Hi,

I like the way that Derek challenges everyone hard on important issues to which there are probably no right or wrong answers.

Based on hard fact STUFF observation I would comment as follows :-

In domestic buildings the process of repair to an "as like" previous condition is rarely seen. Most interventions are made using an approach or with materials that are quite different from the original. If the original approach failed why should this process be repeated ? For example, when sills rot out in a cottage then it might be righted and then simply underbuilt in brick now relying instead on support from mid (chair) rails. Sometimes (but rarely) a new sill will be seen to be inserted at a higher elevation cutting off rotted post bottoms and making new tenons in remaining sound material. This can be seen at the original Pembroke Cottage in Hampshire where the front sill is now 10" higher than the rear. A replica of this cottage was built by Tom Musco several years ago and now stands in Royalston, Mass. and thus one option to preserve a building pattern might not be to repair the old but to simply build a new one.

In "open" buildings like barns where there is little supplementary stiffening or support to be gained from infill walls then the problems of righting leaning buildings is much more complex to resolve. I observed a leaning barn close to home being righted and repaired by a world renowned carpenter (yes you know him Will !) where a complete long wall had short stub scarfed additions made to post and wall stud bottoms. My thoughts on seing this were exactly as per Derek i.e. that there is now a plane of weakness here that might or might not survive a gale. What was previously failing in a slow yielding fashion might now succumb to a catastrophic failure.

I agree with Tom Cundiff's observations about metal connectors but in reality this is probably the most common repair method adopted in old buildings - especially the use of worn down wrought iron cart tyre strakes which do a marvelous job of reinforcing the English Tying joint. Up to 50% of English timber buildings now feature this now historic but quite dissimilar material repair or reinforcement method.

I have seen conservation award winning buildings where badly detriorated beams have been filled with a patchwork quilt of repairs that demonstrated the carpenters prowess but left the heart sinking in despair over the visual impact of the finished piece. Old and new don't seem to sit well together. Over enthusiastic repairs can and does result in "delisting" or downgrading listings of important historic buildings, once again made by timber frame conservation specialist of such standing and world renown that would make your jaw drop.

This week I spent some time at Farnham Castle and observed that an ancient carved capital aisle post is all that remains of a Norman hall (circa 1100's) with the whole hall building having now effectively morphed into something completely different now made mainly from brick and stone. It would clearly not be practical to rebuild the former hall on its current site but it just might be possible to survey and collect enough fragmentary design information about the old timber hall to recreate this hall in virtual space by judicious employment of CAD or other visualization techniques.

The renaisssance of "intensive" repair of timber buildings being seen today is not new. Oft times a complete new front will have been applied to a building possibly to transform its appearance or simply to make good a previously failed or badly deteriorated wall. Is this right or wrong ?

It is worth taking the opportunity to remind ourselves that the timber frame wonder of the world - Westminster Hall hammer beam roof is not the original roof with the previous aisled hall (a bit like Farnham Castle) having served for 250 years before being torn down and replaced with a new superimproved model (incidentally made in Farnham, Surrey).

We do what we can given the constraints that exist but please don't let anyone fool you into thinking that there is a right or wrong way to do anything. Shutting down the brain and following a prescriptive rule book is not the answer.

I don't think that we have yet reached Derek's "50 ways to leave a lover" but the strength of this forum appears to lie in the challenging and informative contributions made by all.

Regards

Ken Hume