Load-bearing or non-load-bearing, two structural engineers say different
Just go for it, no one remembers a coward 😉Vrana said:
The standard is probably a bit different today, so if you ask someone to make an assessment today, it's quite possible they won't approve it.
If there are no drawings and construction calculations for the rafters, I would take it cautiously.
If you've received a statement from a designer who has simply read the existing documentation and concluded that it's self-supporting, they've done an analysis as deep as you could do by reading it yourself.
To make a correct assessment, they need to know how the rafters are constructed.
For low-pitched self-supporting, 8m is quite long, and depending on where in the country, they may need to be quite sturdy to be approved, if they are approved at all without a third support.
Drawings don't tell everything. In older houses, forces may have shifted because everything settles over time. Small movements in the foundation and/or other settling. Walls that were not load-bearing may very well have become load-bearing. They cannot be demolished without further consideration.
Hello
You have at least two paths to take.
One path is a glulam beam or steel beam in the room.
The other path is to reinforce the roof truss while you're replacing the insulation.
There are advantages to the latter as it avoids visible posts and beams and makes it much cheaper and easier to address.
Relying on the old potentially unfavorably aged roof trusses without inspection may make you a candidate for the not-so-honorable "Darwin Award",
/Workingclasshero
You have at least two paths to take.
One path is a glulam beam or steel beam in the room.
The other path is to reinforce the roof truss while you're replacing the insulation.
There are advantages to the latter as it avoids visible posts and beams and makes it much cheaper and easier to address.
Relying on the old potentially unfavorably aged roof trusses without inspection may make you a candidate for the not-so-honorable "Darwin Award",
/Workingclasshero
You mean that free-standing roof trusses may have changed function over time?M måns hagberg said:
How so?
Perhaps not changed function, but reduced function depending on, for example, non-galvanized nails, weak construction that has settled, moisture that has made the wood porous, insects that have gnawed.Nissens said:
Inspection of the roof trusses will provide the answers.
/W
No load-bearing wall in the basement under the room.
99% freeing trusses.
Here's what I would have done:
Removed the boards from the current wall.
Test-saw 3 vertical wall studs next to each other in the middle.
Is the saw pinched? Install a laminated beam.
99% freeing trusses.
Here's what I would have done:
Removed the boards from the current wall.
Test-saw 3 vertical wall studs next to each other in the middle.
Is the saw pinched? Install a laminated beam.
Spontaneously, it looks like the wall is load-bearing; if there is a brick wall in the basement in the same line, it is almost certain. A picture of the truss shows how it is. If it is load-bearing, you can solve it with a beam with a pillar at each end. Or consider a larger double door in the wall, then you can install a beam above the door opening, which is easier; it can be good to be able to close off the kitchen sometimes.
It says free-spanning truss. But if it feels uncertain, you can place two sturdy 45x195 beams in the attic above where you plan to demolish. Remove some wood shavings, and hang the 195x45 support beams well on/against the outer wall on a well-secured bearing. Let the support beams extend about 1.5-2 meters past your "intended wall hole." A 45x195 weighs about 4.1 kg per meter and is quite easy to handle. Make one or two bearings for the support beams right above what is commonly called the heart wall (usually directly below/along the roof ridge). With sturdy perforated straps (available at a well-stocked hardware store), you loop the straps around the rafters of the house's roof that you want to reinforce. Then loop the straps around the support beams, tighten the strap, and fix it with screws through the strap so that it forms a circular band. Screw and secure the support beams to the bearings, also fix the support beams so they don't tip over. Construction angles are great tools. Your new intended wall hole isn't that large; I "guess" about 3-4 meters max. So when it says self-supporting trusses, a steel beam seems highly exaggerated.
The neighbor's engineer seems a bit unusual since they say it must be steel. Of course, wood works just as well, the difference being that a steel beam is more slender.
I am an engineer, and as many have written, more info is needed to be 100% sure. But based on it being described as self-supporting and the fact that the wall doesn't have any support in the basement (no wall underneath), I would guess it's non-load-bearing.
Another effect besides the risk of collapse if a load-bearing wall is removed is that the load on the support on the facade increases to about double. And since there are windows in the facade, there is likely a beam above that gets more load and can deform, leading to broken windows as a consequence.
Open up so the truss is visible or check with the municipality if there are plans available. Then contact an engineer affiliated with SBR. That way, it will surely go well.
Yes, if they are load-bearing, it's to support the roof.Ã…ke Hultgren said:
The fact that a wall that was not intended to be load-bearing has weight on it does not mean it should be considered load-bearing.M måns hagberg said:
My feeling is that you are absolutely right. My feeling also says that if you reinforce the outer truss, you distribute the force over the entire wall/frame. So a window opening is not affected. Or? I would like to know if you have any opinions.StrukturalAB said: