Conservation and development of brick

Page 216

Conservation treatment report on three early 1960s tile panels â—?

â—?

193

These types of mortar and adhesive did not allow free movement of moisture and would eventually be the cause of frost damage to the face of the tiles. The panels had to be moved to allow for refurbishment of the building, making an ideal opportunity to replace the fixing method with a reversible flexible system which will allow for their easy removal to an indoor location in the future.

Our first concern was to divide each section into smaller sections so that they could be manoeuvred more easily thereby reducing the threat of accidental damage while handling. Each of the six sections was laid face down. Lines were drawn, corresponding with the grout lines exactly, onto the mortar dividing each panel into a further six sections which were identified by using a colour and number code (Figure 7.26). We used a chasing saw fitted with a diamond blade to cut along the marked lines to a depth which reached to the reverse of the tile but no further. The depth of cut had to vary to correspond with the depth of the mortar. We turned the sections over, unscrewed the plywood boards and cut through the cotton material with a sharp blade. We then cut the 2 2 bracing timbers in corresponding places to the mortar cuts on the reverse. We did this section by section. As the timbers were cut through the grout between the tiles gave way, so dividing the tiles neatly into smaller sections. This was a difficult operation requiring great accuracy and forethought; it was very successful, resulting in damage to only six tiles out of a total number of 1296 over all three panels.

Figure 7.26 The reverse of the panels after cutting into small sections showing the Portland cement.


Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.