wanting to put climbing holds on brickwall exterior to house
PWalker
to good use. I've decided to set them up outside the house i live in (which
has exterior solid brick wall). These are the traditional holds you find in
a gym. I'm unsure how to set them up. I'll have to drill holes an inch in
diameter and an inch or two deep into the brick and get some kind of metal
plating that i can cement into the hole i bore. This metal plating will have
a hole in the centre that i can screw my holds into so i can swap them
around. I guess this is the approach ill have to take.
Has anyone done this before? and what approach have you taken? Are there any
instructions on the web?
I dont think i will bother with holds for my feet at this point in time as
ill try using the friction of the brickwall to hold me up while im using the
hand holds.
Any ideas/suggestons most helpful!
Cheers,
Peter
Australia
Nate
"PWalker"
> Hi, I have a heap of climbing holds sitting in the dust. I want to put
> them to good use. I've decided to set them up outside the house i live in
> (which has exterior solid brick wall).
I've considered the same for my chimney, but I live amidst too much
accessible climbing to justify it.
I've done this before in cinder blocks and cement slabs. I've done a bit
drilling for other reasons in my own brick house as well. Don't do the 1
inch hole thing. It won't work. Get the same 5 pc anchors or threaded
studs used for sport climbing bolts. Also, look at a loose brick and note
where the 2-3 holes in the middle are, then aim your drill to miss them.
Threaded stud anchors are often better, because if you penetrate into a
cavity, the anchor will likely still work. A 5 pc won't. The rest is
pretty trivial. Maybe buy a few bricks @ 1-2 bucks each for practice if
necessary. If you have a good hammer drill, you should be able to bang out
a wall with maybe 40-50 holds in a lazy afternoon.
- Nate
John
help much. Sure, if you put holes in the mortar you can patch it, but it
will always look patch.
Also, it was not structurally designed to accomodate holds. I thought about
putting holds up the fireplace in my cathedral ceiled living room (I even
got my wife to let me) but the idea of damaging it for the sake of a
climbing wall...
dummya...@electricant.net
> Hi, I have a heap of climbing holds sitting in the dust. I want to
put them
> to good use. I've decided to set them up outside the house i live in
(which
> has exterior solid brick wall).
howdy. a few thoughts.
1. are you sure you want to do this? no matter how you do it, it's
going to look like crap for the house appraisor when you want to sell.
2. i think your 1 inch hole option sounds sketchy and unproven. have
you tried something like this before? id be inclined to use standard
anchor methods. id steer away from the standard rock anchors with
expansion sleeves and the like. i think the best option for you is
glue-in threaded rod. one way to do your project with a very minimal
amount of diddling around is to sink holes in your wall, glue in rod
with the diameter of a normal climbing hold (cant remember what that is
right now), and sink the rod until enough rod for the hold you want to
mount there is sticking out, plus a bit- enough that most holds will
slip on and then secure them with a nut. downside would be that you
coudlnt mount big holds on a short rod, and if you slip a tiny hold you
woudl have a threade metal spike sticking out.
3. rent the hammer drill. dont use those weeny little one-hand things.
if youre going to drill more than 5 holes in masonry rent a huge
hammerdrill and youll thank yourself later. renting is cheap. (i talked
a local supplier into a 30 dollars for one week rental, but i think i
got the deal of the century). also- you shoudl buy proper masonry
anchor epoxy from the rental place, and rent their glue gun.
4. you could also just put in a bunch of glue-in rods, and bolt up
sheets of plywood raised a half inch off the surface of the brick. you
could put in t nuts like anormal wall, use normal holds with no
fiddling around, and when you sel the house, just take hte pajels off,
cut off the rods flush with the brick, and paint the ends dark red. it
would take far less rods to mount a plywood panel than to mount each
hold individually.
cheers
anthony
Nate
<dummya...@electricant.net>
> id steer away from the standard rock anchors with
> expansion sleeves and the like.
Why? Have you ever placed one?
> i think the best option for you is
> glue-in threaded rod.
That's the last thing I would use. Expansion bolts can be removed. The
remaining 3/8" hole will probably be invisible from more than 5 ft away.
I certainly wouldn't do this to my house, but I don't think a bunch of
small, empty holes are going to be all that visible. Sheesh - recalling the
vast number of botched home improvement jobs I've seen (we've all seen..)
out there - a few holes in the exterior brick is just no comparison.
- Nate
Lg
Nate wrote:
> <dummya...@electricant.net>
>
> > id steer away from the standard rock anchors with
> > expansion sleeves and the like.
>
> Why? Have you ever placed one?
It seems to me that expansion type bolts would not hold sufficiently in
the soft material of the brick because of the force necessary to hold
them inside the brick might be too much for the brick to endure.
Besides, as someone mentioned, the lengths would have to vary with the
variety of hold thicknesses and it just wouldn't be feasible to do this
w/ expansion type bolts.
>
> > i think the best option for you is
> > glue-in threaded rod.
I don't think so.
>
> That's the last thing I would use. Expansion bolts can be removed.
The
> remaining 3/8" hole will probably be invisible from more than 5 ft
away.
>
> I certainly wouldn't do this to my house, but I don't think a bunch
of
> small, empty holes are going to be all that visible. Sheesh -
recalling the
> vast number of botched home improvement jobs I've seen (we've all
seen..)
> out there - a few holes in the exterior brick is just no comparison.
>
>
> - Nate
The best option that I was thinking and what Dummy had mentioned as
"#4" in his post, is: mount the sheet of plywood w/ t-nut threads
installed throughout. I wouldn't bother setting it a 1/2 inch off the
face of the brick. I would fasten it solid against your brick wall in
the corners and in the middle of the sheet w/ TapCon Screws, which are
heavy duty screws just for this type of application.
This to me would be the most feasible to install, despite a little
extra cost for the ply and T-nut hardware. Sure it won't be as cool w/
just holds on the brick wall, but you'll have something that will
continue to work for you and will be a snap to take down for any
reason.
Lg
dummya...@electricant.net
> > id steer away from the standard rock anchors with
> > expansion sleeves and the like.
Nate wrote:
> Why? Have you ever placed one?
well, if i wrote that, you should assume i have, eh? this isnt
rockclimbing.com..
Lg reccomended mounting plywood flush with the brick using fasteners im
not familiar with. all the masonry screws and nails ive played with
sucked, but i dont have much experience with them and maybe there is a
better alternative to what ive used, or some insider tips i dont have.
i still like the spaced panel on glue-ins. it woudl give you an air gap
in the back so the wood woudlnt rot and the tnuts rust. it would
require less anchors. it would give you some leeway on the length of
the bolts you use, so you woudlnt need to hacksaw half of them based on
each and every hold. and a grinder would make quick work of the rod
once you take the panels down to sell the pad. cut em off, grind em
flush, paint. pretty quick, i think. anchor, nut, nut, washer, plywood,
washer, nut. seems pretty doable. masonry screws woudl be really fast,
if they work well. i woudlnt wnat to climb on anything held up with any
masonry screw ive ever put in, but like i said, theres something to
them i dont know about.
or you could put up the totally, like, rad new climbing wall
alternative.
http://tinyurl.com/3w8zy
apparently, people thought i was serious.
Nate
"Lg"
> It seems to me that expansion type bolts would not hold sufficiently in
> the soft material of the brick because of the force necessary to hold
> them inside the brick might be too much for the brick to endure.
Expansion bolts will hold fine in brick. Not a truck, but certainly 2-300
lbs easy.
> Besides, as someone mentioned, the lengths would have to vary with the
> variety of hold thicknesses and it just wouldn't be feasible to do this
> w/ expansion type bolts.
Again, if someone had actually done this before, they'd realize that the
necessary bolt length doesn't vary much if at all among holds. Depends what
he's using for holds. 2-3 sizes of threaded stud would probably cover a
very large range.
> The best option that I was thinking and what Dummy had mentioned as
> "#4" in his post, is: mount the sheet of plywood w/ t-nut threads
> installed throughout.
Holy ghetto. I think that would look nasty. He'll need to either anchor it
in several places (probably ~10-12 anchors per 4x8 sht) or build out a frame
for structure. Of course, I'd have to ask what he just accomplished if he
was trying to save on holes - and why is it now attached to the house?
However - if he does choose that route - better make sure the plywood is not
only "CDX" or better for exterior, but it will need several coats of perhaps
Thompson's water seal. It will still separate after a few years.
- Nate
Lord Slime
> "Lg"
> > It seems to me that expansion type bolts would not hold sufficiently in
> > the soft material of the brick because of the force necessary to hold
> > them inside the brick might be too much for the brick to endure.
>
> Expansion bolts will hold fine in brick. Not a truck, but certainly
2-300
> lbs easy.
Bricks are not "soft"; they are hard. They are hard to the point of
being brittle. Masons break bricks with a single blow of the trowel.
Putting expansion bolts in bricks is a good way to break them either
during drilling or by overtightening the bolt, besides the fact that
many types of bricks are hollow.
Brick walls are not intended to hold any sort of lateral force, they are
merely a skin. They are held to the underlying wooden frame with
flimsey "wall-ties" which are placed at 2-5ft spacing, which is totally
at the discretion of the mason. In other words, you can't make any
sort of reliable strength estimate.
Attaching an overhanging climbing wall, or even a person on a vertical
wall, puts a large outward force on the wall. A good way to pull the
whole fucking thing down on top of you.
So all of you talking about bolting the bricks.... none of you know a
fucking thing about what you're talking about.
- Lord Slime
Nate
"Lord Slime"
> Putting expansion bolts in bricks is a good way to break them either
> during drilling or by overtightening the bolt.
If you're an ape with your tools, maybe. However, I have about 8-10
expansion bolts around the house for utilities, etc. There are no cracks.
2-300 lbs isn't squat for either bolt or brick.
> In other words, you can't make any
> sort of reliable strength estimate.
It's way more than 300 lbs.
> Attaching an overhanging climbing wall, or even a person on a vertical
> wall, puts a large outward force on the wall. A good way to pull the
> whole fucking thing down on top of you.
With the winds this AM, all of Pearl St. must be a huge pile of rubble - no?
Those buildings are generally simple brick structures.
- Nate
dummya...@electricant.net
> So all of you talking about bolting the bricks.... none of you know a
> fucking thing about what you're talking about.
oh man, and i was having such a *nice* day.
when i needed load bearing anchors in brick i used threaded rod, sunk
deep. ours went in around 7-8 inches, cant remember exactly. the
anchors were reccomended by a structural engineer. we were putting up
a climbing wall. perhaps the deep anchors acted as structural ties
between the brick and made it feasible. it was a vertical wall. and its
still standing;)
Lord Slime
> > Putting expansion bolts in bricks is a good way to break them either
> > during drilling or by overtightening the bolt.
>
> If you're an ape with your tools, maybe. However, I have about 8-10
> expansion bolts around the house for utilities, etc. There are no
cracks.
Utility companies use bolts that are about 3/32 to (maybe)
1/4" in diameter and plastic expansion sleeves. Try putting
in a 3/8" x 3" bolt using a hammer drill. Older bricks will
exfoliate or shatter. Solid brick might hold together if you
drill very gently, or don't turn the hammer on. Hollow brick
will shatter, but won't make a solid anchor even if it doesn't.
Of course, this is all academic, since the mortor may very
well crack away regardless.
> 2-300 lbs isn't squat for either bolt or brick.
Okay dude. Let's test it on your house. See if you can
put in a nice fat bolt, preferably up high on the wall, like
the top 3 courses, then give me a call. I know just the
jug I want to mount on it. I'll even make a special trip
down there to pull your fucking brick down. Oh yeah,
I'll want a crash pad below me.
> It's way more than 300 lbs.
Oh yeah? So what's the pull-out force? What force
does a large dude dynoing to a jug create (please
include leverage forces) on a 30 degree overhanging
wall?
> > Attaching an overhanging climbing wall, or even a person on a vertical
> > wall, puts a large outward force on the wall. A good way to pull the
> > whole fucking thing down on top of you.
>
> With the winds this AM, all of Pearl St. must be a huge pile of rubble -
no?
> Those buildings are generally simple brick structures.
Ha ha! You don't know shit about construction do you? Brick is
a FACADE, go look in your local building code. The strength of
a wall comes from the frame, which can be wood, concrete,
concrete block or steel. Build a wall from a single layer of brick
and you can kick the thing down with your foot, and the wind
will certainly blow it down.
- Lord Slime
Lord Slime
> Lord Slime wrote:
> > So all of you talking about bolting the bricks.... none of you know a
> > fucking thing about what you're talking about.
>
> deep. ours went in around 7-8 inches, cant remember exactly.
Seeing how bricks are only about 3" wide, what the hell were
you drilling into, eh?
> the
> anchors were reccomended by a structural engineer. we were putting up
> a climbing wall. perhaps the deep anchors acted as structural ties
> between the brick and made it feasible. it was a vertical wall. and its
> still standing;)
Sorry, I still don't believe you know what your talking about. Tell me
what was *behind* the brick. Was it a commercial building with
concrete walls perhaps? Then sure, you're anchoring into the
concrete, not the brick.
This thread has been all about putting a climbing wall on a "normal"
house wall, which is almost certainly a 2x4 frame, possibly 2x6. So
if you had drilled 7-8" into a house wall, you would be coming through
the sheet rock into the living room.
- Lord Slime
Nate
"Lord Slime"
> Ha ha! You don't know shit about construction do you?
Your post is incorrect on so many levels I'm not going to waste my time.
You're an ex sparky arguing mechanics with an ME. Your post was simplistic
silliness.
- Nate
dummya...@electricant.net
> Seeing how bricks are only about 3" wide, what the hell were
> you drilling into, eh?
me
> what was *behind* the brick.
there were bricks behind the bricks. it was a squash court with a thin
cement sheath for a smooth surface. there was nothing behind the brick
to anchor to. the hammer drill would spit out red dust and brick bits
the whole way in
> This thread has been all about putting a climbing wall on a "normal"
> house wall, which is almost certainly a 2x4 frame, possibly 2x6. So
> if you had drilled 7-8" into a house wall, you would be coming
through
> the sheet rock into the living room.
good point. for some reason i had a chimney in my head, as thats what
usually gets bricked on your generic house. and for some reason i was
thinking chimneys are thick masonry, more than one layer of brick. so
my advice relied on an irrelevant or nonexistent house, apparently.
lord slime, you are my daddy. if you responded to all the posts with
the correct response first, dumb shits like me woudl never have to
chime in with incorrect or misleading info.
later,
anthony
Lg
2-300
> lbs easy.
Even though you are an ME, the homeowner in you is coming out. Sure you
can use them to hold some uni-strut for some utilities or whatnot, but
not for continual flexing and loading by us "apes". Maybe I don't know
what the hell I'm talking about, I only have 20 yrs+ experience as a
builder. Installing countless anchors of different types and fastening
systems. But you know, there is a type of single expansion type anchor
that will allow removal of the holds to move them around and refasten,
but geez, you need a 3/4" hole for a 3/8" bolt! You can say that again,
"HOLY ghetto" batman.
>
> > Besides, as someone mentioned, the lengths would have to vary with
the
> > variety of hold thicknesses and it just wouldn't be feasible to do
this
> > w/ expansion type bolts.
>
> Again, if someone had actually done this before, they'd realize that
the
> necessary bolt length doesn't vary much if at all among holds.
Depends what
> he's using for holds. 2-3 sizes of threaded stud would probably
cover a
> very large range.
Now really I think that this would be the ghetto set-up...it may work,
some of them, for a little while . . .
>
> > The best option that I was thinking and what Dummy had mentioned as
> > "#4" in his post, is: mount the sheet of plywood w/ t-nut threads
> > installed throughout.
>
> Holy ghetto. I think that would look nasty. He'll need to either
anchor it
> in several places (probably ~10-12 anchors per 4x8 sht) or build out
a frame
> for structure. Of course, I'd have to ask what he just accomplished
if he
> was trying to save on holes - and why is it now attached to the
house?
Oh like it wasn't already gonna look ghetto with climbing holds all
over the wall?!ha I've revised my original estimate... I said 5, eh 9
max is all you would need, if you wanted to add another set of 3, so
what? TapCon holes would be smaller than those required for a hold and
they are easy as shit to install. Ever install one Nate? Check em out:
http://www.confast.com/products/tapcon-concretescrew.asp
> However - if he does choose that route - better make sure the plywood
is not
> only "CDX" or better for exterior, but it will need several coats of
perhaps
> Thompson's water seal. It will still separate after a few years.
>
> - Nate
I'm sure they make paint that would blend in with the brick wall for
the plywood, throw some sand in, perfect! just like real friction on
real rock! Only thing I'd do extra is paint horizontal "mortar" lines,
it'd be totally stealth.
Dummy asked about moisture w/ the ply flush against the wall...well,
there would be the space between the brick that would provide some
ventilation, but if more was required, just glue 5/8" nuts on the back
side, spaced apart, and then fasten w/ the TapCon screws. They are
(correction) a "light to medium duty", (which I still consider
appropriate for this application) coated screw, used for mason, brick
and concrete applications...3" x 1/4" should work fine. Pull-out values
for block, which I'd say would be comparable to brick is 800 lbs for
1/4" w/ 1 3/4" embedment. I don't think the brick wall will come down
either.
They also have pressure-treated plywood available, maybe not everywhere
though. mmm yeah, nothing like pawing over wood that's been treated
with ammoniacal sulfate copper arsenic. eh, paint it and it's fine. I
don't believe they use this combination anymore anyway.
Lg
Nate
"Lg"
> Even though you are an ME, the homeowner in you is coming out.
I'm so done with this thread. I have a construction laborer, a sparky and a
green college kid telling me all about mechanical engineering.
> TapCon holes would be smaller than those required for a hold and
> they are easy as shit to install. Ever install one Nate? Check em out:
> http://www.confast.com/products/tapcon-concretescrew.asp
Tapcon? I've got burned out and broken tapcon bits up the ass. Great for
furring strips, conduit, etc. I would not use them as climbing wall
anchors. Compare the pullouts to expansion anchors. There's no comparison.
Now take your 20+ years of beating in nails and tell me what you think the
required pullout strength for climbing holds should be, including faster
creap, work fatigue, mechanical leverage, and safety factor. Please post
your work. Extra credit for thermal effects.
> I'm sure they make paint that would blend in with the brick wall for
> the plywood, throw some sand in, perfect! just like real friction on
> real rock! Only thing I'd do extra is paint horizontal "mortar" lines,
> it'd be totally stealth.
Please send pix.
And hey - Slime - feel free to come pull down the wall on my house by
levering and hurling yourself against it anytime. North wall has all the
brick. Address is in the phone book. Don't forget your helmet.
- Nate
Lord Slime
> "Lord Slime"
> > Ha ha! You don't know shit about construction do you?
>
> Your post is incorrect on so many levels I'm not going to waste my time.
Sorry fuckhead, my post is correct. You're posturing big-time
because you don't know shit about construction, but wallowed in
here anyway giving advice that's bullshit. Stick to the subjects
you know.
> You're an ex sparky arguing mechanics with an ME. Your post was
simplistic
> silliness.
Nate, I worked in construction for 4 years. You didn't know that, didja?
I saw a lot of buildings under construction: houses, offices, factories,
you name it. I watched masons lay brick, block, etc. so I KNOW how
it's done. Go watch a mason break a brick in half with a single hit of
the trowel and then tell me that you can torque a bolt tight enough to
hold a climbing wall without breaking the brick. (I'm not talking shear,
I'm talking pull-out.) Go try it with hollow bricks, there's a lot of them
out there!
Merry Fucking Christmas, Nate.
-Lord Slime
Lord Slime
>
> I'm so done with this thread. I have a construction laborer, a sparky
and a
> green college kid telling me all about mechanical engineering.
Hey, if this really was M.E., you'd have a point. But as it is,
SHUT THE FUCK UP about topics you don't know shit about.
> And hey - Slime - feel free to come pull down the wall on my house by
> levering and hurling yourself against it anytime. North wall has all the
> brick. Address is in the phone book. Don't forget your helmet.
Okay. I've got witnesses that you gave me permission, eh?
I'll bring a Hilti and a 3/8" x 3" bolt, and a big jug. I'm gonna try
to drill a brick. If it shatters, I'll try another, and another until I
get
one with a nice hole in it. Then I'm gonna install the bolt, I'll even
use a torque wrench, and see if I can tighten it to spec without
cracking the brick. (Oh, you don't have hollow brick do ya? Have
you even fucking checked? Ya know, houses with 1 brick side, like
yours, often have really cheap brick.) And then I'm gonna put on
a big jug, and wank on it. Oh gee, did I crack the mortar? Pull
some bricks down? Sorry dude.
- Lord Slime
Lord Slime
> Lord Slime wrote:
> > Seeing how bricks are only about 3" wide, what the hell were
> > you drilling into, eh?
> cement sheath for a smooth surface. there was nothing behind the brick
> to anchor to. the hammer drill would spit out red dust and brick bits
> the whole way in
So there must have been a second layer of bricks? There *might*
have been something else behind there besides bricks, and the
dust from that may have fallen between layers.
> > This thread has been all about putting a climbing wall on a "normal"
> > house wall, which is almost certainly a 2x4 frame, possibly 2x6. So
> > if you had drilled 7-8" into a house wall, you would be coming
> through
> > the sheet rock into the living room.
>
> good point. for some reason i had a chimney in my head, as thats what
> usually gets bricked on your generic house. and for some reason i was
> thinking chimneys are thick masonry, more than one layer of brick.
Not modern chimneys. A modern chimney has a "liner" which can
be of several different materials, all of which will be permanently
and dangerously damaged if you drill into it. The liner is surrounded
by a "chimney block" which is a cast concrete block with with a
hole in the center for the liner. The brick facade is applied last.
> lord slime, you are my daddy. if you responded to all the posts with
> the correct response first, dumb shits like me woudl never have to
> chime in with incorrect or misleading info.
Thanks, tell that to Nate.
- Lord Slime
Nate
"Lord Slime"
> And then I'm gonna put on
> a big jug, and wank on it.
You sure seem to know wanking. Wank, wank, wank. Seems you're going to rip
that wanker off here soon. Holy fucking shit.
4 years in construction. I'm so impressed! Not!! I'm sure you called all
the shots out there on the jobsite! The architects, engineers, and the
brick layers too, all came over to his Lordship, LS, interrupting you from
tossing shit into a dumpster, for structural advice. Yeah right!
You sound like a stoned snowboarder trying to talk big wall climbing.
Bye.
Yawn.
PS - Send me about 200 bucks and I'd be more than happy to elaborate on all
the incorrect points in your ignorant, childish rant.
- Nate
Lord Slime
rip
> that wanker off here soon. Holy fucking shit.
So you say. On the other hand, so to speak, you sure seem to
good at slinking away after someone exposes your lies, all the
while spewing shit to cover your escape.
> 4 years in construction. I'm so impressed! Not!! I'm sure you called
all
> the shots out there on the jobsite! The architects, engineers, and the
> brick layers too, all came over to his Lordship, LS, interrupting you
from
> tossing shit into a dumpster, for structural advice. Yeah right!
I never said that, I said I watched them do it. Did you forget?
So you're a ME, so what? I've had a dozen ME's report to me
over the years. And while they were excellent in their area of
expertise, Mechanical Engineering is a broad field, and I don't
think any of them knew much about constructing buildings. Unlike
you, they admitted they didn't know.
> You sound like a stoned snowboarder trying to talk big wall climbing.
You should know, eh?
> PS - Send me about 200 bucks and I'd be more than happy to elaborate on
all
> the incorrect points in your ignorant, childish rant.
Ah Nate. A good offense is the best defense, eh? So try
this... how about I tell them about our little sortie into the
Black, eh? Maybe let them know what a great partner you
were. Perhaps they'll figure out why I've never climbed with
you again.
- Lord Slime
Nate
"Lord Slime"
> Ah Nate. A good offense is the best defense, eh?
Saves time.
Consider - although there are many bricks out there, they are generally
harder than concrete, and get harder with age. That point alone begs the
purpose and utility of the concrete expansion anchor - just to keep things
at a liberal arts logic kind of level.
I'm not going to waste my time explaining the rest of your errors.
> So try
> this... how about I tell them
> about our little sortie into the
> Black, eh?
Feel free to vent all you want. I find it entertaining.
I already posted some time ago that I felt we had little to nothing in
common and I found you incredibly awkward to be around - mostly due to your
obvious temperament.
- Nate
David Kastrup
> So you're a ME, so what? I've had a dozen ME's report to me
> over the years. And while they were excellent in their area of
> expertise, Mechanical Engineering is a broad field, and I don't
> think any of them knew much about constructing buildings. Unlike
> you, they admitted they didn't know.
The job of a mechanical engineer is to give you the facts once you
give him the numbers. Not more, not less. If he doesn't have the
numbers, he systematically breaks things until he gets them. It's
the scientific way of throwing a tantrum. And it sounds like just
this is being suggested.
Standard procedure.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Lord Slime
> Consider - although there are many bricks out there, they are generally
> harder than concrete, and get harder with age. That point alone begs the
> purpose and utility of the concrete expansion anchor - just to keep
things
> at a liberal arts logic kind of level.
You must have failed your logic class. I said bricks are hard before
you ever broached the subject. They're hard to the point of brittleness
and don't take drilling well, or the stress of tightening an expansion bolt
compared to concrete.
And yes, they get harder and more brittle with age. And since there are
so many types of brick out there, assuming anything about unseen brick
on the side of someone's house is irresponsible and ignorant.
And what about your "simple brick buildings" bullshit? Conveniently
forgot that Nate? "Beg" all you want, you've yet to squirm out of the
hole you've dug yourself.
> > So try this... how about I tell them
> > about our little sortie into the Black, eh?
>
> Feel free to vent all you want. I find it entertaining.
Somehow I find that unbelievable.
> I already posted some time ago that I felt we had little to nothing in
> common and I found you incredibly awkward to be around - mostly due to
your
> obvious temperament.
Or perhaps the awkwardness was due to other issues, eh?
- Lord Slime
Julie
> "Nate" <m...@privacy.net> wrote
> > "Lord Slime"
>
> > > So try this... how about I tell them
> > > about our little sortie into the Black, eh?
> >
> > Feel free to vent all you want. I find it entertaining.
>
> Somehow I find that unbelievable.
How about a dual duel of unbelievably entertaining trip reports ???
I know I'm not the only one dying to hear both sides of this outing ...
JSH, brickheaded
David Kastrup
> All building materials and methods meet certain minimum codes.
> Concrete is generally 3ksi or better for residential, for example.
> Brick walls tend to be designed not to to fall over when someone
> leans against them, also as an example. Bricks themselves need to
> support several tons of compression, with ease.
The compression does not tend to be the problem as long as it is well
distributed. Pull is. That's why one combines steel and concrete.
Nate
"David Kastrup"
> The compression does not tend to be the problem as long as it is well
> distributed. Pull is. That's why one combines steel and concrete.
You're just so smart and helpful, David. Tensile is generally estimated at
1/10th compressive for any stone; brick and concrete included. Pushing or
pulling against a wall creates both, so unless you know Mohr's...
However, this is all academic and pointless. Slime is basically saying you
can't tell how strong a wall is for various reasons. Unless it was built
illegally, you can. If it passed inspection and has a certificate of
occupancy, it possesses certain minimum strengths.
But even that statement is pointless. Frankly, anyone who thinks they can
pull over a brick wall with their bare hands, or a even a 1 or 2 ft lever,
just doesn't know wtf they are saying. Holy shit, if that isn't obvious to
someone...
- Nate
ant
> How about a dual duel of unbelievably entertaining trip reports ???
clash of the titans!!
or maybe, more like hearing bill and monica hash out who gave worse
head on Springer.
some things are better left unsaid.
Lord Slime
> brittleness are two completely different properties. 400 series
stainless
> is hard, and anything but brittle. The cookie I just snacked on is
brittle,
> but not hard.
Gee Nate, just when did we start talking about steel? Bricks are
basically clay baked in an oven. They resemble pottery or glass.
Glass is hard, you need a diamond to cut it, but brittle. Scratch
glass and you can break it cleanly along the scratch, just like a
mason breaking a brick. By now that cookie has turned to shit.
> > and don't take drilling well, or the stress of tightening an expansion
> > bolt compared to concrete.
>
> In general, yes it does. You might argue the hollow geometry and small
size
> of a free brick and almost have a point. But you don't. A brick with
> correct morter in a wall is, well, way strong.
Total bullshit Nate. Brick walls are strong in certain directions but
have no strength in tension. You MUST support a brick wall so that
the wind doesn't blow it down. You can't use an brick wall to support
trusses or beams, or a climbing wall because they push/pull laterally
on the wall. If the foundation of a brick wall slumps even a 1/4", the
wall will crack along the mortor seams and depending on the type of
brick, the bricks may crack also.
> > assuming anything about unseen brick
> > on the side of someone's house is irresponsible and ignorant.
>
> All building materials and methods meet certain minimum codes.
Really? So how old is the house in question? What codes were
in force at the time? Was the house inspected? Was hollow brick
used? Was older brick re-used (very common practice)? Did the
mason skimp on materials? Did he use 5 or 6 bags per yard?
> Brick walls tend to
> be designed not to to fall over when someone leans against them, also as
an
> example. Bricks themselves need to support several tons of compression,
> with ease.
Compression yes, tension no. Nate, you just refuse
to admit you don't know what you're talking about.
> > And what about your "simple brick buildings" bullshit?
>
> Most of the older buildings on Pearl are not constructed with brick
"skins"
> or "fascades" over some stronger supporting wall as you cited.
Then what are they constructed of, Nate? I've been in
many of those buildings, so I already know you're lying.
The only way a brick-only wall has any structural strength is if
it's two or more layers thick, and tied together in some fashion.
You'll see this in older buildings (< 1930s) sometimes when
a new building was built directly against the wall of an existing
building. Even then, there is often a frame in between or
on both sides.
- Lord Slime
Lord Slime
at
> 1/10th compressive for any stone; brick and concrete included. Pushing
or
> pulling against a wall creates both, so unless you know Mohr's...
Wank, wank, wank.
> However, this is all academic and pointless. Slime is basically saying
you
> can't tell how strong a wall is for various reasons. Unless it was built
> illegally, you can. If it passed inspection and has a certificate of
> occupancy, it possesses certain minimum strengths.
You have NO fucking idea what you're talking about.
The Certificate of Occupancy has NOTHING to do the brick.
I had my C.O. and lived in my house without having the brick
on my house. Why? Because the brick is a FACADE, has
no structural purpose and it said so on the permit.
Is my house somehow special? No, the construction methods
used are the same as just about every brick house out there.
> But even that statement is pointless. Frankly, anyone who thinks they
can
> pull over a brick wall with their bare hands, or a even a 1 or 2 ft
lever,
> just doesn't know wtf they are saying.
I'll take that bet. Pour a foundation, have a professional mason lay
a single layer brick wall, 8' x 8', using standard size, solid bricks
oriented in the usual fashion. We'll even let it cure a month or two.
I'll drill a couple holes, place a few bolts, and with a 2' lever, I'll
pull
it down. We'll get your humiliation on video.
If I can't, I'll pay you for the cost of the wall. Com'on Nate, you
fucking whimp. Do it. I just know you'll weasel out of it, 'cause
you're all mouth and no balls.
Have a Merry Christmas.
- Lord Slime
Nate
"Lord Slime"
> By now that cookie has turned to shit.
The cookie could get softer, harder, or burst into a pile of carbon - just
like the steel and the bricks. It's all so confusing for the sparky, I
know.
> The only way a brick-only wall has any structural strength is if
> it's two or more layers thick, and tied together in some fashion.
Bingo. Now go find me one that isn't.
How about if I toss a stick...?
- Nate
tra...@cliffhanger.com
there still. They are still standing up just fine to typical wind
loads upwards of 50 psf laterally. These buildings are referred to as
Unreinforced Masonry buildings (the bricks take the load, no frames,
and no additional reinforcing). As far as I know, these walls have
only failed during earthquakes which impart much larger lateral forces
than wind. Your claim that these types of buildings don't exist and
that they can't resisit lateral forces is entirely off base, so STFU.
Craig A. Clarence
"Lord Slime" <jbyr...@SPAMfriiPLEASE.com> wrote in message
news:41c9bbdd$0$208$7586...@news.frii.net...
> Ah Nate. A good offense is the best defense, eh? So try
> this... how about I tell them about our little sortie into the
> Black, eh? Maybe let them know what a great partner you
> were. Perhaps they'll figure out why I've never climbed with
> you again.
>
> - Lord Slime
Typical John Byrnes backpedal - soundly beaten in the argument, so has to
resort to childish personal attacks. And a feeble attack at best - no way
Byrnes has the guts to post any significant details about their Black climb.
Does anyone who reads this newsgroup have even a shred of respect left for
this guy? If so, why?
-C
Lg
Nate wrote:
> > I'm so done with this thread. I have a construction laborer, a
sparky and a
> green college kid telling me all about mechanical engineering.
Yes, you were obviously done when you started. I would rather be called
"insert Nate's cute labels" and know something about structural
engineering than an ME who doesn't know about substrates and will apply
an inappropriate fastener to a medium that won't readily accept it and
will be prone to failure.
Nate, you're a homeowner w/ a supposed ME and that could be very
dangerous. So you put in a few anchors in your brick shit house to
mount the toilet-paper holder, fine, don't get too happy. All you have
done now is put your credibility on the line as an ME, you either have
to go back to school or get some real world experience to understand
that your method is not recommended.
I ran our little scenarios by: a contractor buddy at work, with an
unbiased position at this and each small discussion afterward with the
others. Hmm, he had a problem w/ a 3/8" "expansion" anchor for what I
wanted to do (I pretended I was you-it was fun:) He said epoxy would be
better, or my design. Then last night I had dinner w/ my close climbing
partner (hey-happens to be a structural engineer!) "...and then I got
all these holds from the gym...and I got these anchors from my bolt kit
and I guess I'll just use those...." >wait< he interrupts, "Won't the
brick just shatter? Well, you might get 1 out of 3...you should use
epoxy...." Then I laughed and told him about you Nate and he said,
"Yea, but he ain't a mason and if he was, he'd know something about a
brick." Another engineer/contractor friend who I had dinner with the
night before said you should know about substrates. All approved my
design.
You see, my design spreads the forces out onto the sheet, yours zeros
in at the hold. Of which there will be less than an inch of brick under
your bolt,levering against the 'harder' mortar bed. And again, just
tonight, my best friend, you guessed it, contractor/structural engineer
said there will be problems with the bricks, drilling them and so
forth. So there you are, you don't pass GO...yOur homework is to learn
about the brick, including a paper on, "The nervousness of a brick with
a hole/hold through the middle of it and a 200 lb person standing and
bouncing on it."
Don't bother responding Nate...just look at how many posts you've
written since you said you were done. I'm not interested in your
w.a.g.'s or any techno babble. If you were confident about your method
you'd quit spewing...go back and re-read the first sentence of my first
post in this thread. If you believe it to be inaccurate, perform some
tests. Real simple. Do it. You even have someone willing to perform the
tests. LS, I recommend drilling 3-4 holes low to stand on and to move
in between. Then rotate the holds a few times to re-torque and re-test.
Should be a good show.
Lg
Lord Slime
> And a feeble attack at best - no way
> Byrnes has the guts to post any significant details about their Black
climb.
Nice troll. I may yet.
> Does anyone who reads this newsgroup have even a shred of
respect left for this guy? If so, why?
Did anyone *ever* have a shred of respect for you?
- Lord Slime
Lord Slime
[snip]
> I ran our little scenarios by: a contractor buddy at work, with an
> unbiased position at this and each small discussion afterward with the
> others. Hmm, he had a problem w/ a 3/8" "expansion" anchor for what I
> wanted to do (I pretended I was you-it was fun:) He said epoxy would be
> better, or my design. Then last night I had dinner w/ my close climbing
> partner (hey-happens to be a structural engineer!) "...and then I got
> all these holds from the gym...and I got these anchors from my bolt kit
> and I guess I'll just use those...." >wait< he interrupts, "Won't the
> brick just shatter? Well, you might get 1 out of 3...you should use
> epoxy...." Then I laughed and told him about you Nate and he said,
> "Yea, but he ain't a mason and if he was, he'd know something about a
> brick."
[further corroboration snipped]
Thanks.
- Lord Slime
Lord Slime
Okay, I'm incredulous. I've never seen or heard of one made
with a single layer of brick. Where are these common? Are
they still being built in the U.S.? Point me at a reference.
In my experience, a modern Unreinforced Masonry building
is concrete block of at least 8" width, not the 4" width
(actually 3.5") of standard bricks. Old buildings (circa 1910)
sometimes have bricks turned the long way (8" wide) if
there's only one layer, or more commonly interlaced to give
a 12" wide wall.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that they exist, but I still
believe I can pull it down with a bolt and a lever. 50psf (I'm
assuming you mean 50 pounds/sq-foot) doesn't seem like
much at all. Last week we had 70mph winds in Colorado,
and we've had 140mph winds in the last dozen years. How
many psf is that?
So Tradboy, what do you think is the possibility that the
house owned by the guy who wanted to put up the
climbing wall is an unreinforced masonry building?
- Lord Slime
Lord Slime
> The cookie could get softer, harder, or burst into a pile of carbon -
just
> like the steel and the bricks. It's all so confusing for the sparky, I
> know.
Squirm, squirm, weasel, weasel. All mouth, no brains, no balls.
- Lord Slime
ant
> you should use epoxy
what do you mean 'epoxy'? do you mean glue in anchors?
DingusMilktoast
generally Milktoastian and therefore lazy, I tend to avoid ALL home and
self-improvement topics. I fell into this clash ot Titans quite by accident.
Tell you what, I know one HELLUVA lot more about bricks, by god, than I did
before.
Merry Christmas
DMT
Lg
Yea. Threaded rod and they have dual chamber epoxy guns w/ the plastic
mixing tube for your tip. We have a pnuematic one that's sweet, no
squeezing. Still, drilling the hole is the tricky part and you have to
have it a little bit bigger for the epoxy to fill around. Use the
hammer to start then switch to drill and see how that goes for the
hole.
When you squeeze the epoxy in your hole, push the tip to the back of
the hole, start squeezing and slowly pull the tip out as you do. When
you insert your rod, turn as you insert, then don't touch it.
Lg - Have a nice HOlidaY everybody.
ant
> Yea. Threaded rod and they have dual chamber epoxy guns w/ the
plastic
> mixing tube for your tip.
ahhhhhh. that feels good. maybe i suck at climbing, but at least three
people agree with my choices in masonry anchoring..
best of the holidays to you,
anthony
PWalker
Ok ive been doing some reasearch and found this website:
http://www.iskl.edu.my/~jasin_nazim/buildclimbingwall/Index.html
Looking at that I have just recently purchased a few drop-in anchors (zinc)
40mm x 12mm that fit the conventional 3/8" thread used in gym climbing
holds. This way i can change the holds around.
I put up my fingerboard into the brick and it holds up well. Steady as a
rock. The type of bricks we have are solid (no holes). It's a dirty/muddy
colour and any patchup job will look ok as the brick colour is not uniform.
I'll try and take a before/after shot. The holds will go in the back of the
house which has a certain lengthy section that isnt visited much. We have
previously bore holes in the wall to inject solution every once in a while
againt whiteants. I live in Australia.
Thanks everyone for your insight!
cheers,
peter
Mad Dog
>Okay, I'm incredulous. I've never seen or heard of one made
>with a single layer of brick. Where are these common? Are
>they still being built in the U.S.? Point me at a reference.
I don't know if they are still being built in the US, but I've seen them in
southern IL long ago. Some were knocked down by a tornado in the 60's.
>In my experience, a modern Unreinforced Masonry building
>is concrete block of at least 8" width, not the 4" width
>(actually 3.5") of standard bricks. Old buildings (circa 1910)
>sometimes have bricks turned the long way (8" wide) if
>there's only one layer, or more commonly interlaced to give
>a 12" wide wall.
I've lived in an 8" wide brick house (the bricks, were 8" wide, not the house)
and it was very solid. A real pain to do improvements on, though.
Craig A. Clarence says...
>Does anyone who reads this newsgroup have even a shred of respect left for
>this guy? If so, why?
Sure, I respect John. Why? He may be opinionated and outspoken, but he's also
very well informed on many topics and has an eye for the big picture. I also
respect Nate for the same reasons. Both are unique individuals that I point to
when arguing the value of rec.climbing and why an unmoderated forum is best.
With regards to the argument at the root of this thread, both make good points
that illuminate the grey area argued by experts in the field of masonry. I
spent a few years studying failure mechanisms of systems that utilize mortar
additives and have seen a wide spectrum of brick veneer performance in the
field. Given proper design, materials and execution, it is definately possible
to bolt holds onto a brick wall, even an overhanging brick wall, and climb on it
without failure. But there is a long history of litigation arising from brick
walls that fail with no applied external load other than gravity. One mortar
additive manufacturer has paid well over one billion dollars in settlements when
such failures have occured.
Nate
Lg wrote:
> I ran our little scenarios by: a contractor buddy at work...
I layed down some Tarot cards, then talked to my dog and my 8 year old
nephew. They couldn't come up with anything quantitative either.
Although, the Tarot cards suggested to me that "9 fasters" was bad.
Very, very bad. Better try 8 or 10.
Dude, you are so out of your league.
- Nate
Lord Slime
> Slime sez:
> >Okay, I'm incredulous. I've never seen or heard of one made
> >with a single layer of brick. Where are these common? Are
> >they still being built in the U.S.? Point me at a reference.
>
> I don't know if they are still being built in the US, but I've seen them
in
> southern IL long ago. Some were knocked down by a tornado in the 60's.
A single layer of brick, laid the long way (a 4" thick wall)?
How big were they? How old were they?
Okay, I was wrong, my statement was too broad. They do
exist. But I think you'd be hard pressed to find one in
Boulder, I doubt the house that started this thread is built
that way, and finally, I bet putting a climbing wall on it is
a not a good idea.
> >In my experience, a modern Unreinforced Masonry building
> >is concrete block of at least 8" width, not the 4" width
> >(actually 3.5") of standard bricks.
>
> I've lived in an 8" wide brick house (the bricks, were 8" wide, not the
house)
> and it was very solid. A real pain to do improvements on, though.
Yup. I have a good friend who lives in a brick house, 8" thick
walls interlaced. It's about 100 years old and has been several
times reinforced with steel rods to keep the walls from bulging
and collapsing. Besides the structural issues, the bricks
exfoliate/crack quite easily.
> With regards to the argument at the root of this thread, both make good
points
> that illuminate the grey area argued by experts in the field of masonry.
I
> spent a few years studying failure mechanisms of systems that utilize
mortar
> additives and have seen a wide spectrum of brick veneer performance in
the
> field. Given proper design, materials and execution, it is definately
possible
> to bolt holds onto a brick wall, even an overhanging brick wall, and
climb on it
> without failure.
Exactly my original point. Because no one knows the design,
materials and execution of the wall in question, it's irresponsible
to blindly say it'll be strong enough to hold climbers.
> But there is a long history of litigation arising from brick
> walls that fail with no applied external load other than gravity.
Yes, I've seen more than a few. And these have had *frames*
to help support the brick and they still failed.
- Lord Slime
Lord Slime
>
> Dude, you are so out of your league.
Gee Nate, we're supposed to believe you, but you won't believe
anything anyone else says? You challenge people's credibility
but dodge any & all questions and challenges directed to you?
All you are is mouth. I now doubt everything you say and have
said. Of course, you'll say you don't care, or you're glad, or
some such bullshit.
Maybe we'll get Mad Dog to mediate, and we'll go look at those
brick buildings on Pearl Street. And then we'll go drill into the
brick facade on your house. And then we'll see who's correct.
But that's all wishful thinking. You wouldn't do that. You couldn't
stand to be shown to be wrong, or even admit that you *might*
be wrong. You'll just post some dismissive reply; you're so witty.
Oh well, just keep up with the bullshit, Nate. Some young,
inexperienced people will believe you. For a while.
- Lord Slime
Lg
Yep, and you clearly proved it by talking to your dog and playing cards
with your nephew. Hasta~
Lg
Mad Dog
>A single layer of brick, laid the long way (a 4" thick wall)?
>How big were they? How old were they?
They were 4" bricks and the houses were tri-level, probably built in the late
50's or early 60's. The reason I remember them is that we drove around town
after a tornado went through, to look at the damage. There was a big fuss about
one contractor that built some upper floor sections using just vaneer brick as
the only wall system. I remember seeing one where the walls and roof were gone,
but the piano and other furniture that had been on the perimeter of the room
were still in place.
>Okay, I was wrong, my statement was too broad. They do
>exist. But I think you'd be hard pressed to find one in
>Boulder, I doubt the house that started this thread is built
>that way, and finally, I bet putting a climbing wall on it is
>a not a good idea.
Unless you want a mobile one.
Andy Gale
Lord Slime wrote:
> "Craig A. Clarence" wrote in message
>>Does anyone who reads this newsgroup have even a shred of
>
> respect left for this guy? If so, why?
>
> Did anyone *ever* have a shred of respect for you?
>
I know what he climbs. So, yeah.
Andy
Hardman Knott
LOL
It's official: rec.climbing is indeed alive and well.
Hardman Knott
Will Niccolls
> All building materials and methods meet certain minimum codes. Concrete
> is generally 3ksi or better for residential, for example. Brick walls
> tend to
I'll just point out that "minimum codes" are usually the "maximum" that
gets built, and anyone who has spent more than 9 seconds doing remodeling
notices that there is lots of construction done that does not get built to
code.
And for residential masonry construction, in my jurisdiction there is no
inspection. (Not an earthquake area!). In most residential construction,
brick is simply siding. There are wall ties ever 4 feet or so that are
attached to the wood frame, and mortared into the wall to keep it upright.
Brick walls can vary wildly in the quality of their construction. If a
laborer mixes too much water in the mortar, for example, or if the
temperature during installation is too low or too high, then the strength of
the mortar may be compromised.
Concrete, same deal. The inspector might look at the excavation for
footings to make sure they are below the frost line, but I've never seen one
appear on a site for a concrete pour, or to inspect the finished concrete
footings or walls. Crews routinely add water to the redimix for easier
handling, there goes your 3k psi mix down to ??psi. And reinforcement steel
or mesh is often improperly installed.
Fear of lawsuits, callbacks, and competition are the reason buildings stay
standing, not codes. Inspectors can't keep up on everything.
> be designed not to to fall over when someone leans against them, also as
> an example. Bricks themselves need to support several tons of
> compression, with ease.
I've installed glue-in Hilti and wedge type sleeve anchor bolts in all kinds
of masonry walls, including filled, reinforced CMU walls, brick veneer, and
solid old style brick construction. In the brick, my wild ass guess is that
most are strong enough for climbing holds, if exposed to water freeze/thaw
they will probably degrade in strength over time. In very old buildings,
I've seen mortar that resembled sugar--you could put a hole in it in 30
seconds with a bic pen.
Will Niccolls
DingusMilktoast
lord's barn, lol. A WHITE barn at that. Twas the damn skid marks that gave
me away.
"Dingus, how would you like it if I nailed some of these goddamned holds to
the side of your truck???"
He had a point...
(sum bitch torn the barn down 3 months later to make way for a housing
project)
DMT