Hello,
We are in the process of building a stick-built house and have purchased a package with materials and construction drawings/calculations from Varbergs Trä/Arkitekthusen in Varberg. Now there have been serious errors in the construction, partly because the supplier has not provided the carpenter with complete construction drawings. The carpenter has, in any case, built, for example, the heart wall without having more information than that it is load-bearing. Now the company claims that it is their practice never to deliver construction drawings and work descriptions to the carpenters. They say that just marking on the drawings that it is a load-bearing wall should be enough for an experienced and professional carpenter to carry this out. In our case, it has not worked.
Now my question is: Is it really like this in the construction industry that they do not make complete work descriptions and drawings for the carpenters because they should "know" this kind of thing? In our contract with Varbergs Trä, it states that it includes: "Foundation constructions for standard foundation note that the material is not included—only the drawings). Dimensioned plan drawing scale 1:50. Drawings for trusses, floors, and necessary reinforcements. Framework c/c 450 45x70. (c/c 300 where tile is to be laid). Load-bearing framework c/c 450 45x95-145 and necessary reinforcements and load-bearing according to construction drawings."
What is the heart wall if not a load-bearing structure? I would really appreciate if someone could say whether what they claim is right or wrong!
We are in the process of building a stick-built house and have purchased a package with materials and construction drawings/calculations from Varbergs Trä/Arkitekthusen in Varberg. Now there have been serious errors in the construction, partly because the supplier has not provided the carpenter with complete construction drawings. The carpenter has, in any case, built, for example, the heart wall without having more information than that it is load-bearing. Now the company claims that it is their practice never to deliver construction drawings and work descriptions to the carpenters. They say that just marking on the drawings that it is a load-bearing wall should be enough for an experienced and professional carpenter to carry this out. In our case, it has not worked.
Now my question is: Is it really like this in the construction industry that they do not make complete work descriptions and drawings for the carpenters because they should "know" this kind of thing? In our contract with Varbergs Trä, it states that it includes: "Foundation constructions for standard foundation note that the material is not included—only the drawings). Dimensioned plan drawing scale 1:50. Drawings for trusses, floors, and necessary reinforcements. Framework c/c 450 45x70. (c/c 300 where tile is to be laid). Load-bearing framework c/c 450 45x95-145 and necessary reinforcements and load-bearing according to construction drawings."
What is the heart wall if not a load-bearing structure? I would really appreciate if someone could say whether what they claim is right or wrong!
If the carpenter is a professional, they should be able to see from the material what should be used where. Building a house is not that complicated. It says that load-bearing walls can be made of 45x95 or alternatively 45x145. 45x145 is usually not needed for a load-bearing interior wall with cc 450. There, you use 45x95. Usually with cc 600 to fit panels, etc. It’s the same for exterior walls.
Of course, it would have made things significantly easier for you if the architect/designer had marked the dimensions and cc on the floor plan instead of only writing it in the construction description. But that's often the case. The description is the one that applies. The drawing is just an illustration of how it should be.
Of course, it would have made things significantly easier for you if the architect/designer had marked the dimensions and cc on the floor plan instead of only writing it in the construction description. But that's often the case. The description is the one that applies. The drawing is just an illustration of how it should be.
But as I said, what mistake has he managed to make? If he knew it was load-bearing, it sounds a bit strange for it to be wrong.
Hello,
The following errors have occurred (and we do not have a job description or construction drawings because the company does not consider them necessary - isn't one usually needed?):
The load-bearing partition is missing a supporting beam, and the rafters rest on a horizontal 45x95 wall plate between the studs, which are also placed at c/c 60. After new calculations, the distance between the studs has also been found to be under-dimensioned. In some places, a c/c 300 was required instead of 450. Similarly, new calculations show that some studs should have been double or triple.
The house is a two-story house. The roofs land on the load-bearing partition with a shed roof in between. The problem with the load-bearing partition applies to both the ground floor and the upper floor. Another issue related to the load-bearing partition is that some windows have a rafter over them without sufficient support.
The following errors have occurred (and we do not have a job description or construction drawings because the company does not consider them necessary - isn't one usually needed?):
The load-bearing partition is missing a supporting beam, and the rafters rest on a horizontal 45x95 wall plate between the studs, which are also placed at c/c 60. After new calculations, the distance between the studs has also been found to be under-dimensioned. In some places, a c/c 300 was required instead of 450. Similarly, new calculations show that some studs should have been double or triple.
The house is a two-story house. The roofs land on the load-bearing partition with a shed roof in between. The problem with the load-bearing partition applies to both the ground floor and the upper floor. Another issue related to the load-bearing partition is that some windows have a rafter over them without sufficient support.
I assume there is a missing load-bearing beam under the floor, in the foundation...adv said:
Even I would realize that it's needed under a load-bearing heart wall!
Here I don't understand where the problem is unless the roof trusses don't end up above the standing studs then... In that case, a standing stud 95x45 or 145x45 should have been integrated under the tie beam as reinforcement, right?
Sounds to me like an over-dimensioning, but if the house is really heavy, maybe that's how it should be, probably at least half of the roof load is on the heart wall...
But I await what others have to say with anticipation.
From what you've described, it seems to me that the most serious error is the lack of a load-bearing beam under the heart wall, with all the load on that wall, that load-bearing beam must be well-dimensioned.
I think it seems like you hired fairly ignorant carpenters if they couldn't at least realize that.
Come on now, builder, you're the expert on strength and statics here!
Yes, how is it? Is it a common practice?adv said:
Was it one or two posts that were to be constructed by joining some studs, and then would go all the way up to the glulam beam? It's a fairly common procedure as support under the glulam beam in the ridge. However, it's essential to ensure that there is sufficient strength in the foundation under these posts.adv said:
No need. You've already said almost everything that needs to be saidMikael_L said:---
Come on builder, you're the expert on strength and statics here!
Skilled carpenters are rare. Unskilled ones are plentiful. Ask to see their professional certification.
The architect also seems to be a dumb faaan. Roof trusses cc 1200 always harmonize with cc 600 on the framework. And you draw it so it matches. Then no bearing beams on edge are needed. However, there need to be headers over window and door openings that don't match with 3M.
If the load from two floors is so large that it can't be managed with a 45x95 cc600, you brace the studs with blocking at least halfway up. It's the buckling length that becomes too long. Sometimes you need to brace at 1/3 and 2/3 of the height.
A 45x95 otherwise withstands 9 MPa/mm2, i.e., 4275 mm2 x 9 ==> 3847 kg for a stud in quality K12, i.e., the very lowest wood class (if it weren't for the buckling risk, that is).
If I understood you correctly, you copied
"Load-bearing frameworks c/c 450 45x95-145 and required reinforcements and supports according to the construction drawing"
from the contracts or equivalent? Then they're referring to the construction drawings for specific details! I also wonder regarding what the Builder wrote above, is it the case that you've received a building description where this information is stated? It might be that the carpenters should have understood this information or is it completely missing?
I would probably spend a couple of hundred bucks to let someone spend an hour or so looking at the building documents to see if they are okay and thus know whether to chase the carpenters or the architect.
In industry surveys, it has been found that about half of construction errors are caused by mistakes in the planning stage, i.e., errors behind the pen, not errors behind the hammer. Then, of course, one can discuss how many mistakes and problems are corrected on the construction site without anyone knowing about it...
"Load-bearing frameworks c/c 450 45x95-145 and required reinforcements and supports according to the construction drawing"
from the contracts or equivalent? Then they're referring to the construction drawings for specific details! I also wonder regarding what the Builder wrote above, is it the case that you've received a building description where this information is stated? It might be that the carpenters should have understood this information or is it completely missing?
I would probably spend a couple of hundred bucks to let someone spend an hour or so looking at the building documents to see if they are okay and thus know whether to chase the carpenters or the architect.
In industry surveys, it has been found that about half of construction errors are caused by mistakes in the planning stage, i.e., errors behind the pen, not errors behind the hammer. Then, of course, one can discuss how many mistakes and problems are corrected on the construction site without anyone knowing about it...
Hello,
The beam we are missing is not the one in the foundation but under the rafters and under the tie beams, as the rafters are not placed directly above the vertical posts/studs. What we call the beam for the heart wall, you might call a glued laminated timber beam in your responses? I will try to include a photo shortly. And: We have not received a work description or construction drawing or calculation for the heart wall. The drawings first passed their architect. After that, the company ordered calculations on well-selected parts from an engineer, but the heart wall was not among these ordered parts since they referred to the carpenter being able to build it without a description/construction drawing. And he has indeed started doing so, which means we now have a house that we cannot continue building as it currently stands.
Thanks for all the answers so far!
The beam we are missing is not the one in the foundation but under the rafters and under the tie beams, as the rafters are not placed directly above the vertical posts/studs. What we call the beam for the heart wall, you might call a glued laminated timber beam in your responses? I will try to include a photo shortly. And: We have not received a work description or construction drawing or calculation for the heart wall. The drawings first passed their architect. After that, the company ordered calculations on well-selected parts from an engineer, but the heart wall was not among these ordered parts since they referred to the carpenter being able to build it without a description/construction drawing. And he has indeed started doing so, which means we now have a house that we cannot continue building as it currently stands.
Thanks for all the answers so far!
Actually, they might be right that a carpenter should know that a bearing beam is needed if joists and rafters do not meet directly over a post.
However, it sounds a bit harsh to demand that the carpenter should know that a thicker wall than "normal" is required.
However, it sounds a bit harsh to demand that the carpenter should know that a thicker wall than "normal" is required.
Well, I wrote a lot, that's true. Now, it's just that I'm not as confident as I soundimported_Byggaren said:Not needed. You've already said almost everything that needs to be said
so I was looking for a second opinion...And how many MPa/mm2 can a 45x195 withstand then?
*just joking a bit*ps, 9MPa/mm2, I love such specifications, that's when you can really start figuring things out. ds
Mikael_L said:And how many MPa/mm2 can a 45x195 handle?
It depends if you graduated middle school with passing grades in math
*joking back* Or rather: what grade of timber you're dealing with. (Requires passing Swedish to be able to read properly.)