<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3c.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/loose.dtd">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<!-- Network content -->
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16414" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff">
<DIV><SPAN class=072285208-23022007><FONT face="Baskerville Old Face"
color=#0000ff>As in most professions, there is a range of abilities, for want of
a better word, in the world of the architect. There are those whose opinion
and recommendations you would trust entirely and also those who insist on
their own way irrespective of best practice and the advice of the trade. King's
Lynn and Kevedon fall into the latter category.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=072285208-23022007><FONT face="Baskerville Old Face"
color=#0000ff></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=072285208-23022007><FONT face="Baskerville Old Face"
color=#0000ff>What do you do? It is inevitable and understandable that the
bellhanger is the one that gets the blame but we are not the ones with letters
after our name taking the fees for our advice!</FONT></SPAN></DIV><!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face="Baskerville Old Face">Andrew
Higson</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT
face="Baskerville Old Face">Taylors Eayre and Smith Ltd</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN
lang=en-us><FONT face="Baskerville Old Face">The Bellfoundry</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face="Baskerville Old Face">Freehold
Street</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT
face="Baskerville Old Face">Loughborough</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN
lang=en-us><FONT face="Baskerville Old Face">LE11 1AR</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN
lang=en-us><FONT face="Baskerville Old Face">Telephone: 01509 212241 Fax: 01509
263305</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT
face="Baskerville Old Face">Registered in England No. 1352309</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Chris
Povey<BR><B>Sent:</B> 22 February 2007 20:42<BR><B>To:</B>
bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Bell Historians]
Steelwork into masonary<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<P>
<DIV><EM><FONT face=Arial size=2>Burying steelwork in masonry is fundamentally
very dodgy.<BR>There is a lousy thermal miss match causing differential
expansion<BR>problems.</FONT></EM>
<P><EM><FONT face=Arial size=2>Rod Bickerton, 22/2/07</FONT></EM></P>
<P><EM></EM><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sorry, Rod, this is untrue. Perhaps
surprisingly, there is a close similarity between concrete/stone/<WBR>brickwork
coefficients of expansion and mild steel. It's why we can embed steel in
concrete to make reinforced-concrete<WBR>. If the CoEs were
very different, the steel would either expand at a greater rate
than the concrete as temperature increased, causing it to buckle and
crack the concrete, or the opposite, which would pre-load the steel and
make it fail early. The following coefficients of expansion (taken from Kempe's
Engineers Year Book) will illustrate the point:-</FONT></P><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2>mild steel: CoE 11.0 x </FONT><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
size=2>10<SUP>-6</SUP><O></O></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2>concrete: CoE 13.0 x </FONT><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
size=2>10<SUP>-6</SUP><O></O></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>For comparison: copper 16.3 x <SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
size=2>10<SUP>-6</SUP><O></O></FONT></SPAN> and aluminium 23.0 x <SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
size=2>10<SUP>-6</SUP><O></O></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Concrete actually expands fractionally more
than steel. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>(Did some work on this a few years ago and obtained
CoEs for masonry and brickwork, but can't turn them up now. They were similar to
concrete - which is effectively stonework anyway.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Steel beams embedded in tower walls have no
problem thermally. Actually, the temperature inside a tower rises comparatively
little compared to the outside temperature, because it's in the shade. On this
basis there are potentially more thermal expansion problems within the walls
themselves, from what can be a substantial temperature difference
between the inside and out faces - but they seem to cope quite
happily.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The problems at Kings Lynn and Kelvedon have,
I believe, much more to do with some quite different fundamentals of
burying steelwork in masonry.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Chris Povey</FONT></DIV>
<P><BR><SPAN style="COLOR: white">__,_._,__</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: white">_</SPAN> <!--End group email --></P>
<P></P></DIV><!--End group email --></BODY></HTML>