Page:The Building News and Engineering Journal, Volume 22, 1872.djvu/447

 aha A May 24, 1872. The passage through which it is desired to lead any fluid should, of course, be freed from obstruction as much as possible. The facility with which the sviled air of water-closets passes through pipes is dependent on the same laws that govern the passage of other air and gases through pipes. The fundamental con- sideration in either case is that a given volume of air is to be made to pass through a pipe of a given size in a given time; I say made to pass, but the more correct expression may be that such arrangements shall be made as will allow it to pass by the action of natural forces through predetermined channels. The obstruction, then, to the passage of any fluid through pipes is proportionate to the square of its velocity. Recurring to the starting point, that a given volume of air is to pass through a given length of pipe of given size in a given time (in this case a certain volume each time the closet is used, which is displaced by the rush of water) it will be seen that if that volume of air be forced to pass through a pipe one inch in diameter it will meet with nine times the resistance that it would do if the pipe were 3in. diameter, or sixteen times as much as if the pipe were din. diameter, the velocity being inversely as the cross sectional area of the pipe, and the area being as the square of the diameter. This is true of all fluids in motion through pipes. In practice, a well- constructed chimney is made as large as possible at the top, in relation to its size at the bottom, for the purpose of diminishing the resistance to the passage of the gases of combustion through it. Compare now these principles and this practice with the ventilating pipes mentioned in article 10 on plumbing. The soil-pipe is proposed—very pro- perly—to be 44in. diameter, but towards the top the ventilating pipe is contracted to 2in. or 2}in. dia- meter ; and, worse still, a Zin. lead pipe isin another place recommended to be led out of the upper bend of the syphon trap; and mark the reason why a ventilating pipe is required to be taken up from this point—it is this: ‘I have found that even with the ventilating pipe on top of perpendicular soil-pipe foul air or gas is apt to gather at Q (being at the upper bend of the syphon trap), and in process of time it eats through the pipe there ;” but why does the foul air or gas gather there? Because the ventilating pipe above it is contracted, and prevents the free exit of the foul air upwards and out into the atmosphere above the roof. Small ventilating pipes such as these here described are worse than useless, for this reason, that while the proper ventilation of soil-pipes and house drains cannot be too strongly insisted upon, to put in small and inefficient so-called ventilating pipes misleads people into a false sense of security. Hither ventilate soil-pipes and drains thoroughly and efficiently, or let it be known that they are not ventilated at all. The mischief done by the non-ventilation of house drains may then come in course of time to be attributed to the right cause. Supposing some small portion, say a fourth part, of the foul air to find its way upwards through one of these small pipes, three-fourths of it would escape into the houses. I have put up many hundreds of these ventilating pipes, and always endeavour to have them of large size for the reasons I have stated, and for the same reasons I carry up the pipes vertically and leave the tops perfectly open. ; Kingston-on-Thames. Cuartes SLAGG. LONDON SCHOOL BOARD. Srr,—The exhibition of the competitive designs before the architect to the Board has reported upon them, and the Works Committee have examined and made their award, is to be regretted. Its evil effects are evidenced by the very biassed article which ap- peared in the Standard of last Monday, As more schools are to be competed for would it not be well to suggest to the Board the propriety of exhibiting the plans after, instead of before, ‘the decision has been arrived at, and, also, only those plans which have conformed to the instructions? Many of the competitors have ignored certain of the instructions, notabiy in the Essex-street site, where the architects were directed to utilise, if possible, the existing building. Three have shown it to be possible; the other three, who have set aside this instruction, ought, therefore, to be disqualified. I enclose my card.—I am, &c. A Non-Competiror. [We should have thought that if criticism is to be turned to the best account it should precede, and not succeed, a decision. It is not much good to people most interested in a competition to hear the merits of a rejected design, or the demerits of a selected one, pointed out after a decision has been arrived at. Is it not, in fact, somewhat absurd? The same absurdity prevails in the making of THE BUILDING NEWS. treaties. After our Government has negotiated and signed a treaty, when discussion cannot affect the issue, Parliament may enjoy the privilege of dis- cussing it. When a blunder is made, and irreparable injury is the result, Parliament may console itself with talk, Would it not be infinitely better for the talk to precede Government action, so that the blunder might be prevented? We, therefore, essen- tially disagree wilh ‘A Non-Competitor ” in depre- cating criticism before decisions are made and recorded. Does he not cut away the ground on which he stands by saying that ‘“‘ many of the compe- titors have ignored certain of the instructions, notably in the Essex-street site”? Is it not better that such a fact, if it be a fact, should be known and published? Instead of avoiding discussion we think that committees should encourage it, as it would materially aid them in their decisions.—Ep. ] HOUSE PLANNING COMPETITION. Srz,—It is to behoped that, as the interest in the recent competition gradually increases, those who criti- cise critics willadopt a more courteous tone than that pervading your correspondent’s letter published last week. This competition, which, for the publicinterest, you wisely arranged to take place,involving as it does a question affecting the domestic comfort of the middle classes, and the essence of the work of the bulk of architects, is destined, I firmly believe, to influence to a very great extent the future planning of dwellings. Much has been already said concern- ing it, but a very great deal more has yet to be said. It behoves those, therefore, who wish to see good evolved from bad, to address you on the subject, but certainly in temperate and forbearing language. I am unable to find in the correspondence, up to the 10th inst. inclusive, anything to substantiate the assertion that the designer of the prize plan for mansion ‘has been pulled over the coals for culling ideas from Bignell House.” The implication merely is that there is a marked similarity or affinity be- tween the two plans, and that when contrasted the prize plan suffers by the contrast. Surely, then, as the competition aimed at progress instead of retro- gression, it is a suitable subject to mention to pro- voke fair discussion. Turning to design 24, and reading the remarks thereon by “F. T.,” your readers must feel grateful that you have allowed him to expose the errors, or evidences of bad designing, so plentifully dispersed over theplan. He might have added that the aspect of thedining-roomisthe very worst possible, for thesun will be on the window from about 2 p.m. till sunset, and in full glare opposite the window when dinner is announced on most sunshiny days, when artificial light is not required. The way in which the dining- room door flanks that of the drawing-room is objec- tionable, for any one trying to escape from the former room whilst visitors are about to leave the latter might be intercepted. The position of the fireplace in the drawing-room is most unsatisfactory. It could not well be in a worse position with reference to the door and windows. Its proper place is obviously in the wall opposite the bay. I may add that it is a remarkable thing that the arbitrators should have commended the perspective view (which you did not consider an essential) accompanying this design, without noticing the in- completeness of the elevations and the poverty of the section. Sections, I have been told, are the vitals of the profession. The library bay and its superstruc- ture are not visible in the front elevation, neither is the roofing over the dining-room, as indicated by the section. In the side elevation the tower is omitted. These omissions may, perhaps, be to the disadvantage of the drawings, but it would have been interesting to have seen how the elevations looked with their proper adjuncts. The first object in house planning is to render the dwelling as comfortable as possible to all its inmates, and it is from the thoughtlessness so fre- quently manifested in this respect that the public, as a rule, have no opinion of the wisdom or cleverness of the ordinary architect. As a fresh example, I might point to the “approach elevation”in the design marked “ Una Quinta.” The bottom of the timber under the gutter between the two gables which would have to support the rafters, and therefore be carried over the landing, could not be six feet above the floor. The servants’ w.c. is in a direct line with the staircase window, and might prove a source of an- noyance. A person standing on the quarter space could see right into it when both doors were open. The court is surrounded by a wall too low to hide the clothes hanging out to dry, and there is not ade- quate provision for airing them. There is no fire- place in the scullery, which is indispensable when dinner parties are giver, and always necessary to fall back upon when that in the kitchen cannot be used, Again, the position of the scullery door with respect to 425 the kitchen fire is not in unison with the comfort of the kitchen. This door ought to be placed, in every case, by the side of the fire, so that the cook need not cross the kitchen with pots and pans, to her own annoyance and to that of its other occupants. Viewing this design as a whole, might not the ques- tion be mooted whether a house costing between £1,500 and £2,000 should consist of nothing but ground floor and garret ? There are one or two things in the drawings by «“ Domus” which ought to be noticed. The skyline of the south-west elevation is not correctly repre- sented, nor is the head of the right-hand upper window of the south-east elevation sufficiently low to accommodate it to the adjoining section. The roof- plan also is broken off just where a student would like to see what is intended. The south-east eleva- tion would almost indicate a flat behind the coping. “Una Quinta” omits the washing-house chimney in his “approach elevation.” As your journal is an authority on building matters, students and others may, by-and-bye, refer to the incomplete elevations as precedents, so I take the liberty of suggesting whether it would be better for the authors of the designs you intend to publish to have an opportunity of completing or correcting them without altering the plans.—I am, &c., Shrewsbury. Rusy. —_———_- Srr,—Will you allow me to say, in reply to some of your correspondents, that my plan for a mansion was not based upon that of Bignell House, or any particular plan, that I am aware of. ‘The only point where similarity can be said to exist is in the trades- men’s entrance, and this was certainly unintentional. In endeayouring to make a model plan, in the absence of special requirements, the only course open is to study the best examples, and avoid their weak places if you can. I think that the staircase of a house should be made an attractive feature, and not be hidden away in a recess. External chimneys should have a 2in. cavity to prevent the penetration of cold or damp. I think that no building of any importance should be built without first having a faithful perspective projection made, of its main lines at least; it does not want to be very large or very gorgeous. Some of the huge perspectives that we see, hurried and forced in execution, with glaringly coloured figures of fine ladies and gentlemen introduced, are very repulsive. Mr. Pearson has given us one or two in this year’s Royal Academy well worth the attention of architects; they are small, but all-sufficient; the architecture is faithfully drawn, and yet pleasingly coloured—too often the architecture is lost amidst impossible foliage or needless shadow. These draw- ings are conventional and “architecturesque ;” at the same time, they do not ignore colour—a source of delight we cannot afford to neglect.—I am, &e., W. H. Locxwoop. 10, John-street, Adelphi, wW.C. Srr,—More than usual interest attaches to the com- petition design of Mr. James McLaren (published last week), in the fact that it is about to be realised in a permanent form up in the romantic Highlands of merrie Scotland. Extremes meet. To remote Corn- wall and across the Borders the honours of this compe- tition are carried—a fact well worth noting, for in days not yet faded from the memory architecture had not shed its light beyond the circle of the largest centres of population ; now, however, every town of modest pro- portions boasts its architect. In former epochs of architectural rise and progress its triumphs and splendours found its mainspring in mighty outbursts of religious enthusiasm, for one of the chief instru- ments of elevating and instructing the minds of the people was its holy and exalted symbolism, which all could read. Not sonow. The causes of the present revival are many and yaried. Refined and national tastes, general prosperity among the people, high-class literature, political freedom, religious liberty and growth, lead chiefly to a resuscitation of the arts, wherein architecture stands pre-eminent. Painting and sculpture have vastly improved of late years, but not in the same ratio as the art to which they are, or ought to be, subservient. Furniture and decorations are still struggling under a yapid French or Renaissance school, with which the thinking public have long ago been satiated. Artists of all kinds have formed their ranks to effect this consummation, and to “Jead a willing people to nobler things unknown.” And although in the multitude only a few stand prominent, the units should not be forgotten for the work they have accomplished. Mr. McLaren is well able to delineate his concep- tions, and the perspective has not lost any of its charms by the extensive and highly-wrought fore- ground, which, if true to Nature, should always be giyen, because it gives an idea of the adaptability of the building to the site. The chimney-stacks are not happy for two reasons—first, because they are exterior; and, second, the inspiration from whence they are drawn is too obvious, and there is, perhaps, & striving