Jump to content

SimonD

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2175

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

 Content Type 

Everything posted by SimonD

  1. SimonD
    Haha, hopefully they've decided to give you a break! ?
  2. SimonD
    I've got something similar on my current timber frame, although that is sitting on an existing ground floor masonry wall. In our case the SE also specified Tapcon anchors through the sole plate into the masonry but our roof is curved so there's increased uplift. I think it would be okay to use resin fixed anchor bolts and then use mastic to seal around the penetrations. In the US, when they're aiming for high airtighness levels, they'll add an EDPM strip to the dpm/dpc layer below the sole plate. The brackets you show above are really just uplift restraints so if you do need additional fixing, restraint straps as @Mr Punter suggests would probably be easier to install.
  3. SimonD
    ?
  4. SimonD
    That was the orginal plan for this project - it was designed to have woodfibre insulation throughout. However, the supplier then tried to stiff me on the price, hiking it massively compared to the price given during technical design. I then changed the timber frame design and now we have sheepswool throughout; so it's OSB as internal sheathing that doubles as vapour control and airtightness layer, sheepswool between studs and then I've counterbattened outside the timber frame for additional sheepswool, beather membrane, battens and cladding. Overall it'll perform on a par with the woodfibre and saved me nearly £9k overall on insulation.
  5. SimonD
    I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at here @Russell griffiths. You're now saying something different from your OP which said: What I said was that 'sheathing' is the term typically used in modern timber stick framing to denote a structural component in the timber frame (which, by definition would be done with a proper fixing schedule). This provides the wall with its racking strength. It was to help the OP find the information he was looking for which he'd failed to find using the term "racking." If you don't use a structural sheathing board you do, of course, need something to provide racking strength. But generally speaking: Again from the Structural Timber Association: "The racking wall gains its strength from a wood-based board sheathing material or plasterboard lining material fixed to the wall studs which provides racking stability and sliding resistance by its connection to the horizontal diaphragms and foundations." (http://www.structuraltimber.co.uk/assets/InformationCentre/eb4.pdf) A mere search on google for racking or sheathing will tell you the difference in how those terms are generally used in this context. There are always exceptions and alternative ways to do things. On my current project I have an unusual structural design that uses structural osb lining boards on the inside of the timber frame with no external sheathing. What I've said has nothing to do with minimum or better standards, nor poor workmanship, it's about terminology. If at the end of the day you prefer to use "racking," that's fine by me. I just won't and will stick with "sheathing." ?
  6. SimonD
    Splitting hairs there me thinks ? and potentially misleading and vague. At the risk of being pedantic "sheathing" is both common and formal parlence in modern stick framing. If you doubt what I say here are definitions of timber frame by: 1. TRADA: "Timber frame construction uses timber studs and rails, together with a structural sheathing board, to form a structural frame that transmits all vertical and horizontal loads to the foundations. (https://www.trada.co.uk/start-here/timber-frame-construction/)" 2. Structural Timber Association: "Design of timber frame wall panels The lateral stability of the studs against buckling is provided by either a sheathing material or from the provision of timber blockings i.e. noggins or dwangs at intermediate positions in the stud height, to allow fixing of sheathings or to provide lateral restraint about the minor axis of the studs" Resistance to horizontal actions is provided by the in-plane shear resistance (or racking resistance) of sheathed wall panels which are connected together to act as contiguous wall diaphragms. Racking resistance is covered in part 2. " (http://www.structuraltimber.co.uk/assets/InformationCentre/timberframeeb3.pdf) There really is no need to double up sheathing to both sides of the studs in most cases for domestic buildings, except perhaps under particular circumstances where you need a specialist shear wall.
  7. SimonD
    That's good to know! Edit, ours were rejected for this and I've just looked on our regional requirements which still contain this, even with the latest guidance dated 2017. Has there been more recent change?
  8. SimonD
    the irony of this is that if you then need to submit drawings to planning, for example, they'll be rejected with this note, but notes to the effect of scaling from 'figured dimensions' is okay.
  9. SimonD
    You can use something like this https://www.strongtie.co.uk/products/detail/sole-plate-anchor/408 - sometimes they're installed fully to the inside like an angle bracket.
  10. SimonD
    see also 'sheathing'
  11. SimonD
    On our project, the only people to provide dwg where the company who did the topographical survey and architectural technician who I specifically asked to provide dwgs (as he did the existing site drawings). I think they're mostly worried you'll steal their drawings and use them for other purposes, or that you might unintentionally change something and cock up the drawing leading to a build problem. However, if you really want dwg files, you can import pdfs created by cad software back into a cad programme and go from there. It's also sensible not to fully rely on drawing dimensions as many of the larger general arrangement drawings can be 1:50. Many suppliers won't accept drawing dimensions other than for quotation purposes and insist on as built dimensions for production. In my case, I can tell you that with this project, if I had gone with drawing dimensions, both my steel frame and glulam beams would have been wrong.The steel columns wouldn't have been high enough and glulam beams would'nt have reached the end walls of the house. That's some professionals for you....
  12. SimonD
    I've never used a product like the one you've linked above which looks more like an acoustic product designed to reduce impact noise through intermediate floors. How this might work to get rid of squeeking noises I have no idea I'm afraid. TG floors will provide an excellent floor free of squeaks. In your current situation, as previously suggested you've already added fixings, I guess at minimum 150mm intervals around the edges and 300mm in between but even better if it's 'shit loads' ?. You've also added noggings and you've checked as best as you can to see if there are any obvious gaps between joists and subfloor. The next options really are to either add a floating floor on top of the existing installation and see if that works, or take up the existing chipboard, check joist installation and then re-install an alternative subfloor, probably plywood to see if this rectifies things. I'd say that in the first instance it might be worth laying a large 8 x 4 sheet of plywood on top of the existing floor in the area you've gots squeaks to see if this helps. If this works you can then proceed with installing a floating floor otherwise do the drastic. It's really difficult to say exactly what would work without seeing it all in situ
  13. SimonD
    Yeah, usually its TG2 for the large 8 x 4 and TG4 for the 8 x 2.
  14. SimonD
    @LA3222 's explanation is spot on. Much better put than mine! ? I would go for plywood subfloor over chipboard any day. Whilst chipboard floor may well be ok, I personally don't like it that much but that's just personal preference and many chipboard installations are just fine.So I'm not saying chipboard is more suited. I think plywood is a better product. However, re the plywood, 22mm is overkill as it's usually used in commercial floor applications where heavier floor loads are design for. You'd be absolutely fine with 18mm plywood at 400 centres. 22mm would be belt and braces. However, I would recommend carefully checking the joist installation prior to laying any new subfloor. I don't know if you've already said this but do use the TG4 (tongue & groove 4 sides) plywood flooring sheets. Now, you can use tg4 plywood as a floating floor, but my worry about putting this straight over your existing floors is that if there is some defect in the joist installation, it may not resolve the problem of subfloor creaks. Although you could lay a large 18mm sheet of plywood over your existing floor, walk on it and see what happens? Maybe worth a try?
  15. SimonD
    My suspicion is that the problem lies with the joist installation rather than the subfloor per se. With carcassing timber it's not uncommon to get them with several mm difference in finished dimensions, even when they're regularised, because they're nominal dimensions. Similarly, if a joist or more was slightly bent vertically and installed with the curve concave instead of convex, for example, you'll likely get subfloor movement, even when screwed. If there's insufficient glue, this will not help. If the joists don't provide a sufficient level structure, even installing plywood is risky as any undulation will still need to be spanned by the subfloor. At 400cc that could mean an 800 cc span which is above the recommended max of 600cc even for 22mm ply.
  16. SimonD
    You've pretty much got to go back to planning with your changes. The question is whether your local PD will consider the changes material or non-material. I've been successful getting changes to windows through as non-material amendments which makes life easier and cheaper and you can do it very easily yourself. The only problem is that it is your local planning department who decides whether what you're asking is material, minor material, or non-material. Helpfully my local PD had a clear policy online I could use, but it's worth giving them a call if there's nothing available online for you.
  17. SimonD
    That's the traditional way of building a timber frame wall (although it's usually not with the cladding in place due to weight), so you're spot on. I little tip to make things easier when lifting is to put some 4 inch nails diagonally through the sole plate into the floor before you lift the wall. This will stop the wall from sliding off the side of your floor when you're part way through the lift. Have fun!
  18. SimonD
    Just one more question. I guess you've checked the installed lengths of the joists?
  19. SimonD
    Screws don't have the required shear strength so should never be used for joist hangers. Also, the nailing pattern for joist hangers varies according the installation so you don't always have to nail all holes. I use metal connector nails using a positive placement nailer, makes life a whole load easier for joist hangers.If joists are installed correctly, the nails won't experience forces that pull out the nails.
  20. SimonD
    Sorry if I missed this already but what depth are your joists? Am I correct in reading that the span is 3m? I guess you've checked you haven't got any twisted joists throughout the installation? And the other question is whether the original joists were installed when wet? (this is one of my pet hates about some builder/timber merchants storing carcassing timber exposed to the weather and then installing them that way. With framing timber, for example, there's a maximum allowable moisture content above which you don't frame with the timber). You'll always have some timber joist deflection, it's just a question of whether it's within the correct tolerances. I personally prefer TG4 OSB floor boards to chipboard, and plywood of course is very good, but more expensive. At 18mm thickness the OSB is fine for up to 600mm joist centres so at 400 cc you've got a good margin. OSB glued and sufficiently nailed should give you a creek free subfloor, but that does depend on the joist installation.
  21. SimonD
    Isn't that the unfortunate truth. Beyond the initial design phase, all the meetings we had with our architect ended muddier than they began with rare moments of undertaking to get this done within a specified timeline. I also had to sack the SE our architect wanted to use and refused to pay him a penny. We also got caught between all the builders we spoke to wanting more details and architect saying there's no point as they don't get used anyway. If it's a straightforward house using standard building techniques then I'd argue details are less important. If it's unusual design and/or materials, or you're building to a standard like Passivhaus, then the details and specification are far more important. For me this demonstrates the problems we've got in the construction industry in the UK. Having the poorest quality of building construction in the developed world is in part down to this disconnect and lack of trust between the 'professionals' - e.g. your architects - and the builders, many of them with questionable training, experience and standards and who often think they know better. I grant you that sometimes they do, but to the extent that is accepted in the industry? Anyway, that's got me on my high horse and probably hasn't helped @ianfish
  22. SimonD
    We found that all apart from one of the architects proposing for our job only quoted for RIBA stages up to planning. It means you then get hit with a major additional cost once you've got through planning.I think a lot of self-builders are put out by this and thus choose a different route? I think there are advantages if the architect works with the SEas you can get more integrated design as if they're involved independently I think they can focus too much on their own areas without necessarily considering the others.For example, the structural scheme imposes itself too much on the aesthetic or vice versa. I think the best solution is to have an explicit conversation with the architect as to the exact nature of the agreement and ensure it's all in writing.
  23. SimonD
    I'm guessing it's for some other design purpose that the architect/SE used univeral columns rather than universal beams where the joists could either be notched into the flange and braced with noggings at the ends or face fixed on packers within the flanges? I'd go with @markc that you could probably just use noggings between the ends of the joists bearing onto the welded flange, but I guess you'd want some prevention of potential uplift. Otherwise, you could bolt timber plates to the side of the universal columns and then use normal joist hangers. Hopefully your architect or SE will clarify this for you.
  24. SimonD
    A good excuse is that if you're doing a traditional feather edge fence you nail it all on your side of the fence, automatically giving you the nice face. Otherwise you'd have to be in their garden doing all the nailing.
  25. SimonD
    I've just installed windows using the Soudal SWS foam which has a sound insulation value of 60 dB - I've been quite impressed by how well the foam insulates for sound. I'd be surprised if the Illbruck was any worse.
×
×
  • Create New...