kalleanka70 said:
I think the difference shows itself most like this:

compared to

admittedly different architecture but surely the plaster is more attractive
Which facade is the most attractive depends a lot on the style of the house.

Personally, I think new funkis houses are extremely ugly.
Long live falurött and white corners! :)
 
Vilma said:
Which facade is the nicest naturally depends a lot on the style of the house.

Personally, I think modernist houses are really ugly.
Long live falurött and white corners! :)
Ha ha....it's all in the eye of the beholder....but diversity is nice, it would be boring if all houses looked the same... ;)
 
kalleanka70 said:
Johann, no need to apologize for starting a new thread, even if you can search a bit first....


Here's where I think the difference shows the most:
[bild]


Welcome to the group of us who ask novice but fun questions!

Kalle Anka, what is THAT for a house??? I tried to backtrack the link but I don't understand a word of Finnish... But it's a really snazzy house! Tips please! ;)
 
fia_mstd said:
Donald Duck, what is THAT house??? Tried to backtrack the link but I don't understand a word of Finnish... But it was one heck of a snazzy house! Tips, please! ;)
Hyvää Päivää! What, you can't speak Finnish...thought it was common knowledge ;). If you check http://www.jamera.fi and then click on "Jämerä-mallisto", you'll see a lot of stylish Finnish stone houses...that's where the picture is from. Try the other links too, there's more houses and inspiration. Lots of designs too. Good luck!
 
Has anyone here had problems with a relatively new house with plaster (new=0-20 years)?
 
In Enskede, there is a villa built in '95 that they had to refurbish now.
It had cracked and fallen down in places.
The house is Värsåsvilla, I believe... A plastered wooden house, that is.
 
My dad claims that it gets tricky if you have dead material (=plaster) on a living material (=wood) instead of having the plaster on other dead material like stone or concrete. We are also considering a plaster facade... But don't you get a guarantee on a plaster facade? 20 years should be reasonable for it to last, I think!
 
When using reinforcement and the fittings recommended by Optiroc, it should work with plaster on wooden facades (so-called reversion). Between the wood and the plaster, there is also a plasterboard (rigid mineral wool).

The fittings are really expensive (just over 10 SEK each) and they absorb the movements from the wood. The fitting consists of a metal angle, a wire, and a loop.... It's probably the wire that flexes in all directions which absorbs the movements.

That doesn't mean it can't all go to hell anyway.

Garbage in, garbage out as they say.

If the plastering has been done incorrectly, then everything could fall off. I hope that we've done it according to the rules of the art - otherwise, we'll have to face the consequences in a year's time...

ps. In the past, no fancy facade fittings were used; instead, the reinforcement mesh (stainless chicken wire) was nailed on with staples, and there are quite a few houses like that with functioning plaster. Our house was plastered that way, but we tore it down due to the addition of an extra floor. We also wanted to take the opportunity to insulate the house while we were at it.

EDIT
Here you can find a pdf of the Red Facade Bracket used:
http://www.optiroc.se/optibas/pdf/serpo311.pdf
 
I don't think it's particularly common for things to go wrong.
This method has been used for many years now, even on old timber houses.
My example above just illustrates that it CAN go wrong.
But it's not entirely unheard of... :)
 
For our hives, we used Masterfacade which can be plastered directly onto. They are a mineral board that contains concrete. Heavy and hard.
 
When it comes to the color of a plastered facade, how does it hold up when the sun and wind are constant? Is it easy to change the color if desired?

Regards,

Anna ::)
 
Super easy - you'll need a compressor, paint, and a spray gun. You can rent the compressor and spray gun for a few hundred. The paint costs a couple of thousand for a house.

Then you need to cover the windows, eaves, and foundation and make sure to paint when it's not windy—otherwise, the neighbor might get upset when their car is speckled with etching paint ;)

(IF you get paint on window sills/windows, you must remove it immediately as the paint will etch into the surface. Otherwise, it will leave ugly permanent marks.)
 
It lasts much better than paint on wood. There are different types of paint. The lifespan of the actual color is over 20 years. If you have a light color, even longer. We have a terracotta-colored house today (plastered in 1990) and the only change you can distinguish is that some algae have appeared on certain parts, but this can be washed off though I'm too lazy to do it. The paint on the painted sections, particularly on the sunny side, has "cooled" significantly during the same time period.
 
People have probably plastered wooden houses for ages. In the '80s, I lived in an old parsonage from the 1700s that was made of logs with reed and plaster on the outside. Though there is probably a certain difference between logs and planks. ;)

Best regards,
David
 
Everything depends on the craftsman, I believe.

As someone said, wooden houses have been plastered since time immemorial with good results, while plaster on stone houses falls down frequently elsewhere.

As always, it's important to know what you're doing and not to cut corners at any stage. Poor cleaning of the substrate, for example, can cause the whole lot to fall down.

I don't know whether the new methods of plastering wooden houses are good or bad, but as long as there are guarantees, one must dare to try.

Changing the color of a plastered facade is probably not "a piece of cake." More like "not so darn difficult." :P
 
Vi vill skicka notiser för ämnen du bevakar och händelser som berör dig.