Masonry Magazine May 1962 Page. 9
M Means More Work For
The Mason Contractor
reinforced brick masonry does many jobs better and at ast than reinforced concrete. This was recently proven w England, an area that had scarcely heard of RBM, in a job that was changed from reinforced concrete the suggestion of a bricklayer.
The design problem was an interesting one. A wall was d to completely enclose the auditorium and a lower-kitchen and boiler room in the new Clinton, Massachusetts Junior-Senior High School. The wall would sup-he floor slab and clear span roof of the auditorium 1 as the floor and roof slabs of a circulating corridor d its perimeter, Within the auditorium the wall was ge in height from 23 to 30 feet above the sloping. To satisfy esthetic and acoustical requirements, the vas to have a brick face in the auditorium and follow patterns at the corners. (See sketch.)
Architects and engineers for the school were Drummey-e-Anderson of Boston. They first selected a wall consisting of 10 inches of reinforced concrete, with brick on the interior of the auditorium only. All ning exposed concrete faces were to be painted. tically, this was not an entirely desirable solution but igh cost of forming the irrégular walls and then ring one side precluded any other surface treatment.
It was at this point that John Calnan, a bricklayer er of Local No. 12, Lynn, Massachusetts, and super-Ment of construction for the architects, suggested the reinforced brick masonry. Calnan had learned about from articles he had seen in the BM & PIU "Journal" zh information he had received from the Structural Products Institute.
His suggestion was handed to the structural engineer view of the structural and economic appropriateness M. It turned out to be quite appropriate to the tune $.85 per square foot saving over the other wall. An onal bonus of brick throughout the auditorium, the or, kitchen and boiler room was obtained with the RBM.
Experience on the actual job showed that bricklayers experienced with RBM, caught on quickly and through their production the architect's estimate was exceeded by some 25%. Most of these men were from Local No. 6 of Worcester, Massachusetts. Credit also goes to the architect's advanced preparation which contributed to the smooth operation of the job. Radii were laid out with the briek to be used, in the office. Adjustments to dimensions were made where necessary. Most important, Calnan wrote up a set of workmanship requirements, copies of which were supplied to the contractor for distribution to the bricklayers. These requirements were as follows:
1. Construction joints, horizontally or vertically, between brick and concrete should be prepared so that:
a. The surfaces of the concrete are clean. All laitance completely removed with the aggregate exposed.
b. Do not place mortar between concrete and grout wythe in middle of wall.
c. All dowels from concrete to be straight and elean.
2. Racking to be allowed only under the supervision of the inspector.
(Continued on page 17)