Brick Arches
Window Head Details in Exterior Brick Walls
Jonathan Taylor
In most modern brick buildings, brickwork
is supported across the openings in exterior
walls by either reinforced concrete, reinforced
brickwork or a steel lintel discreetly hidden
by a skin of brickwork. Often the head of
the opening is not expressed in any way, and
even in traditionally-inspired architecture,
brick arches are often facings applied across a
cunningly designed lintel. This modern approach to the design
of brickwork is radically different from
traditional construction methods in which the
lintel or arch was almost invariably expressed.
| |
 |
|
| |
Polychrome brick arches
at the Granary Building,
Bristol (1869 by Ponton and
Gough)
|
|
| |
 |
|
| |
A rare example of an
early window without
either a
lintel or an arch;
the brickwork appears to
be supported
by the heavy
timber mullioned window
frame alone |
|
Even in the simplest, most functional
building types, including humble terraces
and warehouses, the lintels and arches over
the doors and window openings were often
elaborated, often subtly, but nevertheless
providing an important element of detail in
the façade. The addition of a substantial cill
below the window and an obvious arch, lintel
or cornice above, emphasised its height and
elegance, reducing the visible gap between
the window above. This vertical emphasis is a
vital component in the rhythm of many 18th
and 19th century terraces, establishing strong
vertical arrangements across the horizontal
lines of roofs and windows, string courses and
street or garden features, contributing to the
character of the street scene as well as to the
character of the individual window or doorway.
The importance of such details cannot be
overstated: even the simplest segmental arch
detail can have a significant impact on the
visible height of the window, of far greater
importance than the sum of its humble
components might suggest.
LINTELS
The simplest way to support the brickwork
above an opening is to use a lintel – a
horizontal structural member. Stone and
wood were commonly used for this purpose
in the past. Stone, being relatively weak in
tension, could only be used over narrow spans.
However, this problem could be overcome
by dividing wider windows into a number of ‘lights’ separated by stone posts or ‘mullions’.
This form of construction is typically
associated with medieval architecture and the
earliest windows to be glazed.
Rough timber lintels are often seen in
stone cottages, largely due to the current fashion for stripping these buildings of their
render. However, they are less commonly seen
in brick buildings. After the Fire of London,
exterior structural timberwork was seen as
a fire risk, and even the sash windows were
pushed back in their window openings so
that their sash boxes (the hollow boxes on
either side which contained the weights) could
be tucked neatly behind the outer skin of
brickwork.
The emergence of mass-produced wrought
iron beams following the industrial revolution
enabled much larger openings to be created
in brick walls. Typical applications include
industrial buildings, stables and shopfronts,
particularly of the Victorian period, when the
beams were most commonly disguised by a
painted timber fascia. In the architecture of
shopfronts, this beam or ‘bressumer’ became
an integral part of the complex designs which
evolved in the late 18th and 19th centuries
incorporating cornices, pilasters and stall
risers. Blinds, shutters and window grilles were
often incorporated into the space below the
bressumer, above the window itself.
In the late 19th and early 20th century,
terracotta was often used to provide decorative
details such as window and door surrounds
in brick buildings. Small, solid blocks of
terracotta are essentially the same as moulded
bricks. However, large blocks of terracotta
which appear much like large blocks of carved
stone in size and shape, were usually made
from hollow pots moulded on the visible face
only, and filled with concrete. In this form the
terracotta often acted as infill and cladding
around an iron frame.
Flat soffits could also be created by using
a relieving arch infilled with brickwork below
and with a small timber just above the window
frame. This technique was commonly used
where the brick façade was rendered or covered
with stucco which enabled elaborate window
surrounds to be made with cornices and
moulded jambs (see Ian Constantinides' and Lynne Humphries' article on Exterior Stucco).
ARCHES
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
Above: A broken segmental arch, illustrating the strength
of this type of construction: for the arch to fail as
it has, the
bricks
themselves had to crack (Photo: Charterbuild) |
Although generally considered to be a Roman
development, probably the earliest known use of arches
to span openings was around 4000BC in
Babylon. However, it was the Romans who
really exploited the potential of the device as a
structural element, and in the UK arches have
been commonly used as a means of spanning
windows and doorways in every period of
architecture since then, with fine examples of
Romanesque and Norman carved doorway
arches in particular. The simplest form, the semicircular
arch, gave way to more elaborate forms of arch
including the pointed arch usually associated
with gothic architecture and the later gothic
revivals, and ultimately to the flat and
segmental arches which emerged in the late
17th century.
An arch is composed of small elements
such as bricks bonded in mortar. It works by
transferring the load sideways and downwards,
from the key stone at the centre to the jambs
of the walls below. As the structure only works
when completed, brick arches are usually
constructed on a timber frame or former
known as a ‘centring’ which is removed after
the mortar has set sufficiently.
There are essentially two forms of arch
construction: ‘segmental’ and ‘rough’. In the
case of a segmental arch, the bricks or stone
blocks are specially made so that they are
tapered to the radius (or radii in the case of an
arch with more than one centre), with parallel
joints between. Being wider at the top than
at the bottom, these ‘voussoirs’, as the units
are called, cannot fall out. However, in the
case of a rough arch, it is the mortar which
is tapered, not the bricks, and the arch relies
on the cohesion of the bricks and mortar for
its strength. This form of construction was
generally considered inferior to the specially
tapered voussoirs, both structurally and
aesthetically, and rough arches are usually
hidden from sight behind render. (Beware
when carrying out repair and conservation work. One of the symptoms of the dearth of
skilled bricklayers today is that non-specialist
builders often use this form of construction
when repairing or replacing much finer work.)
The voussoirs of segmental brick arches
could be made by cutting ordinary bricks
on site with a bolster and chisel, finishing
with a bricklayer’s axe or ‘scutch’. More
accurate results could be achieved by using ‘specials’ manufactured to the shape required. Brick manufacturers produce these either
by cutting the brick in its green state before
firing, or by using a specially shaped mould.
However, accuracy was limited as some
distortion during drying and firing was almost
inevitable.
The late 17th and early 18th centuries
were a high point in the evolution of
brickwork. Manufacturing techniques
improved, with blended clay, better moulding
and more even firing which led to greater
consistency in shape and size. One of the
most interesting developments where arches
are concerned was the introduction of
gauged brickwork, a technique which was
popularised by Sir Christopher Wren in
particular. This form of brickwork was made
using fine textured, soft clay bricks commonly
called ‘rubbers’. For the tapered voussoir of
an arch, a rubber was first shaped by rubbing
on a flat plane of millstone grit until it
accurately fitted a specially shaped wooden
box, open at the top and on one or more sides.
This enabled the exposed face to be cut to a
complex profile if needed, incorporating the
mouldings of the arch, using a bow saw, and
any irregularities were then smoothed out.
The whole arch was laid out on the floor on
site to the required size as the components
were made, to make sure that the all the
components fitted together correctly, with
evenly spaced joints.
Gauged brickwork enabled the use of
extremely fine joints, so that the joints did not
disrupt the appearance of the fine mouldings. The technique was widely used in fine
architecture of the Georgian and Victorian
periods, and some of the finest examples can
be seen in the elaborate brickwork of the
Tudor Revival in the late 19th century (illustrated below).
Plain gauged voussoirs were often bedded
in pure lime putty, producing neat white
radiating lines which emphasised the geometry
of the arch. This effect was widely imitated
using much cheaper ‘tuckpointed’ brickwork.
For this technique, rough and cut brick arches
were flush-pointed with a mortar of the same
colour as the brick so that the two merged
together to be almost indistinguishable. Then,
while the mortar was still fresh, a thin line was
struck neatly across the centre of the joint and
filled with pure lime putty. Roughly shaped
and distorted bricks thus acquired the neat
edges of gauged brickwork. A by-product of
the improvements in brick production at this
time was the widespread use of segmental and
flat arches.
| |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Left: A late 19th century terracotta arch in Tisbury, Wiltshire.
Centre: A typical flat segmental arch with red rubbers and lime putty
joints, early 19th century.
Right: Rubbed brick arches and reliefs adorning a terraced house in
Collingham Gardens, London (c1880) |
|
THREATS AND CHALLENGES
Arguably the greatest threats to the fine
details which give buildings their character
are complacency and ignorance. Repairs,
when they are carried out, are often made
using inappropriate techniques which actually
cause further deterioration. Brick façades are
sometimes painted over, obscuring the subtle
variations in colour and texture which are so
important to their character, and locking in
moisture. Hard cement mortars are commonly
used in place of the traditional, much softer
lime mortars. Both alterations can cause the
brickwork to deteriorate. Other typical causes
of damage include the cleaning methods
commonly used, rust damage caused by metal
fixings, and frost damage following saturation
by, for example, overflowing gutters.
Where window lintels and arches have
failed, repairing the faults without reducing
the loads can be counterproductive. By
reinforcing the brickwork above the opening
it is possible to convert the brickwork itself
into a lintel, reducing the stress in the arch
or lintel below. This can be achieved quite
simply by introducing narrow stainless steel
bars into the mortar joints above to span the
width of the opening and repointing so that
they are invisible externally. Some specialist
companies have also developed the technique
of introducing threaded stainless steel rods
through the bricks themselves. These rods are
then attached to plates on either side of the
opening with nuts which can be tightened to
post-tension them. The brickwork thus acts in
compression, while the steel carries the tensile
forces.
| |
 |
|
| |
A replacement rubbed brick and some of the tools used to make it, including
the open faced box and a carburundum block used for
rubbing
(photograph courtesy of Nimbus Conservation Ltd) |
|
Repointing should always be carried out
using a mortar which matches the composition
of the original. In older buildings this will
usually mean using a lime mortar, often with
a local sand or aggregate. These mortars are
relatively porous and expand and contract to
a degree which cannot be matched by modern
cement mortars. Repointing with a hard
cement mortar can introduce stresses across the
face of the brickwork, causing the edges of the
bricks to crack and crumble. They also lock
moisture in, which can lead to frost damage
and salt crystallisation, causing the brickwork
to crumble.
As in so many aspects of historic buildings,
it is important that the consultants and
contractors used are all experienced in dealing
with historic and traditional materials. It is
not enough for a person to be a member of
a professional body or trade association, if
these vital features are to be understood and
properly cared for.
|
|
The Building Conservation Directory, 2003
Author
JONATHAN TAYLOR is the editor of The Building Conservation Directory and a co-founder of Cathedral Communications Limited. He studied architectural conservation at Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh and has a background in architectural design, conservation and urban regeneration.
Further
information
RELATED
ARTICLES
Brick
Lime mortars
Masonry
RELATED
PRODUCTS AND SERVICES
Brick services
Brick suppliers
Masonry cleaning

Site Map
© Cathedral
Communications Limited 2011
|