Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
The Builder
of 5th September (1879, 24), stated:
Suffolk white bricks contain a large proportion of sand, hence their suitability for
rubbers.
Gwilt (1888, 526) records:
The Suffolk bricks, called white Suffolk's or 'Clippers', are of two or more qualities,
expressly made for facings, and are expensive; the best are rarely obtained in
London, being sold in the locality of their manufacture… The works supply super-
ior white and red (kilnburnt) Suffolk facings, splays, door-jambs, coping bricks,
stable clinkers, &c dark red facings, rubbers, splays, paving bricks, &c; bright yel-
low malm facings and cutters of best quality.
The Introduction of Scientific Testing
By the end of the nineteenth century, improved methods of brickmaking and
the rapidly changing technology of brick construction meant that architects
and engineers demanded information on how masonry, including individual
materials, would perform by quantitative testing. Rubbing bricks were no
exception.
Rivington's Notes on Building Construction
(Rivington, 1901, 112) gives
the defining characteristics of good rubbers:
A really first-class rubber will not be easily scored by a knife even in the centre,
and the finger will make no impression upon it…Such a brick will be of uniform
texture, compact, regular in colour and size, free from flaws of any description.
Rivington also recorded 'the sizes and weights of the best-known varieties of
British bricks'. This included the Fareham Red rubber, the dimensions of
which are given as, 10.9 ins
74 mm), and its
weight recorded as 8.8 lbs (3.9 kg). This is as opposed to the standard Fareham
Red facing brick with dimensions of 8.5 ins
4.8 ins
2.9 ins (277
119
66 mm) and a weight of' 6.3 lbs (2.85 kg) (Rivington, 1901, 113). One can
determine from this that the Fareham Red rubber was oversized, particularly
in its length, but less dense than its facing brick counterpart (0.058 lbs/in
3
compared with 0.069 lbs/in
3
).
Since water is one of the main decay agents in brick, knowledge of the
presence and movement of water within a brick is very important. Rivington
recorded information on water absorption by different varieties of brick, includ-
ing a malm cutter, which was shown to have the highest absorption recorded, at
22% (Rivington, 1901, 114).
Rivington also considered the comparable compressive strength of rubbing
bricks with other bricks. The results of testing showed that the rubbing brick
4.15 ins
2.6 ins (216
107
