Hello,
I have read a couple of threads about catwalks and their walls. From what I've read, the walls leading into these spaces are often load-bearing. I haven't seen any thread that describes my type of wall.
I don't think the wall seems load-bearing, but I want to hear your experiences. Many of you are well-informed.
Attached is a compilation of images.
House:
- 1.5 stories with a basement
- Built in 1948
- Wood frame
- Approx. 9x7m (LxW)
- Approx. 40° roof pitch
- 2 dormers on the roof
Upstairs, there is a room at each gable. The plan is to remove all the side walls (i.e., catwalk walls) in both rooms to utilize the floor space better. In conjunction with re-roofing, we plan to install 2 skylights in the sloped roof, one in each room.
Unfortunately, I have not been able to obtain any original drawings. I tried to get them from the municipality and land survey without success.
The catwalk walls are placed at different distances from the outer wall in both rooms. 1.4m in the children's room and 1.2m in the bedroom.
I tore off the cladding on one of the two catwalk walls in the children's room to see how the wall is constructed and fastened.
The wall consists of standing tongue-and-groove planks 2"x6". This was clad with Tretex boards. As I understand it, this is how inner walls were built in the past. Load-bearing and non-load-bearing walls often consisted of standing rough planks. That is, there are no hefty support posts for each top frame.
Inside the catwalk, the sheathing is nailed to the top frames, and then the wall is erected. The tongue-and-groove standing planks stand on two horizontal beams at the bottom. The entire wall stands directly on the floor joists.
The wall's top plate (on top of the standing planks) is beveled in length to fit against the sloped roof. The wall is only fastened with a few large nails into the rafters. No other offloads or joints. This suggests to me that the wall should not take up loads from the rafters. The force component from the roof load would then want to push the wall inward, and the wall should then be better anchored in the rafters in my opinion. There will be a large shear force on the nails. But of course, the wall does take some vertical load. But that can hardly be the main purpose of the wall?
Rafters
o Dimension: 5x14.5cm (both collar beam and top plate)
o Distance: Slightly varying, but approx. CC 91cm at the catwalk wall
o Number: 10 in total in the house
o Ceiling height in the children's room: 238cm
In direct line with the rafters, there is no floor joist. The rafters do not have the same distance as the floor joists. The floor joists are spaced about 54cm apart and are made of 5x14.5cm beams.
Under the catwalk walls, on the ground floor, there are no load-bearing walls. The load-bearing wall on the ground floor runs along the house and is located in the middle.
The door openings in the walls are placed differently. In some cases, the door opening is placed directly under a rafter. Not an optimal placement if the wall is supposed to be load-bearing.
The inner wall of the catwalk is about 60cm high and consists of standing 4" wide planks.
It does not seem like the wall is loaded at the moment. It was easy to lift the wall with a crowbar. But now the roof is admittedly not loaded with snow.
I can't find much info on the internet about rafters that don't have support posts down to the joists, hence my concern. The rafters I have seen that need support down to the joists have "stödben" and not a whole "stödvägg". That is, hefty beams that are well anchored in both the top plate and joists. That is not the case in my situation.
What is the term for my type of rafter?
What do you think? Anyone who thinks it is load-bearing or supportive? Appreciate all input.
Thank you!
I have read a couple of threads about catwalks and their walls. From what I've read, the walls leading into these spaces are often load-bearing. I haven't seen any thread that describes my type of wall.
I don't think the wall seems load-bearing, but I want to hear your experiences. Many of you are well-informed.
Attached is a compilation of images.
House:
- 1.5 stories with a basement
- Built in 1948
- Wood frame
- Approx. 9x7m (LxW)
- Approx. 40° roof pitch
- 2 dormers on the roof
Upstairs, there is a room at each gable. The plan is to remove all the side walls (i.e., catwalk walls) in both rooms to utilize the floor space better. In conjunction with re-roofing, we plan to install 2 skylights in the sloped roof, one in each room.
Unfortunately, I have not been able to obtain any original drawings. I tried to get them from the municipality and land survey without success.
The catwalk walls are placed at different distances from the outer wall in both rooms. 1.4m in the children's room and 1.2m in the bedroom.
I tore off the cladding on one of the two catwalk walls in the children's room to see how the wall is constructed and fastened.
The wall consists of standing tongue-and-groove planks 2"x6". This was clad with Tretex boards. As I understand it, this is how inner walls were built in the past. Load-bearing and non-load-bearing walls often consisted of standing rough planks. That is, there are no hefty support posts for each top frame.
Inside the catwalk, the sheathing is nailed to the top frames, and then the wall is erected. The tongue-and-groove standing planks stand on two horizontal beams at the bottom. The entire wall stands directly on the floor joists.
The wall's top plate (on top of the standing planks) is beveled in length to fit against the sloped roof. The wall is only fastened with a few large nails into the rafters. No other offloads or joints. This suggests to me that the wall should not take up loads from the rafters. The force component from the roof load would then want to push the wall inward, and the wall should then be better anchored in the rafters in my opinion. There will be a large shear force on the nails. But of course, the wall does take some vertical load. But that can hardly be the main purpose of the wall?
Rafters
o Dimension: 5x14.5cm (both collar beam and top plate)
o Distance: Slightly varying, but approx. CC 91cm at the catwalk wall
o Number: 10 in total in the house
o Ceiling height in the children's room: 238cm
In direct line with the rafters, there is no floor joist. The rafters do not have the same distance as the floor joists. The floor joists are spaced about 54cm apart and are made of 5x14.5cm beams.
Under the catwalk walls, on the ground floor, there are no load-bearing walls. The load-bearing wall on the ground floor runs along the house and is located in the middle.
The door openings in the walls are placed differently. In some cases, the door opening is placed directly under a rafter. Not an optimal placement if the wall is supposed to be load-bearing.
The inner wall of the catwalk is about 60cm high and consists of standing 4" wide planks.
It does not seem like the wall is loaded at the moment. It was easy to lift the wall with a crowbar. But now the roof is admittedly not loaded with snow.
I can't find much info on the internet about rafters that don't have support posts down to the joists, hence my concern. The rafters I have seen that need support down to the joists have "stödben" and not a whole "stödvägg". That is, hefty beams that are well anchored in both the top plate and joists. That is not the case in my situation.
What is the term for my type of rafter?
What do you think? Anyone who thinks it is load-bearing or supportive? Appreciate all input.
Thank you!
Self-builder
· Stockholm
· 8 605 posts
In most cases, the wall itself may not be load-bearing, but usually, the knee wall is placed so that the studs supporting the roof truss are within this wall. So you can probably remove the wall panels, but make sure not to remove any load-bearing elements for the roof trusses.
In the pictures/descriptions you've provided, it doesn't seem like this is a typical knee wall encapsulating load-bearing elements... as mentioned, the wall panels themselves are not load-bearing, but the framework inside is...
Moreover, your roof truss construction seems a bit tricky; you usually have struts (e.g., as in the Mansard roof truss: http://www.traguiden.se/konstruktion/konstruktiv-utformning/stomme/tak/sadeltak/). Otherwise, you risk the construction moving.
Maybe someone removed these struts at some point in time!?
But if the house has stood for 50 years without them, it should probably hold up; maybe the interior walls on the upper floor, where it's likely properly reinforced, are sufficient. However, the knee walls might have provided that "little extra" support, so you might want to keep an eye on it—or, to be sure, consult a structural engineer to assess it...
/K
In the pictures/descriptions you've provided, it doesn't seem like this is a typical knee wall encapsulating load-bearing elements... as mentioned, the wall panels themselves are not load-bearing, but the framework inside is...
Moreover, your roof truss construction seems a bit tricky; you usually have struts (e.g., as in the Mansard roof truss: http://www.traguiden.se/konstruktion/konstruktiv-utformning/stomme/tak/sadeltak/). Otherwise, you risk the construction moving.
Maybe someone removed these struts at some point in time!?
But if the house has stood for 50 years without them, it should probably hold up; maybe the interior walls on the upper floor, where it's likely properly reinforced, are sufficient. However, the knee walls might have provided that "little extra" support, so you might want to keep an eye on it—or, to be sure, consult a structural engineer to assess it...
/K
Last edited:
Renovator
· Näverkajakens födelseort
· 797 posts
Saying like Klas, it seems like a framework truss. If I were you, I would start by bringing in a designer to check. If it is a framework truss, it might be possible to remove the braces provided that they are replaced with other support legs. In any case, I wouldn't tear them down and take a chance, it would be a bit nerve-wracking to have a roof with an associated joist fall on your head when you're standing and frying meatballs 
Hello and thank you for your responses.
No, there are no individual strong beams anchored in each rafter in the wall; instead, the wall is homogeneous made of planks.
Yes, normally there are usually braces, but I cannot see evidence that braces once existed elsewhere in the kneewall space.
It shouldn't be a framework if the rafters are not aligned with the floor joists, right? I have different CC measurements on the rafters and floor joists.
No, there are no individual strong beams anchored in each rafter in the wall; instead, the wall is homogeneous made of planks.
Yes, normally there are usually braces, but I cannot see evidence that braces once existed elsewhere in the kneewall space.
It shouldn't be a framework if the rafters are not aligned with the floor joists, right? I have different CC measurements on the rafters and floor joists.
Self-builder
· Stockholm
· 8 605 posts
It doesn't have to be that the rafters are exactly in line with the floor joists...Jhony said:
/K
Renovator
· Näverkajakens födelseort
· 797 posts
Then you can make a framework roof with a homogeneous wall instead of support legs. If those who built it wanted to have storage in the knee walls, it becomes a bit complicated to place support legs and then build wall sections in between; in that case, it is easier to put up full planks.
Interesting thread, I live in an old faluhus built in '58, which they added a second floor to in '78. I'm going to drill for geothermal heating and wanted a drawing of the plot where I can mark where the drill should be. The guy at the municipality asked if I wanted all the documents on the house, thought it would be interesting so he sent everything. On the drawings of the roof trusses, you can see that the beams for the kattvind have a supporting function, so it's probably safest to keep them.
Self-builder
· Stockholm
· 8 605 posts
There could be several reasons why it looks the way it does:Jhony said:
1. The framework for the roof truss is removed/incorrectly made - the house still stands, so the question is whether the little support the kattvindsväggen provided affects it?
2. The kattvindsväggen was supportive, the attachment is not critical since the loads that need to be absorbed mostly go downward (some kind of framework is required though since the panels won't make much difference as they will bend otherwise).