Conservation compendium. Part 17: Filler-joist floors – development, capacity and typical defects

Author: J. Miller (CTP Consulting Engineers)

Date published

1st May 2016

First published: 1st May 2016

Price

Standard: £9 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

Buy Now

Added to basket

Back to Previous

Conservation compendium. Part 17: Filler-joist floors – development, capacity and typical defects

The Structural Engineer
Conservation compendium. Part 17: Filler-joist floors – development, capacity and typical defects
Date published

1st May 2016

First published

1st May 2016

Author

J. Miller (CTP Consulting Engineers)

Price

Standard: £9 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

Buy Now

According to the Institution’s librarians, one of the most common requests they receive is for information on structural floor systems dating from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In particular, engineers appear to have a thirst to know more about filler-joist floors. This article describes their origin and how they perform.

The term “filler joist” is a generic one used for certain types of building floors dating in particular from the late Victorian era to World War II. These may commonly have embedded iron or steel joists. Those of earlier date, from the 19th century, can have wrought iron sections, or even cast iron tees in early floors. They span one way between beams or bearings, and are encased in concrete made with coke-breeze, clinker, broken brick or conventional aggregates.

The filler-joist floor was – at the time – a very important structural development, now long superseded by other systems, such as flat slabs and composite decks. It grew out of an enthusiastic age of Victorian invention that had created a wide range of proprietary, patented make-ups that all worked in a roughly similar way. Filler joists are encountered frequently in the alteration and remodelling of large office and institutional buildings.

Additional information

Format:
PDF
Pages:
4
Publisher:
The Institution of Structural Engineers

Tags

Conservation compendium Technical Issue 5

Related Resources & Events

The Structural Engineer
Conservation compendium. Part 9: Corrosion of steel frames behind masonry elevations – an introducti

Conservation compendium. Part 9: Corrosion of steel frames behind masonry elevations – an introducti

This article is the first of two which will discuss the problem of corrosion of steel frames behind masonry elevations. It aims to provide an introduction to this form of construction and to consider the ways in which lack of maintenance can lead to corrosion of the steel frame, before setting out how remedial work should be approached.

Date - 31st July 2015
Author - Eur Ing M. D. Beare (CARE, AKS Ward-Lister Beare Consulting Engineers)
Price - £9
The Structural Engineer
Conservation compendium. Part 5: Inspection and repair of cantilever stone staircases

Conservation compendium. Part 5: Inspection and repair of cantilever stone staircases

Cantilever stone staircases have been used in all sorts of buildings for more than 350 years. Unfortunately, when surveying buildings we can be so intent on getting from floor to floor that we forget to look at the stairs on the way. Like all structures, stairs need regular inspection and maintenance; without which, collapses can ultimately occur.

Date - 1st April 2015
Author - C. Richardson (AECOM and CARE)
Price - £9
The Structural Engineer
Conservation compendium. Part 15: Use of lime in historic masonry construction in the UK and Ireland

Conservation compendium. Part 15: Use of lime in historic masonry construction in the UK and Ireland

In conservation work and like-for-like repair on older masonry, lime mortar is the only recommended material. The thick, plain or lightly punctured walls that make up most historic buildings have few concentrations of load. Calculations of stress in such cases are often needless and, subject perhaps to the check of any critical element, we can generally lay aside our concerns about mortar strength.

In contrast, the need to maintain a balance of moisture and flexibility in the body of an old wall is essential. Ignoring this will lead to the classic error of repointing old structures in brittle, impermeable Portland cement (OPC) mortar. The mortar provides the route for evaporation from the core and should be more permeable than the brick or stone. To reverse this by sealing the joints with a hard finish can only lead to trouble.

Date - 1st February 2016
Author - T. Ryan
Price - £9