This summer, I'm planning to extend our house. I've found the paragraph "kompletteringsrätt," which allows me to expand 50% of the house's land area from 1987 without a building permit.
In discussions with a structural engineer and designer, we've determined that a ridge beam needs to be installed. It should be anchored to the chimney and rest on pillars at the gable. The setback has come from the chimney sweep, who insists that anchoring to the chimney is absolutely prohibited due to settlements, etc.
As far as I can find, there are no "rules" within Boverket's regulations about what can be done in the chimney, as long as it is constructed for the purpose (free to proceed if it holds, in other words). I have also been in contact with the municipal engineers who refer to my designer and his interpretations of BBR. The designer in question is my boss, works with steel, and has no education in house/roof truss construction. However, the loads have been calculated, and the material needed has been determined.
This is what the extension looks like. The left one is a future extension, which I have included in my calculations since everything will be connected later. The right one is what's happening currently.
Blue = ridge beam
Red = beam in between floor joists (for the large opening that will be created)
Green = pillar from the beam between floor joists to ridge beam
Gray = pillar from beam between floor joists to foundation (and from ridge to foundation)
I already have the dimensions, a bit of IPE160, HEA 140, VKR 70x70 (working with steel, so I'll bring it home instead of glulam)
The roof's slope on the existing house is 45 degrees, while on the extension, it will be 27 degrees. The roof trusses in the existing house are 145x45 plus 145x45 (145x90) after roof renovation.
Since the setback from the chimney sweep came, it's got me puzzled. I had set my mind so much on this construction that I'm finding it difficult to see new solutions. I wonder if anyone sees another solution. Perhaps it's possible to dispense with the ridge beam entirely?
I don't want to place pillars from the ridge beam along the chimney down to the foundation (they would be visible in two rooms).
Right, it's about 4x4 meters. Gabled roof and 27 degrees on the extension, 45 degrees on the existing house.
Okay, how should I support the roof then? Just new rafters in line with the extension's frame and go from there? Doesn't it seem long with about 7 meters from the gable extension to the ridge of the existing house, without a ridge beam?
What I find tricky is when the future extension comes into play. I will then have to remove almost all the rafters below the chimney.
You do not necessarily need to have a ridge beam in the 4*4 meter extension, but it might be needed from there to the existing ridge since you will then open up the upper floor, which involves 3 meters.
I would be cautious with loading the chimney with that.
No, it's clear now when you think about it. We save some steel.
But then I still need to have a ridge beam in the house, you mean? Because how else am I supposed to attach the ridge beam (3 meters) that ends up against the extension? It needs to be supported at the corner in the middle of the house.
I have some opinions. Whether they are relevant naturally depends entirely on whether I've understood the scenario correctly (which is not certain at all )
1.
Why make two small extensions of 16 sqm each?
It should be much simpler and cheaper to make one extension of 32 sqm, then it's done.
2.
You will build an extension of 16 sqm. Why does the old cabin need to be fitted with a bunch of beams crisscrossing then? What else will be changed besides the addition itself?
These extra 16 sqm should just be like placing an annex next to the old cabin.
3.
If the cabin has a 45° roof pitch and the extension is supposed to have 27°, how can they have common ridge beams? The ridge lines won't be at the same height, right?
4.
If you're not allowed to support the beam on the chimney, which I think is a very reasonable assessment by the chimney sweep, then just place a post next to the chimney? Problem solved!
All these questions have been asked of me as well.
1.
The basic idea is that we want to keep the core of the house. The layout is such that these extensions suit the house and the garden best. The house isn't large in itself, about 50 square meters on the ground floor. 1.5 stories. We think a bigger extension wouldn't fit in.
2.
The scenario is a bit misunderstood. It's pretty clear why I want to include these load-bearing beams further up . The 16 (18 sqm is actually 4x4.5) square meters will be only on the ground floor, opening up about 20-22 square meters on the upper floor considering the sloped ceiling.
3.
Why can't the house have 45° and the extension 27°? It's the same ridge height. The extension's eaves do not meet the existing house's eaves.
4.
I don't want to support with a column next to the fireplace, because the column would then run along the wall in both the bedroom and bathroom.
1.
The basis is that we want to maintain the core of the house. The layout is such that these extensions suit the house and also the garden best. The house isn't large in itself, about 50 square meters at the ground level. 1.5 stories. We don't think a larger extension would fit in.
2.
The scenario is a bit misunderstood. It is quite clearly stated why I want to include these beams higher up . 16 (actually 18 sqm, 4x4.5) square meters will only be on the ground floor, opening up about 20-22 square meters on the upper floor considering the sloped ceiling.
3.
Why can't the house have 45° and the extension 27°? It's the same ridge height. The extension's eaves do not meet the existing house's eaves.
4.
I don't want to support with a pillar next to the chimney, because the pillar would then run along the wall in both the bedroom and the bathroom.
1.
Often when you need to extend old cottages and cabins, you add the extension as a separate building body with a shared passage as a vestibule.
This can make it easier to adapt new to old.
2.
Still don't understand, but let's leave it. Unless you have drawings to upload.
3.
It would be interesting to see facade drawings and 3D views of this!
4.
OK, no pillars along the bedroom wall then
But the pillar isn't visible, it's built into the wall.
(I have two pillars in my house, only the builder and I know where they are )
I don't quite understand the whole thing, but can't you move one of the extensions a bit and use a long beam? Then you can use two more pillars, and then attach the short beam to the long one without putting a load on the chimney stack.
I don't quite understand the whole picture but would it be possible to move one of the extensions a bit and use a long beam? Then you can use two more pillars and fasten the short beam to the long one without putting stress on the chimney.
Yes, good solution, it must be the left extension that is moved in that case.
I will see if I can manage to upload some architectural drawings so one can get a sense of what's actually happening. I can guarantee at least that it won't turn out like your addition knockonwood.
Here's a picture that somewhat resembles what I'm aiming for.
Click here to reply
Vi vill skicka notiser för ämnen du bevakar och händelser som berör dig.
)
