Calculate beam for removal of load-bearing wall

[Gralov]

Hello,

I'm considering removing a load-bearing wall to create a larger living room. I know the wall is load-bearing since half of it leading up to the entrance hall has already been removed and replaced with a piece of railway track around 60-70 years ago.
Anyway, the plan is to remove the entire wall and entrance hall, and I would need some help with the calculations. I've used the tool here https://www.byggbeskrivningar.se/dimensionering/med-meny/?cid=931 to check some calculations. However, there are some parameters for our house that don't quite match what is available in the tool. Our house is an old house with a broken roof, which there are no options for in the tool, of course.

Anyway, the wall I want to remove is 370cm long as shown in the drawing. The house is brick, and I would really like to embed the beam in the wall instead of mounting it on pillars if possible (that's how the existing shorter beam is already installed).
The calculations I've made using the tool above suggest I could use a 90x360 GL30c laminated beam and get a deformation of 11mm, but I would prefer a steel beam since it would likely have a smaller build.

The drawing shows there are walls on the upper floor in the same spot as those I will remove on the ground floor. These are no longer there but have been moved slightly and are no longer brick, so the weight is not there.

The floor above is a wooden beam floor with beams about 100x220mm placed roughly 100cm apart, the spacing is somewhat irregular. On top, there is a tongue-and-groove wooden floor.

The house is 7 meters wide, with a ceiling height of about 2.6 meters, and the wall is about 3 meters in from one side. The opening I want to create is 370cm and extends from the gable of the house to the wall where the staircase rests in the drawing.

I appreciate any help I can get.

 

[justusandersson]

Can you specify which walls are there now and where the train tracks are located? What is the material of the partition walls? Brick or plank? Has it been remodeled into a single-family house?

 

[Gralov]

Can you specify which walls are present now and where the railway track is located? What is the material of the partition walls? Brick or plank? Has it been converted into a single-family house?

The house is now a single-family home, so we own and live in the entire house. I'll see if I can be clear.

On the ground floor, the left part of the wall is completely gone and supported by what looked like a piece of railway track when we were working on the floors upstairs. So approximately 2.5 meters.

The rest of the walls we want to remove are brick. The outer walls are also brick.

This piece of rail/beam that is there now is intended to be taken down, remove the marked walls above, and get a longer beam to put all the way across (370cm).


On the upper floor, the marked walls were previously brick, these have also been removed long ago and the vertical on the image moved about 20 cm towards the stairs. The horizontal wall on the upper floor is in the same place as on the drawing but is now a stud wall with what I believe are 45x95 studs and, from what I can see with the stud finder, it seems to be at cc45.
We don't want to do anything with this on the upper floor, I'm just providing this information in case it affects the load-bearing calculation for the beam on the ground floor, as I assume a brick wall weighs a lot more than a stud wall.

 

[justusandersson]

The self-weight of walls is small in relation to the loads from roofs and floor structures, where the so-called useful load from people and furnishings is the dominant factor. In Helsingborg, the snow loads are not very large either, especially not with a sloped roof. You don't need to mention that the exterior walls are brick walls, but 1/2-brick partition walls as core walls are a bit unusual. I will try to comment more a little later. The drawings are exemplary.

 

[Gralov]

The self-weight of walls is small compared to roof and floor loads, where the so-called useful load from people and furniture is the dominant factor. In Helsingborg, snow loads are not that significant either, especially not with a pitched roof. You don't need to mention that the exterior walls are brick walls, but it is somewhat unusual for 1/2-brick walls to be used as interior walls. I will try to comment more a bit later. The drawings are exemplary.

No, we don't have much snow here, and with the poor insulation in these old houses, the snow usually melts away before it has a chance to settle on the roofs. I wasn't aware that it's unusual for interior walls to be built from brick. Most houses in this area are built that way. Perhaps there was a surplus of bricks at the time of construction.

I have taken a picture of how everything looks in reality. The yellow marking is where the rail/beam is, of course, and the red marking is where we want to remove the wall.

 

[justusandersson]

That it was unusual with partitions that are brick-built

I did not express myself that way. Load-bearing partitions that are only half a brick thick are unusual. Normally, they are a full brick thick. Partitions in masonry brick are extremely common.

 

[Gralov]

That's not how I expressed myself. Load-bearing partition walls that are only half a brick thick are uncommon. Normally, they are a full brick thick. Partition walls in brick masonry are enormously common.

Ah, do I understand you correctly that you mean it's not common for the core walls to be as thin as half a brick?

 

[justusandersson]

Yes.

 

[Gralov]

Yes.

Okay, then I apologize for the misunderstanding.

 

[justusandersson]

The load on the wall heart is about 15 kN/m. Considering the beam is to replace a wall heart (i.e., a primary structure) and the span is 3.7 meters, the smallest possible glulam beam would be 215x315. (There are more but higher variants) A steel alternative is HEA 200. With cladding, the height difference is not significantly large. The installation advantages of glulam outweigh, in my opinion. The beam, regardless of type, must rest on two pillars which in turn must stand on the basement wall. All variants of glulam pillars are suitable. The choice should be made according to the beam's dimensions. Since the action requires a building application with structural calculations, I suggest you contact a local structural engineer.

 

[Gralov]

The load on the heart wall is around 15 kN/m. Taking into account that the beam is to replace a heart wall (i.e., a primary load-bearing structure) and that the span is 3.7 m, the lowest possible glulam beam is 215x315. (There are more but taller variants) A steel alternative is HEA 200. With cladding, the height difference isn't decisively large. The installation advantages of glulam outweigh, in my view. The beam, regardless of type, must rest on two columns, which in turn should stand on the basement wall. All variations of glulam columns suffice. The choice should be made considering the dimensions of the beam. Since the measure requires a construction notification with structural calculations, I suggest contacting a local structural engineer.

Thank you for the response.
A local structural engineer will be hired when it comes time. Just want to explore a bit.
Why is it that you can't recess the beam into the wall so that it rests on the brick? The existing beam is mounted in this manner.

 

[justusandersson]

Maybe you can, but it's not something you can calculate remotely. You need to know the quality of the brick and mortar. The point load will also be higher than with the current beam.

 

[Gralov]

You might be able to, but it's not something that can be calculated remotely. You need to know the quality of the brick and mortar. The point load will also be higher than with the current beam.

Okay, I understand. Thank you for all your help.