MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

Identifying problems in brickwork

The most common problems likely to be encountered by owners of brick buildings are the decay
of the joints in the brickwork and/or the decay of individual bricks in specific areas and in
varying amounts. The causes of such decay will vary. They may be related to particular
structural problems or failures, or may be simply the normal effects of weathering from rain and
frost. Water in its different forms is the main agent of decay and brickwork, like all other
building materials, needs to be correctly detailed to minimise the impact of driving rain and to
cut down the potential for water saturation. Maintenance of rainwater goods, flashings and
drainage are also essential to prevent damage.

Inspection and survey

Historic brickwork will deteriorate and decay if not properly maintained or if it is subjected to
inappropriate repair works. Decay can be caused by a number of factors, most of which are the
result of water penetration and the saturation of the brickwork. The main signs that something is
wrong with brickwork are:

• cracks or bulges
• bricks becoming loosened or dislodged
• spalling (deterioration of the surface of bricks)
• surface staining from organic growth
• efflorescence (white powdery residue on bricks)
• algae growth
• soft, loose or crumbling mortar

Where these symptoms are noticed, action should be taken to establish the cause of the defect
and to put it right. Areas of risk are the higher and more exposed parts of a building such as
chimneystacks and parapet walls. It is important to examine these more inaccessible parts of the
building in any inspection. Alternatively, isolated patches of brickwork may become saturated
due to leaking gutters or downpipes, damaged internal water pipes or slipped flashings.

Regular inspection and maintenance of building fabric are at the heart of good conservation
practice. Maintenance is routine work necessary to keep the fabric of the building in good repair.
Typically, for a brick-faced structure, this will require periodic inspection and checking of
gutters and rainwater goods to ensure that the masonry is not receiving excessive amounts of
water and taking particular note of the condition of the more exposed parts of the building, such
as the parapet walls and chimneys.

Repair works are those beyond the scope of regular maintenance. Repair will be required to
remedy significant decay or damage caused by neglect, weathering, or wear-and-tear over time.
1
Page

The object of a successful repair is to return the building to good order without alteration or

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

restoration. Building inspection should identify defects and prioritise repairs under the headings
of ‘urgent’, ‘short-term’, ‘medium-term’, and ‘long-term’ works. To determine the true causes
of failure and arrive at the best methods of repair, accurate information will be needed on the
element of brickwork to be repaired. It will be necessary to understand the building’s history,
form, structure, materials, and original craft methods. For brickwork this should typically
include information about:

• wall construction
• type, age, colour, texture and size of the brick
• type(s) of brick bonding used
• style(s) of joint finish
• orientation of façade
• detailing at openings – heads, reveals, sills
• decorative features such as the use of purpose made or cut-moulded bricks, or use of clay
creasing tiles
• materials used for mortars
• condition of the brickwork joints
• any particular surface treatments
• weathering details and how they are performing
• previous interventions and repairs
• signs of movement such as distress-cracking or bulging and whether this movement is active
or inactive
• brickwork discolouration due to staining, salt
attack, lime leaching, efflorescence
• signs of biological growth and invasive vegetation

Identifying Structural problems

The most common sign of a structural fault in

brickwork is cracking. This can be caused by structural
movement, subsidence, unstable foundations, the effect
of tree roots or defects in the original construction.
Cracks can be minor and superficial, restricted to a few
isolated bricks. However, extensive cracking is usually
indicative of a serious problem and a structural
appraisal by a suitably qualified structural engineer,
experienced in dealing with traditionally constructed
masonry, is essential.
2

Common structural defects in brickwork can be caused

Page

by a number of different reasons, such as cracking due to settlement or problems with rainwater

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

goods. The defects may also be the result of the original use of inferior materials, bad original
detailing, or poor craft practices, such as improper bonding. In the Georgian period, for
example, the prolific use of ‘snapped’ headers in façades mean that, while the outer skin of
brickwork looks like a typical 9-inch (225mm) solid wall of bonded brickwork, it is in reality
only a half-brick-thick veneer, infrequently tied-in to the backing brickwork. As with most
historic buildings, the Georgians graded their bricks from the clamp or kiln. The best quality
bricks and mortar were used where appearance mattered, and their inferior counterparts were
used where the brickwork was to be concealed. This led to a situation where the load bearing
brickwork was often made with the poorest quality bricks while the facing bricks, which carried
little or none of the structural load, were of the highest quality. Party walls between dwellings in
terraces were often infrequently tied-in to external walls so that there was no effective restraint
between floor levels. Differential behaviour of under-fired bricks laid in weak mortar can lead
to bulging of the wall.

Furthermore, the inner brickwork of the wall is often

found to contain built-in bonding timbers. These
bonding timbers were inserted into brick walls at
intervals during construction as a temporary restraint in
long walls being built at speed. These timbers were
usually of softwood and can shrink, causing localised
cracking. Timber was also commonly used to form
lintels above door and window openings. The timber
used for lintels tended to be of a higher quality and is
less likely to cause such problems. Bonding timbers are
also vulnerable in a damp external wall to attack from
fungi and insects causing the timbers to deform or, in
severe cases, collapse. When deformation of inner
brickwork occurs to a significant extent, it can lead to a
shearing of the bonding headers that connect the facing
brickwork with the main wall behind and may cause
the outer skin to collapse.

Bulges in Brickwork

There is a range of reasons why bulges may occur in brick walls, the following is a list of some
of the more typical causes:

• poor original workmanship and defects such as inadequate cross bonding (can be identified
when the outer wall face is bulging and the inner wall face remains straight)
• decay of the structure in a variety of ways due to water penetration, e.g. leading to
3

delamination of the wall

Page

• rotting bonding timbers > problems with changing ground conditions

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

• changes in loading on the wall

• previous inappropriate interventions, such as the enlargement of openings and the
formation of new openings in a wall without sufficient support

Bulging of a brick wall may be of minor or more serious concern. Often, the minor movements
which occur throughout the life of structures lead to gentle bowing which is part of the historic
character and charm of the structure and, in such cases where there is no concern regarding
structural integrity, then the principle of minimum intervention should be observed. However,
where bulging is found it is recommended to seek the advice of a structural engineer with a
knowledge and experience of traditional buildings – choosing the right engineer can often
result in less radical, more sensitive and often cheaper solutions.

Dealing with structural defects

Repairing Cracks

Minor cracks can be repaired by carefully cutting out the affected areas of brick, replacing
fractured bricks, and repointing using a mortar appropriate to the existing brickwork. Where
major cracking has occurred, or where bricks are displaced or out of alignment due to
structural movement, specific repair works will need to be planned and directed by a structural
engineer experienced in the repair of traditional structures.

Dealing with bulging in brick wall

Each situation will require a specific solution and it should always be the primary aim to repair
the brickwork in situ, rather than take down and rebuild. However, there are occasions when
the structural defect is such that the appropriate solution will be to carefully take down the
damaged section and rebuild it using the original bricks. In such cases, the section to be taken
down should firstly be recorded and then carefully dismantled in such a way as to maximise
the retention of whole bricks for reuse. When rebuilding, matching historic bonding patterns
and pointing materials and techniques should be used. This is specialised work and will require
to be designed, specified and overseen on site by a suitably-qualified structural engineer. The
conservation officer in the local authority should be consulted before any works are
undertaken.

There is also a range of repair techniques available depending on the specific problem, the
severity of it, location of bulge, and the like. The primary repair solution involves tying the
bulging wall to a sound structural element and there are several different approaches to tying.
Sometimes, where an external wall is being tied back to the structure, the tie will be fixed to
the wall with an anchor plate. These are commonly found on historic buildings, but it is also
sometimes possible to conceal the fixing. It is important that the repair solution does not result
4

in making a structure overly rigid that was designed to have flexibility. This can create stresses
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

in the building which may induce new and more serious problems whether in the brickwork or
elsewhere.

Sometimes the deformation of a wall is such that tying back will not be sufficient and the wall,
or part of it, may need to be taken down and rebuilt. Generally, if a defect is left unattended for
a long period, the likelihood of such radical solutions being required becomes greater. The
earlier a problem is identified and repair is undertaken, the simpler, and generally cheaper, the
solution will be. Always with such structural repairs the advice of a structural engineer
experienced and expert in traditional building construction will be required.

Brickwork decay

WATER SATURATION - One of the most common causes of deterioration and failure of
brickwork is water saturation. Water can percolate deep into masonry by capillary action. It can
be a particular problem on exposed areas of a building, such as parapets and chimneystacks and
in the vicinity of leaking rainwater pipes. Bricks differ in their tolerance of wet conditions
according to their material properties. Causes of excessive water penetration can include:

• rising damp
• rainwater ponding at the base of walls
• encroaching vegetation
• windblown rain
• failure of roof systems
• defective rainwater goods
• failed mortar joints to copings
• slipped or damaged

FROST DAMAGE - Different brick types will vary in their ability to withstand frost damage.
Porous bricks will absorb more water and some may have poorer frost resistance than denser
bricks. It should be noted, however, that there is no dependable correlation between strength or
water absorption and frost resistance. Frost resistance relates to the pore structure of the brick.
Frost damage results when the water absorbed by the brick expands on freezing, breaking the
brick apart. Where this occurs it may be necessary to replace damaged bricks. It is also essential
to discover and remedy the source of the water that has saturated the bricks and to make good
such defects as leaking rainwater pipes or overflowing gutters.

SALT CRYSTALLISATION - In historic brickwork, soluble salts present in the adjacent sub-soil
may be carried up a wall by rising damp. Salts may also be present in the bricks themselves.
The saturation of brickwork can cause the movement of salts through the wall to the surface of
the brick. If these salts crystallise within the body of the brick wall they cause ‘sub-
florescence’. Because the crystals of salt expand in size, this can result in the spalling of the
5

faces of the bricks. The white powder caused by salts crystallising on the surface of the brick or
Page

mortar is known as ‘efflorescence’. Efflorescence is normally harmless, though while it lasts it

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

can be aesthetically disfiguring. Where it appears, it should be brushed off and collected as
otherwise the salts will continue to attract moisture and prevent the brick surface from drying.

ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTION - Brickwork can be affected by chemical attack from

atmospheric pollutants on surfaces that are not regularly washed clean by rain. These include
areas directly under windowsills and projecting dressings where there is an accumulation of
encrusted dirt. Where deposits remain on the surface of brick they can, in time, lead to the
formation of destructive salts. SULPHATE ATTACK Historic brickwork on chimneystacks is
subject to soluble sulphates in condensing gases. These areas are most susceptible to the
harmful effect of sulphate attack. Sulphate attack can also occur with mortars based solely on
Ordinary Portland Cement (which contain alite) when they come in contact with soluble
sulphates, such as those that occur in the groundwater of clay soils. The resultant expansive
action can be seen as a thin linear crack through the bed joints.

DAMAGE FROM VEGETATION - Unchecked vegetation can be harmful to brick structures.

Ivy, in particular, can cause serious harm if allowed to grow on damaged surfaces and penetrate
with its root system into the wall core. Other climbing plants, while not penetrating the wall
with roots, should not be allowed to grow to the extent that they cover up or conceal defects in
the brick wall behind, or hold moisture and prevent the wall from drying out naturally. Moss
growing on brickwork is a sure sign of a saturated wall and the growth will damage bricks
further by encouraging more water retention against the face of the brickwork.

6
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

7
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

Stone

Stone Consolidation
Halts decay and prolongs life
Elizabeth Garrod
Natural weathering of stone is inevitable, but some types have a structure that makes them more
durable than others.
There are three major causes of deterioration in natural stone; pollutants, frost and crystallisation
of soluble salts. Water penetration is the main instigator of decay, and structure is the most
important factor influencing the ability of stone to resist decay processes.

THE PROBLEM
To illustrate some of the problems a stonework wall may be subjected to throughout its lifetime,
imagine the following common scenario:
There is constant wetting and drying of the surface of a limestone wall over the years. Gradually
more of the exposed surfaces begin to erode a little. This is natural weathering. A decade of
extremely wet weather interspersed with unusually low temperatures heightens the natural
weathering. The atmospheric pollutant, sulphur dioxide, combines with the calcium carbonate in
the stone and creates a hard gypsum layer covering the surface of the stone. This means that
moisture inside the stone cannot escape and salts may crystallise behind this hard layer and
eventually cause spalling, which leaves a weak exposed surface, more vulnerable to natural
weathering. The owners of the building notice the problem but choose the wrong type of
treatment, perhaps a water repellent treatment that does not breathe. It doesn't penetrate any
further than the surface and the result is a hard, impervious outer surface like the gypsum.
Ultimately the same problem arises as before; spalling occurs and weathering is accelerated.
What, if anything, can be done for this stonework? If it is not possible to shelter or isolate the
material from the weather in some way, and continual erosion will lead to the loss of the original,
then conservation through consolidation is the answer.

PRINCIPLES
The fundamental principle of conservation is to alleviate the problems affecting a building or
monument in a way that doesn't detract from its history and doesn't endanger but promotes its
future. This should be done, wherever possible, with the absolute minimum of intervention and
in a way that is reversible should a better way come along in the future.
When talking about stone consolidation it is important to be clear on the difference between a
8

consolidant and a preservative. The aim of a preservative is to totally preserve the stone in
Page

whatever state of weathering it has reached and stop all future decay; this generally means

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

applying a coating to the surface of the stone which totally protects it from the effects of the
atmosphere around it. Consolidation on the other hand should aim to stabilise the friable material
whilst still allowing weathering to take place as a result of natural processes and at a natural rate.
When considered in this context, consolidation appears to agree with the principles of
conservation. However, the application of a chemical to a stone is usually considered a more
significant intervention than most. Simple mechanical repairs and alterations such as erecting
guttering to protect the stone for example are clearly more readily reversible, and 'traditional'
coatings such as lime wash are considered to be sacrificial - that is to say that they provide
protection as they decay. Furthermore, stone can cope with getting wet, as long as it can also get
dry; it can also cope with minimal loss around the edges: indeed some stones could have been
put in certain places purely to be sacrificial. When is it necessary to introduce such a significant
intervention and apply a chemical to stabilise the effect of weathering?
A thorough assessment of the damage to the stone and the examination of all possible options,
bearing conservation principles in mind, should always precede a decision on whether to simply
carry out repairs or whether to use some form of consolidant.

THE IDEAL
The only requirement of a consolidant is to reduce the rate of decay of the stone surface and the
most successful treatments are those which least alter the characteristics of treated stone leaving
it similar to the underlying sound stone.
The ideal polymer for use in stone consolidation would be one that can reverse the degradation
of a stone, returning it as nearly as possible to its original condition. In order to achieve this the
treated stone should mimic sound stone in as many characteristics as possible. Some
characteristics are, however, more important than others. The most important of these are
strength, porosity, permeability, thermal dilation and colour. Of all the polymers, silanes seem to
hold out the most promise although they may not be suitable in every situation. The theoretical
end-product of polymerisation of the simplest silanes is silica, which is present as a cementing
mineral in many sandstones and may mimic the behaviour of a natural cement more closely than
many other polymers.

DIFFICULTIES
Traditionally waxes and linseed oil were used as water repellents but they had several flaws:

• there was no possibility of deep penetration by these viscous substances;

• they tended to discolour the surface of the stone;
• the surface picked up dirt very easily;
• after a longer period of exposure there could be a breakthrough of salt efflorescence;
• generally the water repellency of these substances caused problems. For modern
consolidant treatments these issues still remain but the most important are depth of
penetration and water repellency.
9
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

DEPTH OF PENETRATION
There is agreement that treatments confined to the outer surface of stonework are dangerous
since they can result in spalling. However, there is no agreement on what would be an
appropriate depth of treatment beyond the fact that it is obviously necessary to treat the stone
deeply enough to consolidate the full thickness of the decayed zone. It is necessary for the
consolidant to penetrate at least 25mm into the stone to reach all areas of friable material.

WATER REPELLENCY
Since water plays such an important role in the decay of stonework, research into consolidants
has often focused on their ability to make stone water repellent. However, this may prevent the
harmless effects of natural weathering as well as the more damaging ones, causing the
appearance of the stone to change.
More seriously, if a consolidant or preservative is water repellent, not only will the ingress of
water be lessened but also water already inside the stone will be hampered from making its way
to the surface to evaporate. The result of this can be salt crystallisation and eventually spalling.
To prevent this, the stone would have to be totally dry throughout the period when the
consolidant is being applied (almost an impossibility in our climate) to be certain that no
moisture is trapped.
Water repellents are usually marketed as being vapour permeable, suggesting that moisture will
be able to escape to the surface of a wall and evaporate. Unfortunately water ingress may
continue as vapour at the surface, as water escapes through cracks at mortar joints, as rising
damp, or by transfer from surrounding stonework, often entering the structure faster than it can
escape. Water repellents can reduce the amount of moisture in stone but they cannot be
guaranteed to exclude all moisture.
Although opinion is divided on whether the use of water repellents can reduce stone decay, it is
clear that any material that completely blocks surface porosity will lead to accelerated stone
decay. Such materials should never be used.

SOLUTIONS
An ambient low humidity, a dry building and a high penetration depth are all very important in
the application of a consolidant. So during the decision-making process and before application it
is necessary to investigate the needs and condition of the building, monitor its environment and
assess the properties of the consolidant.
There has been lots of research into consolidants over the last century to determine colour
changes, strength changes, their effect on properties of different stone and even biological
growth tests. But as yet, no one has whole-heartedly recommended one product or indeed one
type of product as ideal for use in stone conservation.
There are many products on the market, all with different brand names, but their main
10

constituents are similar and can therefore be classified into categories.

Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

SILANE-BASEDMATERIALS

Silane-based materials are generally organosilicon compounds which polymerise inside the
stone. Some water is needed to aid the reaction, but the amount is critical; a high humidity means
the reaction may take place too quickly and too much water leaves no space for the polymer to
form. The end product of polymerisation is silica, similar to the natural silica deposits which
bind many sandstones. Penetration can be quite deep but this depends greatly on the product used
and the conditions in which it is applied.
By the production of silica there is a definite consolidating effect and many silane-based
products seem to increase the strength (flexural, compressive, tensile etc) of damaged stone.
Unfortunately, there is some colour change with most types of silanes, although studies show
that this usually lessens after about 18 months. Porosity, water absorption and pore size
distribution have shown to be affected by the treatment, a little in some cases and a lot in others.
This influences resistance to salt crystallisation and freeze/thaw action. Where there is a new
area of stabilised decayed material, moisture evaporation has to take place within the stone and
this may lead to salt crystallisation at the boundary between treated and non-treated stone.
These are the main silane-based products and their main features:

• tetraalkoxysilanes - have little water repellency;

• alkyl trialkoxysilanes (such as brethane) - less consolidation, but good water repellency;
• polysiloxanes - flexibility and more water repellency;
• silicon hydrides - use presents many health and safety problems;
• halogen bearing silanes - generate damaging acids, so thought to be too dangerous to use
in conservation.

ORGANIC-BASED MATERIALS
These products can be applied by themselves or dissolved in an appropriate solvent. They
generally have good adhesion to the substrate and are good at taking up dimensional changes in
stone (such as thermal expansion and contraction). The disadvantage of using organic-based
materials is that they can be vulnerable to heat or ultra-violet (UV) light and generally the
penetration depth depends greatly on the ability of the solvent to carry the consolidant into the
stone and the percentage of moisture in the stone. Many products have a very low penetration
depth.
These are the main organic-based products and their main features:

• acrylic consolidants - there can be some colour changes;

• vinyl consolidants - very unstable in heat and light and tend to pick up dirt;
• epoxies - the treated stone will be prone to yellowing and the appearance of a white
powder;
• polyurethanes - can alter many of the properties of the stone it is applied to, including
strength, porosity, and brittleness; sometimes having quite a detrimental effect;
11

• polyesters - have an extremely poor resistance to UV radiation and acid rain; not ideal for
stone conservation;
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

• perfluoropolyethers - good water repellents, their advantage in stone conservation is the

fact that they are reversible and stable in UV light, but they have limited cohesive
properties
• fluorinated elastomers - water absorption, vapour permeability and porosity can be
altered by them, but cohesion is good.

INORGANIC TREATMENTS

• Fluorosilicates - cannot be used on limestones since they react badly with calcium
carbonate, and they are not very effective on sandstones;
• barium-hydroxide - there is sometimes a colour change, but it can be a very good
consolidant if applied correctly and kept wet for an accurate amount of time;
• limewater - an old product that is still in use, it is reversible and simple to use.

SURFACE COATINGS
Lime treatments and shelter coatings can be applied to a surface to act as a sacrificial layer after
repairs and treatment have taken place. They should be breathable and can be colour tinted to
match the weathered stone.
Shelter coats are ideal in extreme environments since they provide a sacrificial layer designed to
weather and protect the underlying stone, therefore halting decay and prolonging life. It is
essential to keep shelter coatings in good repair with regular maintenance.

THE FUTURE
Current research, mainly centred on the properties of each type of consolidant, is largely being
done in the laboratory, although these tests often give different results to those performed on
actual buildings. Nevertheless, most non-proprietary research concludes that there is no ideal
consolidant for use on historic stonework, confirming comments made 80 years ago; either some
discoloration of the stone is caused or the altered properties of the stone cause additional
problems. There is also little data on the effective lifespan of treatments beyond one or two
years.
For new buildings there have been tentative suggestions of dipping building materials into a
silane-based product before building. For existing buildings, there are different methods of
application to consider. For example, if a water repellent consolidant is applied to each stone
individually and not to the mortar in between, a good quality lime mortar could be used
sacrificially to help any water escape from the building. Alternatively several carefully chosen
stones could become sacrificial by not applying a water repellent to them, so that any water in
the structure could make its way to them and escape. These stones may have to be monitored and
replaced on a regular basis but it may aid the rest of the building.
There is some new research into dispersed hydrated lime in the recent RILEM
12

publication Historic Mortars: Characteristics and Tests and more extensive tests could certainly
be very interesting (Strotmann, 1999).
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

Whatever treatment is chosen, it is important not to forget the source of damp. Most old stone
buildings were built with complicated systems of water removal in place. Over time stone gullies
acting as guttering may have eroded away and the system will begin to fail, resulting in stone
decay. With the principles of conservation uppermost in mind the best way to consolidate the
stonework of a building is to find those places where water is causing decay and make minor
repairs to the building to re-institute its own system of water removal. Minor repairs and regular
maintenance can in themselves halt decay and prolong life.

Poultices
The true or plain poultice and the cleaning and
desalination of historic masonry and sculpture
Catherine Woolfitt and Graham Abrey

The term poultice has its origins in the field of medicine with the
application of a cleansing pack to the body to relieve infection. The
notion of the poultice has been adapted for the cleaning of historic
buildings and a true poultice is intended to draw out deep-seated
contaminants and staining from the surface of masonry and
sculpture. In current practice the word poultice is extended to a
wide range of cleaning materials and techniques, not all of which
achieve a true poultice effect on the substrate.

Cleaning and desalination of an
outdoor marble sculpture using a
plain clay poultice
What might be termed the true or plain poultice contains water and
the poultice medium only, relying on these ingredients to achieve
the mobilisation and removal of the contaminant. The most
common poultice medium is clay, although paper and cotton fibres
are also used, and talc, chalk and even flour are traditional poultice
materials. A mixture of clay and paper fibre produces an absorbent
and plastic mixture that is often favoured by conservators of stone
sculpture.

This plain or true poultice is normally used for desalination, to draw out soluble salts, or as a
cleaning method on substrates such as limestone that respond to water cleaning. In these cases
the poultice is allowed to dry out and the soiling and/or salts are drawn into the poultice by
capillary action with the moisture. Multiple applications may be necessary to draw the salts
from within the surface pores. Whatever the medium, the poultice is mixed with water to form
a material that will adhere to the substrate. Clay forms a sticky mass that adheres well to stone
13

and other surfaces. These plain poultices can be conveniently mixed by hand as required on
site with the addition of water to the poultice medium.
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

CLEANING PACKS

The plain clay poultice may be modified with the addition of certain compounds to target
particular stains or surface coatings. These 'active' or 'chemical' poultices are designed for the
removal of the various types of soiling and contaminants that are insoluble in water and for
those which have penetrated deep into the surface pores. Proprietary cleaners and strippers are
specifically designed and formulated for certain applications, including degreasing surfaces
and paint stripping. Poultices containing sequestering agents, such as EDTA, are available for
the removal of metallic stains, the copper and iron stains which frequently disfigure masonry
subject to rain water run off from bronze sculpture or iron fixings. Sequestering agents
chemically isolate specific staining material such as metals, forming compounds which are
soluble and can be removed from the surface.

Alkaline poultice cleaners and strippers are commonly used for

cleaning or degreasing masonry surfaces and for paint removal.
Sodium hydroxide is the most common alkaline cleaning agent in
proprietary cleaners for a range of masonry substrates, including
limestone, sandstone, brick and terracotta and is the most common
ingredient in proprietary paint removers. Care must be taken in the
use of sodium hydroxide based cleaners to minimise risks to the
building and the user. Sodium hydroxide based cleaners and
strippers must be neutralised with acid afterwash. Adjacent,
dissimilar building surfaces must be protected and personal
protective equipment worn by the cleaning operative. In the field of
stone conservation ammonium carbonate is added to clay and
clay/paper poultices to remove soiling from limestone. Ammonium
Trial cleaning of a detail carbonate is a less alkaline cleaner than sodium hydroxide. It works
on a 19th century by reacting with calcium sulphate on the soiled surface to form
cement stucco facade calcium carbonate and soluble ammonium sulphate that can be
rinsed off with water.
using ammonium
carbonate in a clay and These 'active' or 'chemical' poultices are all applied to a pre-wetted
paper fibre poultice. surface to minimise penetration of the chemical into the masonry
surface and covered with plastic film to prevent the poultice drying
out. The cleaning additives in these mixtures chemically dissolve the soiling or staining which
is held to the surface of the poultice, and then both the cleaning agent and the contaminant are
removed with the clay. Rinsing with water and, where necessary neutralisation, follows to
remove any soiling that remains on the surface and also to remove residues of the chemical
cleaners. Strictly speaking these materials are clay-based cleaning packs rather than true
poultices, but the word poultice is now widely used in the building cleaning industry.
14
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

OTHER POULTICES AND GELS

Cleaning agents are often mixed in a gel medium, normally

based on CMC (carboxymethyl cellulose). Gels containing
alkaline cleaning agents, such as ammonium carbonate, are
covered with plastic sheet after application to the surface and
in this way function like packs, not true poultices. Other more
specialist cleaning packs may be developed for particular
cleaning problems on sculpture or decorative masonry detail.
One poultice developed for the cleaning of limestone is the hot
lime poultice credited to Professor Robert Baker and initially
used at Wells Cathedral. Hot slaked lime is highly alkaline and
softened the black soiling deposits and the sulphate crust on
the limestone. Although successful to some degree this method Application of a hot lime
is difficult to control and non-selective and is now rarely used, poultice to heavily soiled
even in the field of stone conservation. The Mora Poultice, limestone sculpture
which contains ammonium and sodium bicarbonate, EDTA
and a surfactant in a CMC gel, is still sometimes used for
limestone.

DESALINATION

Clay poultices, traditionally of either sepiolite or attapulgite clay, with fine particle sizes in the
range of 50mm, have been the usual choice for desalination of historic masonry suffering from
soluble salt-related decay. The depth and degree of salt contamination should be understood at
the outset of the operation through drilling of masonry to obtain samples at various depths for
analysis of the types of salt present and their content. Pre-wetting with sprays must be
sufficient for water to reach and mobilise salts in the heart of the masonry, depending on the
depth of contamination. The clay will need to be applied with wire mesh or other
reinforcement.
Once the poultice has dried out the clay can be removed and a sample must be checked for salt
content. This procedure should be repeated until the salt levels are significantly reduced. This
procedure can take a long time and periods of months rather than weeks should be anticipated
for large-scale and thorough desalination of masonry walls. It should be noted that dry clay
powders are potentially hazardous substances and must be used with adequate personal
protection, mainly to prevent inhalation of the fine particles.
Desalination of sculpture and architectural detail on a much smaller scale is used to draw salts
from vulnerable porous surfaces. In certain cases, for example where the surface has open
pores or has badly deteriorated (often the case with limestone or sandstone sculpture), clay
may be inappropriate and paper or cotton fibres may be preferable and more easily
removed. Decisions regarding the cleaning and treatment of sculpture should rest with
an appropriately qualified and experienced conservator.
15
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

CLEANING WITH POULTICES/PACKS

Poultices are normally associated with small scale cleaning but they are potentially useful for
the general cleaning of building facades. Commercial demands to bring the costs of poultice
cleaning in line with less expensive methods, such as traditional water cleaning, have led to
the development of spray applied poultices. In certain cases clay based poultices or packs may
be the best cleaning option.

Poultices can be used in combination with other cleaning methods. For example, a sodium
hydroxide based poultice might be used to soften and remove heavy soiling and black 'carbon'
deposits on the underside of cornices and other projecting detail before using a gentle wet
abrasive, or possibly a water cleaning method, to clean the remaining areas of lighter soiling
on the facade. This combination of cleaning methods on one facade can often provide more
control, removing heavy soiling to decorative mouldings and enrichments with less risk of
damage or over cleaning than using a single cleaning method.

Poultices can also be used as the

principal cleaning method to remove or
reduce soiling on a facade. Poultice
cleaning is often selected for very
detailed facades where more control and
care is required in the cleaning
procedure. Soiling that has penetrated
deep into the masonry substrate is often
more easily removed by a poultice than
by other cleaning methods. Poultice
cleaning can also be used as a post-
cleaning treatment to remove areas of
staining that may have emerged
Trial cleaning of a detail on a 19th century cement following the general cleaning of the
stucco facade using ammonium carbonate in a clay facade. Plain clay poultices will usually
and paper fibre poultice. mobilise and remove water soluble
staining such as the brownish staining or
discoloration sometimes left on Portland
and other pale-coloured limestone facades by water cleaning methods.
Incorrect use of chemical poultices can cause damage, for example by the mobilisation of new
staining material in the substrate or through inadequate neutralisation or rinsing. Adequate
neutralisation or rinsing with clean water to remove potentially damaging residues must follow
any chemical cleaning procedure. All poultice materials must be used in accordance with
COSHH (Control of Hazardous Substances to Health) and CDM (Construction [Design and
Management]) regulations. Many cleaning products and items of cleaning equipment are
available to registered or approved users only and material data sheets for all products used
16

must be obtained and consulted.

Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)

 MATERIAL CONSERVATION NOTES

Site trials are essential prior to any facade cleaning programme to establish which method will
be most effective and to indicate the 'level of clean' that can be achieved without risk of
damage to the masonry surface. In inexperienced hands any cleaning agent or piece of
cleaning equipment can cause damage to surfaces. The cleaning of historic masonry facades
should only be carried out by suitably qualified masonry conservation specialists, from the
specification stage through site trials and execution of the work.

http://www.nicee.org/iaee/E_Chapter9.pdf

http://www.ahg.gov.ie/app/uploads/2015/07/Bricks-A-Guide-to-the-Repair-of-Historic-Brickwork-
2009.pdf

http://bermanwright.com/diagnosing-issues-of-brick-masonry-walls/

http://www.hoffarch.com/assets/Journal23.pdf

For Stone

http://www.conservation-science.ch/files/2010_06_conservation.pdf

http://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/poultices/poultice.htm

http://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/salt-crystallisation/salt-crystallisation.htm

http://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/stoneconsol/stoneconsol.htm

http://www.newforest.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=541&p=0

17
Page

MGMB – MAA – 2015 – M.ARCH (GEN)