I have torn down the knee wall now the whole house is thumping

[mlaf]

Older trusses, in my experience, are significantly less well-dimensioned than modern ones. Comparing the trusses in my previous house with a similar span to my current house, the current ones feel a bit like toothpicks in comparison (the former built in -80, this one in -49)

I have the impression that older trusses often are indeed weaker, and I’ve also heard from a designer that since the "Eurocodes" came out, the sizing has run completely amok; someone on ByggaHus was talking about it being over-engineered.

I own an old house and a designer who looked at the trusses said they shouldn't hold, but they've lasted for over three hundred years

 

[DrDengrot]

Despite the alarming responses you've received, I want to calm you down a bit. I did the same on my house from 1937 in the early '80s, long before you could get answers to questions here. Nothing negative has happened despite snow-rich winters. I believe that when no one calculated what roof trusses could bear, they went all out with dimensions, so it holds up anyway.
But that said, since you feel a difference, you should let someone knowledgeable in construction take a look at it.

The key word in your post is "believe." Don't do that when it comes to load-bearing structures where people can die if it goes wrong.

 

[Kurtivan]

The key word in your post is "believe". Do not do that when it comes to load-bearing structures where people can die if it goes wrong.

Do you know how it was done historically since you got caught up?

 

[DrDengrot]

I own an old house and a constructor who looked at the trusses said that they shouldn't hold, but they have for over three hundred years

Older trusses are usually mainly dimensioned for strength. Modern trusses with Eurocode are almost always dimensioned for stiffness. Therefore, it's generally less risky to modify a modern structure than an older one. The modern one normally has significantly more margin against failure.
This said with a caveat that the modification does not significantly change how the load is absorbed.
Many constructors do not understand these differences and have only learned to dimension using computer programs.

 

[DrDengrot]

Do you know how it was done historically since you got stuck?

It has been done in different ways, with different principles in how loads are taken up and how shear, compression/tension, and moment loads are transferred between construction elements. That can only be understood by finding out how it is done in each case and suggesting changes based on that specific case. In other words: the fact that *your* house has held when you've made changes to load-bearing parts you don't understand how they function doesn't necessarily mean that the same change is safe in TS's house. Don't assume. Find out the facts and analyze/calculate what needs to be done.

 

[Minnie Mesola]

The keyword in your post is "think". Don't do that when it comes to load-bearing structures where people can die if it goes wrong.

Exactly. Likely, there must be large numbers of houses that have been weakened in a similar way by enthusiastic amateurs who want to "open up" the floor plan, which generates the obvious question -"how many collapsed old wooden villas have you seen this week?
I myself have never even heard of a single one, ever, that just collapsed from snow and wind.

Minnie

 

[MultiMan]

I have seen several where the walls on the upper floor bulged outward.

 

[Minnie Mesola]

I've seen several where the walls on the upper floor have bulged outward.

I have too. But not any that have suddenly collapsed.

Minnie

 

[heimlaga]

So. It's likely that there must be large amounts of houses that have been weakened in a similar way by enthusiastic amateurs who want to "open up" the floor plan, which generates the obvious question -"how many collapsed old wooden villas have you seen this week? I've never even heard of a single one ever just collapsing from snow and wind.

Minnie

There are plenty of houses that have been so cut to pieces when renovated that they've distorted their visions to the point that they just barely stand upright while the settling gets worse and worse, and eventually, they are demolished because everything is crooked and skewed, and there's no framework to renovate.

I was personally involved in a renovation where the owner had a middle roof beam fall on him as he was sawing open the floor plan for himself. The long sides slid out, and the beam was pulled from its slot in the log structure. After that, I was called in. Before I could start reinforcing, I had to install temporary props all the way from the roof trusses down to the ground under the floor to create a reasonably safe workplace. I started reinforcing inside the door and continued inward.

 

[Arne Vedefors]

If you have a load-bearing wall that is demolished/altered, a building notification to the Municipality is required as well as a new K-drawing. A Construction drawing costs approximately 10 KSEK.
Good to have when you sell the house or the insurance company asks uncomfortable questions …

Someone who has just completed the work of relieving a load-bearing wall with glulam beams.

 

[heimlaga]

If you have a load-bearing wall that is being demolished/altered, a building notification is required to the Municipality along with a new K-drawing. A construction drawing costs about 10 Tkr.
Good to have when you sell the house or the insurance company asks awkward questions ...

Someone who has just completed the work of relieving a load-bearing wall with glulam beams.

If you have a load-bearing wall that is being demolished/altered, a building notification is required to the Municipality along with a new K-drawing. A construction drawing costs about 10 Tkr.
Good to have when you sell the house or the insurance company asks awkward questions ...

Someone who has just completed the work of relieving a load-bearing wall with glulam beams.

Not everywhere is it so insanely complicated.

 

[Arne Vedefors]

It's not insanely complicated everywhere.

Yes, but don't you mean in Ostrobothnia / Finland?

 

[Eriksgatan]

Note that this is the same user who created the thread with "fjällpanel" in the shower a few weeks ago and then went silent while the thread continued.
So either the OP has extreme problems with their house or the OP is an exceptionally skilled troll.

Sure, sure, and by chance, this thread is used as clickbait in a news email. How do you think the forum is financed?
But of course, they should be able to earn a decent income, and we usually learn something new anyway. So it's totally fine with me regardless of who is trolling.
Personally, I've long since stopped getting too worked up over weirdness in posts from accounts that seem new or have made few posts at all.

 

[Baboobas]

A longitudinal beam that supports the outer frames? And what will support them, all the loads from self-weight, standardized snow load, standardized room load, and other point loads must somehow be transferred down to the foundation.

That is the solution the architect recommends. I have done it myself. Important to have solid support at the ends, of course. But no bigger problem according to my experience. Additionally, an extremely cost-effective solution.

 

[Bernt Ö97]

Sure, the support beams at the knee walls are load-bearing. That's why they exist. They likely also stabilize the floor structure, but I know less about that myself. The video in the message above says that the "support beams" also hold up the underframe, which seems reasonable.

You surely have upper and forearms, but houses don't have that, they have upper and lower frames...

A slight touch of dyslexia that some of my children have inherited as well.
You'll have to be patient with the fact that some of us have defects