Patio slab in 600 x 600 or mixed sizes

[chriselevate]

I'm trying to choose between 600 x 600 slab laid in straight lines, brick bond or buying a mixed pack size which consists of 24 - 600 x 600, 36 - 300 x 600 and 36 - 300 x 300).

The laying pattern that Bradstone suggest is like this...



If laying them like this, would it mean that all grout lines could be 5mm or will some be different than others? The product I'm looking at is the Aspero Range https://www.bradstone.com/products/contemporary-paving/aspero-porcelain-paving/

Thanks for any help & advice you can give.

 

[Nige F]

I like the random pattern shown by Bradstone, the joints shoul all be = Have a look @ www.pavingexpert.com

 

[r896neo]

The pattern shown is not very random to my eye. A good random pattern will have no long straight lines and should have no x crosses where 4 corners meet. These draw the eye and ruin the look of it.

You will find getting exact joints almost impossible with a random layout but should be easier with porcelain paving than say random sandstone. Its all to do with tolerances of the slabs. If you have a 600x600 slab and then a 300x300 with another 300x300 laid along side it you have 600mm = 605mm (300 + 300 + 5mm joint) Here lies the problem.

If you really want a consistant joint you either must use a predetermined pattern with matching flags cut to suit ( some mftrs will make the 600x600 flags 595x595 to account for joints) or use a different pattern such as a coursed width. Coursed width is becoming more popular as its more contemporary and quicker and easier to lay.

If you did go for single sized flags a stretcher bond is the best way to make it more contemporary. Ideally a random stretcher bond with the first course laid full flags, next one started with a 1/3 flag, next course maybe 3/4 flag, next course 1/4 flag etc etc rather than a brick bond which is 1/2 a flag.

 

[chriselevate]

Thanks Nige. I like the pattern shown by Bradstone but as r896neo has said, I can see that there are a few points where "four edges meet". Now I've seen them I think my eyes will always be drawn to them!

I guess this leads me to a few questions that I wondered if you could help me with?
1. Buying the 24 (600 x 600), 36 (600 x 300) and 36 (300 x 300) from Bradstone. Can they be laid in a different pattern to the one above to avoid the "four edge meets"? Or is this impossible unless the quantities changes? By the way.... Bradstone said that the slabs are all adjusted to allow for the 5mm joints that the recommend.
2. You mention a "coursed width". What do you mean by this? Is this something I could do with the slabs that Bradstone offer in their patio kit?
3.You mention "stretcher bond" is a good contemporary way to lay one sized tiles. Do this look contemporary for 600 x 600's or it more applicable for rectangular shaped slabs?

Thanks for your help and advice. I'm just wondering whether to do a U turn on the Bradstone patio pack decision or to go ahead

 

[r896neo]

yes rectangular flags always look better stretcher than square ones but if you stagger the bond as i suggested it helps a bit.

Coursed width is how i often now lay sandstone and other 4 sized paving. Your bradstone can certainly be laid in that pattern if you like it.

If you have 300x300s, 600x300s, 600x600s, 900x600s You lay the first course of 300 depth so maybe a 300x300 then a 600x300 then a 300x300 then a 900x300 (900x600 cut in half)

Your next course can be a 600 depth course so lay a 600x600 then a 900x600 then a 600x300 then a 600x600 etc

 

[chriselevate]

Only problem is.... I only have 600 x 600 as my biggest slab.

So for the porcelain patio pack I'll have...
24 - (600 x 600)
36 - (600 x 300)
36 - (300 x 300)

The photo looks an excellent job by the way! Very nice!

 

[r896neo]

Not my photo, I dont have any on this computer so googled it. its refered to as a coursed width or gauged width.

It can obviously still be done with 3 sizes but it is less pleasing visually.

 

[chriselevate]

How would you do it with the 3 sizes? 24 - (600 x 600), 36 - (600 x 300), 36 - (300 x 300)

I'm guessing...

first course would be 300 depth so would consist of 300 x 300, 300 x 600, 300 x 300, 300 x 600 (alternated) etc.
next course would be 600 depth so would consist of 600 x 600, 600 x 300, 600 x 600, 600 x 300 (alternated) etc.

How would this look? Like this?

 

[lostinthelight]

How would you do it with the 3 sizes? 24 - (600 x 600), 36 - (600 x 300), 36 - (300 x 300)

I'm guessing...

first course would be 300 depth so would consist of 300 x 300, 300 x 600, 300 x 300, 300 x 600 (alternated) etc.
next course would be 600 depth so would consist of 600 x 600, 600 x 300, 600 x 600, 600 x 300 (alternated) etc.

How would this look? Like this?

Arnt you going to end up with a straight line grid of blocks of 4 ? or has my brain gone to sleep?

 

[r896neo]

You dont just alternate the two sizes, you put a random selection down. 300x300 - 300x300 - 600x300- 300-300 - 600x600 - 600x600- etc etc .You can also cut a 600x600 into say 200x600 and 400x600 to break the bond. You also do the same and dont simple alternate courses having one 300 then a 600 then a 300 etc.

As i said its not as nice to look at compared to a 4 size layout but with a tight clean flag like porcelain accurate joint size and neat laying is imperitive. This is very hard for a diyer to get right using a normal random layout but very acheiveable using coursed width.