|
Posted by on September 26, 2006, 7:25 am
a@a.com wrote:
>
> >Basically I was told if when you purchase your tile they have matching
> >caulk, to get it but grout the joints. If the grout does pull use the
> >caulk =)
> Not concerned with the pulling; it's the pushing, and consequent
> buckling. I thought more would chime in here, as there are at least a
> couple posters who appear to be pro's who I believe said that they
> grout. Oh well...
> >
> >Most of what I've read said to caulk. Overtime one of more of those
> >areas will probably crack but could be 1 month or 10 years...
> >
> >
> >a@a.com wrote:
> >> I've read, here and elsewhere, where professional or at least
> >> experienced tilers say to use grout in the expansion joints. Or maybe
> >> it's not termed an expansion joint, according to them? Anyway, the
> >> joint where the tile meets the wall, tub, etc.
> >> What's the reasoning on using grout instead of caulk? Aesthetics, I
> >> imagine. But is there not a concern among the pro-grouters about
> >> buckling, or cracking? Or do you simply accept that as a risk and deal
> >> with it when it happens?
> >> I'm no expert, but I had mine buckle last year; oh, what a joy. And
> >> now others are loose. More joy. Personally, I don't think sanded caulk
> >> looks that bad to outweigh the advantage of, at least possibly,
> >> alleviating the buckling. Do I understand the two sides correctly?
I'm not a pro, but I would always use caulk in the areas where the tile
meets the tub. I think that is most critical, as the tub is likely
going to move more than any other area that the tile abuts, due to temp
chg and weight of water. Plus, those are the areas where will have
the most water, so even hairline cracks can cause big problems. Where
tile abuts say a door threshold, I'd probably go with grout for
aesthetics.
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap