attic wall load-bearing or not?

[xyle]

The trusses look like the ones in the picture I sent. I have 9 of them, and about 4 have knee walls underneath. But perhaps the upper trusses can be reinforced to be safe?

 

[MB77]

Yes, there can be load-bearing parts in an attic crawl space that are covered by the attic wall/panels, I wrote that the actual attic crawl space wall is not part of the load-bearing construction. Instead of picking on me, delve into how the roof truss in this thread is constructed; there are many types of roof truss solutions out there, but if the attic crawl space is missing on some of the roof trusses, it seems logical that they are not load-bearing in this case.

Calm down, it wasn't my intention to upset you.

You wrote attic crawl space wall, which I interpret as the WHOLE wall and not the surface layer.

Anyway, what I wanted to point out is that it's common for these cold attic spaces to be load-bearing.

Have a nice evening...

 

[MB77]

There are no walls underneath, just one in the other direction right where the bedroom ends approximately. Yes, I almost have to check with a consultant. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone! As I said, I assumed they really weren't load-bearing when I was looking around in the attic and crawl space. But as mentioned, I became unsure when I saw similar walls here on the forum that people thought were load-bearing. I understand it's difficult for you to see in the pictures if they're load-bearing or not. But is there something specific you can check for? And I don't have an increased wall cavity, the wall stops right at the floor joists on the upper floor.

The fact that you don't have an increased wall cavity is to your advantage, but I still think you should check this with an expert.

 

[xyle]

Yes, that's probably how it will be! Just thought I'd check here first to see what you think. Thank you so much

 

[Anna_H]

As mentioned, I am completely convinced that the cladding, the standing planks, are NOT load-bearing; however, any possible studs are very likely load-bearing. However, these are probably level with the low wall seen on the left.

 

[Locke]

Well, how they built roof structures in the past is not really relevant to the question in the thread...?

If you look at image number 2, you can see that the knee wall consists of standing planks; how could such a thing be load-bearing? A load-bearing wall must consist of pillars, beams, and braces in between for the planks in the wall to interact in some way and absorb any vertical loads.

The house is from 1942. Back then, walls weren't built like they are today.

Small houses were often constructed with load-bearing wooden frames of tongued 2" planks. On top of this, insulation made of materials like rock wool or reeds was affixed with battens.

The entire wall section functions as a rigid panel, so no braces are needed.

The knee wall can be part of the framework rafter's support legs.

You need to look closely in the attic. Sometimes there are hewn rafters whose thickness varies along their length. They didn't use thicker wood than necessary.

It's tricky to demolish old houses. I suggest that those of you who are entirely sure about giving the green light for demolition also share your insurance policy number for your professional liability insurance, so that any moisture damage due to sagging and leakage, or even more serious damage due to collapse, can be settled smoothly.

 

[Seglarvännen]

....
It's tricky to tear down old houses. I suggest that those who can confidently give the go-ahead for demolition also share their insurance number for their professional liability insurance, so that any potential water damage due to sagging and leakage or even more serious damage due to collapse can be smoothly resolved.

Yes, you can kill a thread by talking about liability and the like, and then no one will dare to help out voluntarily in the future with tips and ideas...?

 

[Seglarvännen]

Yes, that's probably how it will be! Just wanted to check here first what you think. Thank you so much

Please follow up in this thread when you have had a visit from a professional/constructor regarding whether the kattvinden is load-bearing or not.

 

[Locke]

Yes, talking about consulting responsibilities and similar topics might kill a thread, and then no one will dare to help voluntarily with tips and ideas in the future...?

A bunch of enthusiastic amateurs shouting "just tear it down, go for it" is not helpful. Don't you understand that it can cause problems for people if they start tearing down load-bearing parts without knowing what they're doing?

There are clear examples of non-load-bearing walls that can be identified at a glance by looking at some pictures - this is not one of those.

 

[daugaard]

very little risk that the wall is load-bearing, and if it was built to be load-bearing, I would be more nervous about how they constructed the rest of the house but you can never be sure because even a non-load-bearing wall can become "load-bearing" due to various damages to the roof structure!
I would remove the wall without worrying too much

 

[KnockOnWood]

Yes, you can kill a thread by talking about consulting responsibility and the like, and then no one will dare to voluntarily help with tips and ideas in the future...?

It's a good tip to be cautious before starting to tear down something where the function is unexplored!

 

[Seglarvännen]

It's a good tip to be cautious before tearing down something where the function is uninvestigated!

Anonymous tips and ideas read on a general construction forum shouldn't determine whether to tear down or not. Shouldn't xyle check with a professional first? If you don't have the expertise to determine what's load-bearing or not, an investigation must take place on site, preferably with original drawings as a basis.

 

[KnockOnWood]

And that is exactly what, among others, Locke does.

While you have confidently stated that

I have not heard of an attic wall being load-bearing or part of the roof structure's load-bearing. It's the rafters' job to handle the loads from above and distribute them to the facade walls.

and

Well, how roof constructions were built in the past is not relevant to the question in the thread...?

If you look at picture no. 2, you can see that the attic wall consists of standing planks, how could such a wall be load-bearing? A load-bearing wall must consist of columns, beams, and braces between them for the planks in the wall to be able to cooperate in some way and take up any vertical loads.

But it's good if you change your mind now. It is precisely such confident statements that can create problems for the unsuspecting questioner.

 

[Seglarvännen]

A clear example that everything you write can be used against you... How many dare to write anything at all when there are forum police everywhere?

I wrote a few posts in this thread about how load-bearing constructions are usually designed, why would I change my mind? The information is solely based on logical thinking since we don't have an overall picture. It's not just the questioner seeking knowledge, even the sun has its spots, I can afford to admit, can you dare to do the same?

 

[KnockOnWood]

...It's not only the questioner who's seeking knowledge, even the sun has its spots I can afford to admit, do you dare to do the same?

You are absolutely right, and yes, I actually think that applies to most people