesthetic cachet of the wall, we can even imagine a formwork that showed as the repair progressed, from the bottom to the top. Be careful, this is serious, do not do DIY.

The reason for this solution
- there is a little house, and you shouldn't see it go into space!
- the current foundations, I would leave them and not touch them!
- if it were necessary to make a concrete wall in good and due form, a footing of foundation would be imperative according to current standards and attention if not to questions of insurance RC.
- obviously it would also be necessary to find out about municipal law issues (who owns the wall? Are the owners responsible for its maintenance, or is the municipality required to participate in the work, because of the watercourse which belongs to the community? What are the local directives concerning the questions of restoration of such a wall in this configuration => there I would inquire, but as discreetly as possible.).
- in short, I would do the minimum to avoid trouble, and the maximum to make it stick.
- if we had to imagine, instead, to put a concrete wall, it would be a big job, it would be necessary either to excavate, or to put a faithful sheet piling (or what do I know) to contain the wall and the thrust of the earth during the works, and that would be very expensive to achieve!
- so as long as the wall can be used as formwork on top soil, use it as much to proceed as above.

And of course with the ba ba, to remove everything that is falling apart (very gradually and very locally so as not to drop the wall or pieces of wall, and replace everything with stone hydraulic cement => in order to stabilize everything: so you have to clean the area you are working on, do inking and of course as cleanly as possible! And if the risk of partial collapse - to be assessed with care - becomes clearer, we can imagine temporary repairs allowing to consolidate locally as we progress, parts that will be implemented - with pending trellis - or completely replaced by the recovery of the repair and the formwork)

Nothing dramatic in the state, because the wall holds thanks to its own weight - as much to use earth's gravity to make an ally of it - so starting at the bottom gives a greater factor of security than at the top, which will tend to create an undesirable overload of weight, and may go to the opposite end of the desired effect (which being below is less stable, even though we see that the bottom of the wall, does not present any problem major).

Otherwise, I doubt - with a new wall (necessarily reinforced concrete taking into account the configuration of the premises) on an ad hoc foundation footing - that it is possible to keep the house. Here.

[seb1000]

some quick comments following your post:
- unfortunately, the wall matches me and its maintenance too.

- you saw well, the wall has been patched up with cement which comes off from the rest of the wall

- the wall is mounted either with lime or earth; I quickly opted for lime-based mortar because the house is like that. I would do a hydrochloric acid test.

- the idea of ​​the trellis, I hadn't thought of it, maybe on the river side it would be a good choice.

- the appearance of the river side wall doesn't matter to me. I'm obviously not going to be ugly out of respect for the neighbors. side terrace a mu visible stones is close to my heart.


slightly longer remarks:

the concrete solution: it would be the solution that I will adopt without asking too many questions si the wall was far from the house.

there it is near the house, and the whole was probably built at the same time.
the house on the waterfront, and it has been there for a minimum of 2 centuries, so I have to ask myself some questions.

I have no practical training in the building trade, which is a disadvantage because I know nothing but a nice advantage because I have everything to learn, without prejudice and I do not exclude anything: I therefore do not fit into usual conflicts concrete is useless // lime is out of date.

what I have read and which seems to me quite logical for reasons of elasticity, permeability etc ... is that lime and cement go very well together.
and that is verified on a good number of wall or house coated or repaired with cements which crack or for which one sees humidity seeping and sometimes the wall collapsing.

let's go back to my wall. it is 25m long. if the part to be repaired was 20m from the house, I will not ask myself too many questions: cement or concrete or both + reinforcements etc ...
there the wall is close to the house and the whole thing was most certainly built in a coherent way (since no trace of saltpetre, no crack, no visible repair on the side whose feet of the house are in the water and yet the river side is not heated, it is an old stable ...).
I am therefore ultra vigilant to be consistent in the use of materials near the house: particularly at this location (in front of the wall in question) where the slope brings all the rainwater and snowmelt: 2m cumulated in 50 weeks, so much melt.
I must therefore be vigilant with regard to the water behavior of the materials used.

so I would be more ready for a lime-based mortar which reassures me about possible humidity problems which could harm the house nearby. [/ u]

[Rabbit]

In view of the photos I would be tempted to say that we will have to work
with hydraulic lime This lime has the advantage of being
softer than cement but less than air lime.
It is not waterproof, which allows the migration of
salts. In addition it hardens and does not dilute (at our time scale)
in water.
But it will be necessary to see with what type of mortar was put up the wall.
Cement is excluded since the building has 2 sciecles. The elders
had techniques (dust, brick pile etc.) to give
their lime mortar the desired properties. A good way
to study this is to study closely a sample of mortar.

[chatelot16]

lime and cement are bad household? on the contrary it mixes very well to make intermediate properties

pure lime, or fatty lime or air lime hardens only if it is dried

hydraulic lime, hardened even when wet, and then better resists water ... hydraulic lime is a mixture of cement and pure lime obtained in a single firing, with limestone containing clay, but not enough to make real cement ... we can do the equivalent of hydraulic lime by mixing pure lime and a little cement

you can also make the equivalent of hydraulic lime by mixing pure lime with brick or crushed pouzolane: that was the recipe for the Romans! So whether the clay is in the limestone to make hydraulic lime, or cooked separately in brick, then mixed with lime, it has the same effect

I have already done masonry with pure lime, it takes forever to harden: it is an advantage because it allows to settle well without any crack ... but it is absolutely necessary that the wall is dry to harden

with 20% of cement in pure lime, it becomes hydraulic lime, it hardens more slowly than cement alone but it still hardens entirely even in water, or even in often moist earth

masons who worked at my house used what they called bastard mortar: mixing half cement half hydraulic lime ... at the time I knew nothing about it ... now I understand that if it is to mix cement, it is useless to take hydaulic lime: with air lime it would be the same

using white cement, mixed with lime we avoid the gray color that some people don't like: it has the color of sand, like old mortar ... but the cement hardens faster and allows thick joints between ill-fitting stones

with too slow lime, if the stones are ill-adjusted it settles too much and the wall tilts before being finished

[seb1000]

hydraulic lime is a mixture of cement and pure lime obtained in a single firing

I never realized this before I delivered the book "Lime Technique and Practice" and your post telling me that you were contradicting yourself.
the book talks about silicates, aluminates and ferro aluminate of calcium without specifying that it is also the formula of the cement .... damage this small lack of precision in the book which encourages the cission between the supporters of lime and cement.
I have no idea of ​​the percentage of cement, but I suppose it is very low otherwise the pre-feasibility would no longer be as efficient.

I actually planned to use NHL lime for this wall for fear of moisture problems that could "arise" from the use of cement.