Hello All...
Been drawing up ideas over several months now as I am a month or so away from the very start of my build, and looking for input into my idea and concept here of a remake of the 20x30 1.5 plan here on the site.... I have had answer in other posts that I am trying to factor in here into my build, so I have tried to take all of them into account
Pictures say a thousand words, so let me show you the pictures first, then explain my idea with the pictures as a visal reference for you
(https://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u578/steve_building/20x42IDEA_zps20022742.png)
(https://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u578/steve_building/IJoist.jpg)
(https://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u578/steve_building/CathedralLivingAreaTruss.jpg)
(https://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u578/steve_building/view1_zpsfb0e026d.png)
(https://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u578/steve_building/view2_zps0390c132.png)
(https://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u578/steve_building/view3_zps573fba4e.png)
As you can see the downstairs would be one bedroom, one bathroom, a small half walled in office area, the living room, and kitchen that fully opens into the dining room.... you will see the wood burning stove in between the kitchen and dining area as the wifey does not want it as a focal point and I think it only adds to the charm of the kitchen area
Near the front door will be a full flight of stairs coming up to a catwalk which will lead to either of the two loft bedroom upstairs
Been to the truss company a few times now and going to go with a cathedral style truss as it adds lateral stability to the house, and the math says it will offer 8'1" of headroom on the second floor at 5'7" away from the front and back wall of the house.... roughly 6' of headroom at 3' away from the front and back walls in the lofts
the first floor will be 8' tall using the called for 2x6 studs, then the engineered floor joists for the two loft areas, then platform frame a 4' tall wall as the second story of the house which the engineered trusses will sit on.... the idea being more livable space in the lofts but not the extent of a whole second story workwise or pricewise
I considered balloon framing as the plan has it, but really desire more liveable space in the lofts, even with using the 12 on 12 roof
the floor joists and roof trusses, both engineered, will meet or exceed code to hold the house laterally... and as added security, the addition of a "plant shelf" by way of doubled up 2x12 running between the first and second floor horizontally in the open area of the living room, both front and back wall, will overdue it
The 17' long by roughly 4' wide catwalk will be made likely out of 2 additional engineered floor joists being supported by the two walls at each end, then covered with 3/4" T&G and such
I am doing as much work and labor by hand as I can as the budget is extremely tight... so my approach on building this house this way holds this value as being important
It would seem pretty straightforward.... build the 8' tall first floor, then add the floor joists in, then platform frame the 4' tall second floor, then have the trusses delivered and install them.... hopefully I will have friends helping me as much as I can..... of coarse throwing in rough plumbing and such during these stages
I am no engineer, or master builder by any means.... so please add any thoughts or concerns you may have seeing the pictures and reading these thoughts
I am striving for the simplest way to build this, but trying to add some charm in too hopefully with the open living area and catwalk
Please add any thoughts or concerns or ideas here
Regards greatly,
Steve
Have you considered using 12' 2x6 studwalls for the first floor? It eliminates the potential hinge joint resulting from building those 4' pony walls in the loft areas. What are you going to do for your wall framing in the open area? I built a 24x36 1 1/2 story in Alaska a few years ago. Plan similar to yours but with only a single 10x24 loft with a 4' wide by 14' long catwalk from to door opening onto the upper 10x24 covered porch. The 12/12 roof extended to cover the two stacked 10x24 porches. The heated footprint of the cabin was 24x24 on first floor and 10x24 in the loft. I didn't use trusses but did use a 6"x16"x36 foot glulam for a ridge beam so did not require rafter ties. A 3"x12"x24' glulam formed the edge of the loft area along with one 4x4 support buried in the interior partition walls carrying the load down to a footing. I found it very difficult to draw a comfortable floor plan in a 20' wide format. The staircase was particularly hard to scale in without eating up a significant chunk of the first floor. The extra 4' in width was of great value. I used a single landing on staircase after trying to use a winder design--very difficult to get code and/or common sense compliant tread design on a winder. Looked at spiral but getting furniture up and down is impossible with a spiral. Also headroom is a problem if you try to place top landing near a sidewall---mine was landed at the catwalk which was in the center. I found that drawing scale drawings using 1/4x1/4" graph paper revealed a lot of interference situations during the planning process and avoided the dreaded "aw shits" during construction. If you search forum for rwanders you can find pictures, etc. Recommend your consideration of 24' wide plan. It will require some adjustment of spans, etc but will make an amazing difference in livability. I also found that going from 8' deep porches to 10' was not much more in $$, but made them much more comfortable. An uncovered deck or porch in a snowy climate is unusable too much of the year and just adds a lot of shoveling to your life. [if you want a porch at all]. Good luck--I found the design process was great fun. It took lots of pencils, lots of graph paper, lots of time, but paid great dividends during construction and in the finished product.
Quote from: rwanders on December 21, 2012, 12:18:34 AM
Have you considered using 12' 2x6 studwalls for the first floor? It eliminates the potential hinge joint resulting from building those 4' pony walls in the loft areas. What are you going to do for your wall framing in the open area? I built a 24x36 1 1/2 story in Alaska a few years ago. Plan similar to yours but with only a single 10x24 loft with a 4' wide by 14' long catwalk from to door opening onto the upper 10x24 covered porch. The 12/12 roof extended to cover the two stacked 10x24 porches. The heated footprint of the cabin was 24x24 on first floor and 10x24 in the loft. I didn't use trusses but did use a 6"x16"x36 foot glulam for a ridge beam so did not require rafter ties. A 3"x12"x24' glulam formed the edge of the loft area along with one 4x4 support buried in the interior partition walls carrying the load down to a footing. I found it very difficult to draw a comfortable floor plan in a 20' wide format. The staircase was particularly hard to scale in without eating up a significant chunk of the first floor. The extra 4' in width was of great value. I used a single landing on staircase after trying to use a winder design--very difficult to get code and/or common sense compliant tread design on a winder. Looked at spiral but getting furniture up and down is impossible with a spiral. Also headroom is a problem if you try to place top landing near a sidewall---mine was landed at the catwalk which was in the center. I found that drawing scale drawings using 1/4x1/4" graph paper revealed a lot of interference situations during the planning process and avoided the dreaded "aw shits" during construction. If you search forum for rwanders you can find pictures, etc. Recommend your consideration of 24' wide plan. It will require some adjustment of spans, etc but will make an amazing difference in livability. I also found that going from 8' deep porches to 10' was not much more in $$, but made them much more comfortable. An uncovered deck or porch in a snowy climate is unusable too much of the year and just adds a lot of shoveling to your life. [if you want a porch at all]. Good luck--I found the design process was great fun. It took lots of pencils, lots of graph paper, lots of time, but paid great dividends during construction and in the finished product.
I would like to just go with 12' sidewalls and make a 7'6" first floor height, but from all I have read, this sums it up the most....
" The maximum height of an unsupported and non-engineered wall is 10'. This is what limits the wall height in a partial loft partial cathedral situation. "
I "must" try and keep the house as simple and as easy to build as I can, as I am doing almost all of the labor involved, and this is my first house build.
I would love to go to 24' wide and open it up more, but the money and engineering would kill me
I have designed and redesigned this floor plan at least 50 times and this seems to be the best layout for our needs, as well as being the most cost effective layout
QuoteI would like to just go with 12' sidewalls and make a 7'6" first floor height, but from all I have read, this sums it up the most....
" The maximum height of an unsupported and non-engineered wall is 10'. This is what limits the wall height in a partial loft partial cathedral situation. "
I might be misreading your understanding but what they are asking for in that support is something stabilizing the wall "out of plane", in and out. A floor at the 8' height level connected to a 12' tall stud wall is supporting that column agains buckling out of plane, the wall sheathing provides support "in plane" against the studs buckling along their weak axis. If the plant shelf is designed as a girder to support a wall with less than 10' of height on either side of that shelf, it too would satisfy the requirement. This would actually be stronger balloon framed but does require fire blocking to seperate the floors. You can platform frame the floored areas, it is no different to frame that at 4' than at 8' tall which is what we would do if it were a 2 story. IF the roof is framed properly the walls don't need to resist its' lateral thrust. (We do see alot of roofs improperly framed and they are sending lateral thrust at the kneewalls. This is not a good thing to do. If the kneewalls must be loaded that way it is an engineer's playground and I can tell you, he'll do plenty not to play in that sandbox. Code calls for a ridgebeam in that situation)
But, I don't think your trusses are out of the woods yet. I'm seeing ~7/8" lateral deflection under full load. You can check the allowable deflection of a wall, l/120 comes to mind... 1" in 10' of height. you are looking at ~1/2" in 4' of height, you're pushing a mighty lenient(poor) code requirement.
The "engineering" on a 24' wide is no big hill to climb, it would actually simplify some of this. Things are easier on paper or on a screen, don't be frugal there. Just messing around I've sketched parts of several houses tonight. Spend that time up front. That wasn't really directed to you Steve just a general good idea.
Quote from: Don_P on December 24, 2012, 12:27:55 AM
I might be misreading your understanding but what they are asking for in that support is something stabilizing the wall "out of plane", in and out. A floor at the 8' height level connected to a 12' tall stud wall is supporting that column agains buckling out of plane, the wall sheathing provides support "in plane" against the studs buckling along their weak axis. If the plant shelf is designed as a girder to support a wall with less than 10' of height on either side of that shelf, it too would satisfy the requirement. This would actually be stronger balloon framed but does require fire blocking to seperate the floors. You can platform frame the floored areas, it is no different to frame that at 4' than at 8' tall which is what we would do if it were a 2 story. IF the roof is framed properly the walls don't need to resist its' lateral thrust. (We do see alot of roofs improperly framed and they are sending lateral thrust at the kneewalls. This is not a good thing to do. If the kneewalls must be loaded that way it is an engineer's playground and I can tell you, he'll do plenty not to play in that sandbox. Code calls for a ridgebeam in that situation)
But, I don't think your trusses are out of the woods yet. I'm seeing ~7/8" lateral deflection under full load. You can check the allowable deflection of a wall, l/120 comes to mind... 1" in 10' of height. you are looking at ~1/2" in 4' of height, you're pushing a mighty lenient(poor) code requirement.
The "engineering" on a 24' wide is no big hill to climb, it would actually simplify some of this. Things are easier on paper or on a screen, don't be frugal there. Just messing around I've sketched parts of several houses tonight. Spend that time up front. That wasn't really directed to you Steve just a general good idea.
In speaking with the man who is designing these engineered trusses, he says that code actually allows for 1.25" and when I mentioned I wanted less deflection, he said ( maybe this is normal here in SC buildings ) that this would be fine as he already planned
Hopefully a simple question here..... John's plan calls for 10' walls. You are saying that I can swap out the 10' walls for 12' walls and balloon frame the dual lofts and in using a joist on each side of the open living area at say 8' off the ground, this is well within code and would be safe?
Another question if I may.... instead of using engineered trusses with the above question, how hard is it to "build" your own ridge beam roof? I am going with a concrete slab, so how do the vertical beams get "anchored" onto the slab, or are they just secured to the sidewalls?
As mentioned, I am doing all I can do to keep the cost down and working with a very tight budget.... what is the easiest way for almost one man to do this build? Or should I switch to the 2 story model of this house?
Many Regards,
Steve
Let the truss designer know they are sitting on top of 4' tall walls and ask the question again ;). He was unaware or oblivious of the kneewall height.
If the studwall is laterally supported at <10' height intervals then it satisfies code, The loft floor diapragms do that and an appropriately sized and secured horizontal beam can accomplish that.
I'm pretty old school so I would more than likely use a ridgebeam on this. There would be a post foot embedded in the slab with a thickened section under that to form a footing under the ridge support posts.
I like something along these lines. A flat plate with hooks is embeded flush in the slab. The knife plate is inserted in a slot in the post, pinned and the post is installed and plumbed, when everything is happy weld the post base to the floor plate.
(https://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x109/windyhilll/MVC-014F.jpg)
Don... thank you for all the insight you are giving me here, much appreciated I must say first
I have made the truss company well aware of the idea of the 4' platform framed kneewall upstairs a few times, and on my last visit I was very clear about it as he was looking at them in the program he drew up.
Recap here and a question.... if I take the plan from the site here for the 1.5 story and build it using 12' studs and balloon frame in the two lofts and roughly have a 3 to 4 foot high wall in the lofts and still have the open living area in the middle as in the first post picture and add in lateral support <10' high on the stud walls in the open living area.... can I then use the above mentioned engineered trusses with no issues or work arounds? Would balloon framing solve all the issues at hand?
In the plan, do the site built trusses call for a ridgebeam?
QuoteIn the plan, do the site built trusses call for a ridgebeam?
No, no ridgebeam in the 20x30 plans
Quote from: MountainDon on December 24, 2012, 09:16:55 PM
No, no ridgebeam in the 20x30 plans
I would hope this would be the same if I bumped it up to 20x42 instead of 20x30?
QuoteRecap here and a question.... if I take the plan from the site here for the 1.5 story and build it using 12' studs and balloon frame in the two lofts and roughly have a 3 to 4 foot high wall in the lofts and still have the open living area in the middle as in the first post picture and add in lateral support <10' high on the stud walls in the open living area.... can I then use the above mentioned engineered trusses with no issues or work arounds? Would balloon framing solve all the issues at hand?
If the truss designer gets the horizontal deflection down to <1/2" total then he is within spec. At that point you can either platform frame the loft areas or balloon them. Playing with the interior and exterior pitches of the truss is another way of stiffening it. It doesn't neccessarily have to be heavier or higher grade material, there are several ways you all can do it. I'd balloon the tall LR walls either way and have the plant shelves we talked about tied well to the lofts. The gable walls should be platform framed... don't put a framing hinge at 4' above the second floor on the ends, we see that mistake too often in pics don't repeat it. Balloon those gables from the loft floor up, again use the floor as a point of lateral stability.
The site built truss is not really a truss. It is a pair of rafters that are gusseted together at the peak rather than being nailed to a ridgeboard, this is fine. If the tie between the rafters is in the lower third of roof height it is able to be adequately tied to prevent horizontal thrust to the walls. If the tie needs to be raised above the lower third of roof height then a ridgebeam should be used.
All the years of being creative and building things in the garage, I've come to realize that one of my biggest faults is that I try being too creative and over complicate things instead of keeping them easy
So to mountaindon and don_p I ask this.....
If I take the stock plan from the site here for the 20x30 with 1.5 and ONLY increase the length from 30' to 42' and increase the loft length by those extra 12' I added, and keep the same open living area as in the plan.... and add stairs running up to the middle of the loft instead of the edge of the loft, would this be fine to do with the site built trusses as in the plan?
In the open living area, I would keep the rafter ties to the lower third of the trusses..... are there rafter ties in the loft area in the plan, or just site built trusses?
Quoteare there rafter ties in the loft area in the plan, or just site built trusses?
Neither.
The prescriptive solution is to use a ridgebeam in that situation. Do check headroom under the rafter ties over the stairs.
IMHO, there are some negatives to the dual loft. Yes, you gain two distinct sleeping areas, but, you impact the main floor and the structure substantially by doing so. I'd strongly consider the benefits of building a larger single loft which will allow you a true cathedral ceiling over a major portion of your main floor. By extending your main floor to one of the end walls of your structure, you gain the ability to have a window wall in that end wall. Putting in two or even three levels of windows will give a level of natural light and airiness to your great room that is hard to beat. In addition, it will give a great view from your single loft. Otherwise, even the windows in your lower level will be limited to what you can put in under the overhang.
In my journeys, I see a lot of homes that cost about the same $$ to build. Some are lovely, some are homely. Truthfully, if you are going to spend the money on good materials, why not maximize the esthetic benefit of what you are builiding.
Sometimes I think this is even more important in our cabins and cottages. They may well be a more accurate reflection of our inner selves than our "live-in" home. Thankfully, we all have different tastes which allow us to enjoy the variety of life. I'm just suggesting to consider your dual loft carefully. What appears quite functional on paper, may be less than ideal in reality. Best of luck!
Structurally those airy window walls are a bear to design properly.
Strongest is the tried and true, a full 2nd floor diaphragm, a massive, complete, horizontal beam that transfers any horizontal loads to the perpendicular sidewalls, down through the foundation and to the ground. Next is the dual lofts, both tall gable ends have the lateral support of a floor bracing the tall gable walls, with a weaker section in between that we proposed bracing with a horizontal beam if it exceeds 10'. Weakest is a tall laterally unsupported gable... code calls for an engineer pretty quickly, a 20' tall 2x6 wall punched full of holes isn't going to get it.
Personally I've built enough cathedrals and watched how people use them to have observed a couple of things. People tend to gravitate out of those rooms for two reasons. First they are uncomfortable. The room is tall enough to stratify and set up convection currents. The heat isn't where you want it and the cold slides down the walls. A tall glazed gable facing south or west will fry you and your eyeballs for half the year and will radiate precious heat to the black sky on those long winter nights. They are hard to drape effectively to prevent either. Secondly, as highly evolved as we think we are, we still like to kennel up in a cozy space, that isn't in the middle of a chapel. Beyond about 12' this all seems to begin. I'm not an archie so take it as a carpenter's armchair musings, nothing more, but I just did a 20' wide x 26' tall southern living special that I'm glad isn't mine. Incredible wow factor but a dog to HVAC and the gable is full of steel and took several conversations with an engineer. Just across the meadow I have one that the owners have been through several iterations of blinds to make it liveable. All that glass and the efforts the owners have had to go through to make the fashionable look work for them is the building's way of telling the architect he was an idiot. Design IS tough stuff and we do have to live with what we've done, good or bad. I like one of Frank Lloyd Wright's quotations, which I'm going to butcher. If a doctor screws up he merely has to bury the patient, if an architect screws up the only thing he can do is suggest planting trees. We are all pretty free with our opinions and broad input is good for design.
There is a lot of varying opinion on design. I must admit to appreciating the style that can come along with a window wall, soaring ceilings and all, but when it comes to living there, I subscribe to much of what Don_P states. In both our home and cabin we stuck with 8 foot ceilings. At home that helps a lot with the summer A/C load and comfort and at the cabin it helps warm up fast and then stay comfortable when it drops to zero like it is supposed to tonight. But that is my practical side showing.
A loft at each end stiffens the structure up with more or less conventional, prescriptive methods.
If you are located anywhere the winds could easily blow real hard... hurricanes and the like, I would stay away from walls of windows. I would also think hard about spending the money for engineered roof trusses. Attic trusses at the loft rooms would permit best possible headroom and can be designed to withstand the wind and rain loads a storm can toss at it. In the open space a scissors truss might be worked in to permit some open feeling if that is important, and still provide strength and space for insulation. Lots of plans are drawn in a very general manner. There are many locations where local conditions, from the soil type, the snows, the winds, the earthquakes, etc necessitate changes to the drawn plans.
I hear exactly what Don P is saying and there is great truth in it. In my case it is 22' to my inside peak, and yes, I do have horizontal beams every 10' to hold the sidewalls together. Two of them are buried in the end walls, one is visible at the edge of the loft and the other run across the middle of the great room. My window wall faces to the north, towards the lake. I wouldn't want that window wall facing south because of heat problems. On the other hand, heating will always be a challenge, you have to run ceiling fans to force the heat back down which means a constant draft in the winter. Since my utilization is focused on summer, it isn't the concern that it would be for a year around dwelling. Heat rises, so a tall ceiling can make it cooler below.
There is a reason that many older homes and cabins had low ceilings. They were a lot easier to heat. It was also the reason that summer homes had high ceilings. And I truly believe that people gravitate towards cozy intimate spaces. The success of "The not so big house" phenomenon and on sites such as Houzz.com, readers favorites lean towards the more intimate spaces that are feature intensive. Rarely is the 5000 Sq. Foot starter castle selected, it is the cottage rich in architectural features and user friendly spaces that call to peoples hearts.
If I were builiding a home, it would be along those lines. In my smallish 30x30 cabin, the single loft and cathedral ceiling gives a spaciousness that couldn't be gotten any other way. If I used it much in the winter, it would have to have lower ceilings. Construction is always a blend of economics, esthetics, preferences and practicality. In many of our cases where DIY is involved, our construction may be limited by skill and ability. We build what we are able to build. In more urban areas, we build what we are allowed to build.
I suspect moving forward in our country, that economics will dicate construction choices more and more. 3500 Sq. Ft. homes with dual HVAC and 5 figure real estate taxes should slowly falter as we more and more begin to resemble the european socialist model we seem determined to emulate.
Meanwhile, if it is your get-a-way, or even your golden parachute in the event of economic collapse, build to your heart and build safe. The structure that endures may well be the best of all.
Guys... let me take a new approach here to get back to simplicity
A few questions for all of you answering here....
Seeing what I wanted to do here, would I be more well suited to just follow the 2 story universal 20x34 plan here on the site? I would pretty much go with the first floor plan as is with only moving the front door to the side of the house, and the 2nd floor would be 3 bedrooms with no extra bath but maybe a small office
How much harder would it be to physically build then what I had planned earlier?
How much more materials would be involved pricewise?
With the 20x34 2 story universal plan, can you use site built trusses? Or better off with engineered trusses?
Trying to get what I wanted was getting me into the realm of having to engineer the house and not build the house....
Whats your guys thoughts on just going with the new plan I mentioned?
Just went 11 pages deep on the owner builder projects forum and can not find anything site plan wise here but the 1.5 story plan and a ton of other non site plans
Should I just go with a stock 1.5 plan and take it 42' long and add more length to the loft or go with the 2 story universal plan???
HELP...
Or go with a 20 x 42 with 1.5 and make it a full lot floor???
HELP...
OR does this post answer my question fully?? Start at the original question the poster asked
http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=2855.msg29688#msg29688 (http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=2855.msg29688#msg29688)
It gives the ALL CLEAR for a 20 x 30 1.5 with 12' walls and a balloon framed FULL LOFT
Any of these are do-able if you do it right. Personally I was kind of liking the dual lofts.
The site built "truss" and its' limitations are described here;
http://publicecodes.cyberregs.com/icod/irc/2009/icod_irc_2009_8_sec002.htm?bu2=undefined
R802.3, the gusset in that section describes what you are calling a truss.
R802.3.1 describes the need for a continuous rafter tie, the second paragraph describes the raised tie and points to section R802.5.1(9). In that section you will see the connection requirements and the limitation that the rafter tie be located in the lower third of roof height. Notice at the bottom of all of the rafter span tables in that section an adjustment factor to be applied to the allowable rafter span as the tie is raised up to that maximum 1/3 of rafter height. These are not casual requirements, gravity is unrelenting over the life of the structure.
If we're going to use the term "truss" to describe that gusseted rafter pair you have entered the truss requirements in section 802.10.1 You really don't want to go there. I'd use the proper terminology in any discussions with officials, it would help if we used them here to avoid confusion.
With that out of the way, the dual lofts or a full second floor would work if the kneewalls are tall enough to allow rafter ties to be located in the lower third of roof height. We use the term "kneewall" but the building code doesn't specify any difference in a kneewall and an 8' wall, what you are calling a 1.5 story is structurally no different than a 2 story. The wall can be 2' or 10', it's your job to get the tie in that lower third of roof height. If that cannot be done a ridgebeam is required if you want to stick frame it. Don't reject that option out of hand, I've done it many times.
Going to a full second floor some things do get easier. The walls would be platform framed, you're only tipping up an 8' tall set of 1st floor walls, framing a floor, tipping up 8'tall second walls, rafters and ceiling joists or trusses. It's stout too. Costwise you'll need to run the numbers yourself, but, studs are generally cheaper than longer lengths per lineal foot so there is probably some offset.
I do sense the frustration and appreciate it, we've all been there. Hang in there, we are trying to help. For myself, when I seem cryptic I'm actually trying to leave openings that we can pursue or trying to avoid stepping too hard on toes. When I stepped on the tall window walls it wasn't to say it is something to avoid at all costs but to point out that it comes with it's own set of difficulties, and I'm glad Ndrmyr took my comments that way. Design is very circular, we fix one problem then need to look at what its' implications are. It seems hard hearted at times, nerves can fray, but it is much better then hitting something unintended later. So often one comment from someone can open up a new and good direction to chase down but just as often a "new" direction is one that has been tried before and found to be wanting in some crucial detail. So often we do things a certain way not because carpenters are dullards but because the alternatives have real problems the new builder does not see. "Good judgement comes from experience, experience comes from poor judgement", I've got a boatload of experience :D.
I saw the siding thoughts on another thread, it's do-able, I'll throw another into the mix. I've been talking to a local forester and we are having a quantity of hemlock hitting the market with the wooly adelgid problems. I've used it for siding before.
Don(s), and all who reply....
I do get frustrated a bit when what seem like the right way to go ends with a hurdle, but foremost, I appreciate any and all insight every one offers me here as this is by far the largest undertaking ever done by me..... part of it is fear as well, as I look at all the work I must do, but the greatest accomplishment at the end for the wife and kids to live much much better then we are now
Extensive hours on this site and online today lead me to believe the "best" way for me to go in "my" situation is to go with the 20 x 30 1.5 plan and bump it up to a 20 x 42' with a full loft upstairs... it seems easier to build and will keep the $$$ down in the very tight budget
Going this way... if I were to use the site built trusses, how hard is it to go with a ridgebeam with the 1.5 plan? how is the ridgebeam connected to the house, and where is it connected to the house exactly? or would engineered trusses be an easier way to go if the kneewall was roughly 4' tall?
Once again, any and all insight is much appreciated gentlemen
Well said, Don P. A true 2nd story would be easier than lofts. I couldn't agree more. My tall open structure and window wall made construction far far more difficult. A LOT of time on ladders and scoffolding, and therefore, longer and slower.
If I were doing it again, it would be hard not to simplify and make things easier on myself. That being said, I'm happy with the finished product, I just wouldn't want to do it again.
There is always an elegance to a simple solution that shouldn't be overlooked.
I hear you Ndrmyr, my Dad's career was the 4/12 ranch house period, mine was the 12/12's, darn the luck. The house with the frying eyeballs problem has a million dollar view out that window wall. There is a reaction when people step inside. They are quite happy with the house, it just came with a cost. Seems its hard to have it all so we have to choose the best compromises we can. Structurally, it has an oak 8x8 horizontal beam with a pair of oak wrapped steel posts up to that between window framing. It has a pretty good "fetch" to the wind and needed good reinforcing. The durecho in July slapped it in the face at about 80mph. It will have harder days before its done I'm sure, it cannot weaken with each blow.
Playing around in sketchup I did this sketch of a 20x42 to the codebook prescriptions in my post above. If the kneewalls are about 5' tall and the rafter ties are 8' off the upstairs floor it looks like this.
(https://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x109/windyhilll/22x42w5ftwalls.jpg)
I prefer to use a ridgeboard rather than independent gusseted rafter pairs, it makes the roof easier to get straight. The parts are also lighter one stick at a time but either way is by the book. This is not a ridgebeam, I jacked up the kneewall by a foot to avoid that yet, the ridgeboard is just 2x material to nail the rafters to and keep them aligned during assembly.
If we want to lower the kneewalls the rafter ties are going to get into the headroom pretty quickly. If the ridgeboard becomes a structural ridgebeam that the rafters can hang from, then the rafter ties can go away and the kneewall can lower.The useable width will begin reduce as the walls lower and the slope of the rafters gets into headroom. From the inside that 5' kneewall isn't a bad thing, one way to look at that compromise is that for every foot you lower the kneewall you effectively lose 2' of useable width upstairs.
By making the kneewalls ~5' or more and using the rafter ties rather than a ridgebeam there are no interior support posts for the ridgebeam so the interior layout is simpler. The kneewalls in the drawing could just as easily go to a full 8' and the ties could come down... or could stay up at some point in the lower third for a coffered ceiling effect.
I really want to complicate life with a few dormers now ;D
Quote from: Don_P on December 30, 2012, 08:20:43 PM
I hear you Ndrmyr, my Dad's career was the 4/12 ranch house period, mine was the 12/12's, darn the luck. The house with the frying eyeballs problem has a million dollar view out that window wall. There is a reaction when people step inside. They are quite happy with the house, it just came with a cost. Seems its hard to have it all so we have to choose the best compromises we can. Structurally, it has an oak 8x8 horizontal beam with a pair of oak wrapped steel posts up to that between window framing. It has a pretty good "fetch" to the wind and needed good reinforcing. The durecho in July slapped it in the face at about 80mph. It will have harder days before its done I'm sure, it cannot weaken with each blow.
Playing around in sketchup I did this sketch of a 20x42 to the codebook prescriptions in my post above. If the kneewalls are about 5' tall and the rafter ties are 8' off the upstairs floor it looks like this.
(https://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x109/windyhilll/22x42w5ftwalls.jpg)
I prefer to use a ridgeboard rather than independent gusseted rafter pairs, it makes the roof easier to get straight. The parts are also lighter one stick at a time but either way is by the book.
I would be interested in doing the build this way.... so a ridgeboard is connected to the floor of the second floor and gable walls?
I imagine at 42' long it would need to be built up with several pieces? This is code worthy?
In your opinion, go with a balloon framed 1.5 to do this, or go with a true platform framed 2nd story with 5' walls? Which is the best approach for ease of building and strength?
The sketchup is greatly appreciated
I think I was still modifying while you were typing but were on the same page I think.
I'd platform frame it. This ridgeBOARD would be several pieces long but this is no problem, yes it is to code, remember the "trusses" have no ridge at all... we discussed that earlier this week, can't remember which thread that was at the moment ??? A ridgeBEAM is another animal but I won't go there if we don't need to to avoid confusion.
Quote from: Don_P on December 30, 2012, 10:04:44 PM
I think I was still modifying while you were typing but were on the same page I think.
I'd platform frame it. This ridgeBOARD would be several pieces long but this is no problem, yes it is to code, remember the "trusses" have no ridge at all... we discussed that earlier this week, can't remember which thread that was at the moment ??? A ridgeBEAM is another animal but I won't go there if we don't need to to avoid confusion.
Don... going with a ridgeboard, could you just give me an example of what dimensional wood the board is made out of, and what dimensional wood the rafters would be made from?
Just trying to visualize sizes and depth
If the rafters are a part of the insulated envelope then the insulation requirement controls their depth, in that case I typically frame with 2x12 rafters. There is a requirement that the ridgeboard be deep enough to provide a bearing surface to the entire plumb cut at the ridge. At a 12/12 pitch that requires about 16" of ridge depth. I'd use a 2x6 atop a 2x12 and extend the 2x6 out to support the fly rafter.
I have satisfied the structural neccessity with lesser depth members and furred down the sloped insulated area to satisfy those requirements as well.
I believe you are building in piedmont SC and am going to make some assumptions for this next part to show the other end of the spectrum. I'm going to assume 24" on center spacing, a 20 psf live load+10 psf dead load. I'm going to assume the 2nd floor walls are 8' tall and the ceiling joists rest on those walls and the ceiling is attached not to the rafters but to the ceiling joists, the insulation is on the ceiling. Now we are just looking at the structural requirements of the rafters. In that situation 2x6's would work for the rafters. The ceiling joists would need some thought. They are spanning 20' and if you keep the pitch high there is going to be storage up there, I'd use 2x12's. If the pitch drops to unuseable height in the attic that could go down to no less than 2x8's. Of course if there is an interior load bearing wall that can support the ceiling the cj's can be shallower. Don't build off of that, you need to confirm those assumptions, it is just to show the range and point out another potential offset in costs.
The R802.5.1 tables flesh all that out further, read the headings and footnotes carefully and make sure you are on the right on center spacings. Ignore the southern pine spans and use the SPF spans for southern pine till they correct the tables (we grew em too fast and they just got busted down)
A little more terminology, when the word "dimensional" is used it is generally referring to 2x lumber of some sort (actually 2x-4x) as opposed to 1x boards or >5x timbers. Every profession has its lingo that can be confusing. You used the term correctly :).
Just want to give a New Year shout-out to Don_P and all the help he gives folks on this forum!
Don, your experience, patience and thoroughness has been invaluable to so many of the owner-builder projects people post here.
THANKS FROM ALL OUR 7,391 COUNTRYPLANS MEMBERS!
Indeed John... Thank you to all who have furthered all of us in gaining more knowledge and coming closer to the dream of building your own house! There is invaluable information here in the forum from many people who are willing to help us beginners
Don... Here is an idea taking in account all I have read in this post... here is the scenario
I am going to buy the plans for the 20 x 34 universal 2 story house. I am going to build that same sized house on a concrete slab and lay out the first floor and stairs exactly how they are in the plan. I am going to platform frame the second floor just as in the plan. ~( now for the changes )~ I may lower the 2nd floor wall height to 5' or possibly keep it at 7' 6" and build the roof as a ridgeboard roof with no 2nd floor ceiling at all or joists. The entire 2nd floor would have the roof visible as there is no ceiling or "attic floor" installed. I am going to adjust the second floor floorplan to have 3 bedrooms only with a some storage space. The insulation would be installed inside the rafters which would be 2x12
Will this scenario work as I wrote it? Would I need rafter ties?
John, Thank You, I appreciate that. I do agree with Steve, there are many good voices here, we sharpen one another :).
Steve, yes you would need either rafter ties in the lower third of roof height or a ridgeBEAM to do that. The beam would likely need at least a couple of posts from ridge to footings for the full cathedral. I'd lean towards a scissor truss roof to keep the floorplans open.
http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=5513.msg70414#msg70414
Steve B;
Found a bunch of posts related to the cabin I built in Alaska 2008-09 timeframe. It has a few interior pictures of cabin at various stages. Don't let design problems discourage you excessively. Most can be resolved at design stage and if that stage is done well problems that arise during construction can be overcome without great trouble. When you see homes/cabins being framed ask the builders if they would let you take a look at their work---it's a good way for a person with limited experience to gain some good mental pictures of framing details [just be sure and look at good workmanship examples]. You can do it. You will make some errors; probably take what seems to be a long time; wish you had done some things differently [without a doubt]; but the satisfaction you will gain building your 'dream cabin' [even if limited by $$$] will be priceless.
I think the link above will get you to my 'dream cabin'. If not search for rwanders in owner/builder section. It would not be everyone's 'dream', but it was mine. It was a great adventure and done with the input of many members of this wonderful forum. I have a lot of other pictures of completed cabin interior---can email to you if you want to reveal address to me [via personal note?]