Hello,

I have a question about load-bearing walls. How do I know how thick studs I should use in the walls? I'm considering building a small cabin, 6x6m, with two floors and a terrace on a flat roof. The walls need to withstand essentially unlimited snow loads during a harsh winter and also strong winds for the rest of the year as it is located on a moraine ridge.
 
Aron D said:
...How do I know how thick the studs should be in the walls?
...
Small buildings are often designed "off the cuff."
Otherwise, you may need to hire a structural engineer.
Often the studs are sized more based on how much insulation you want rather than the static load.

I would choose 120 mm studs in your situation. It will be sturdy and good.
(I had such a large garage in Gbg with 70 mm studs, which were also notched for nailers)

What difference does it make that the cabin will stand on a gravel ridge do you mean?

Greetings from Hallandsåsen :)
 
My house is built with 45x70 studs on cc 1200 and that house has stood since 1962 so likely 45x70 studs on cc 60 should be sufficient without any issues. However, 70mm insulation is often the minimum, so it's probably best if you follow KOW's suggestion and dimension the studs based on how much insulation you want.
 
Snow load is vertical, and 70x45 might feel a bit meager, but it can still hold. Wind load is horizontal, and that's when the diagonals take up the load. The most economical option is probably 2x4 (95x45) since they have roughly the same price per meter as 70x45. But as mentioned, the diagonals are important!
 
Thomas_Blekinge said:
Snow load is vertical and it feels a bit sparse with 70x45, but it might still hold. Wind load is horizontal, and that's where the diagonals absorb the load. The most economical is probably 2x4 (95x45) as they have roughly the same price per meter as 70x45. But as mentioned, the diagonals are important!
I live in Örebro, so normally there's not much snow, but there have been a few snowy winters in recent years when we've had as much as half a meter of snow on the roof, and there have been no signs (creaking, tough windows or the like) that it would be under-dimensioned. Now, I wouldn't actually build a new house with so few and thin studs since it doesn't feel right, but evidently, it works.

If I were TS, I would probably choose 95 or 120 studs depending on how much insulation I want. If it's about a year-round residence, I might even go for even wider studs, but I get the feeling it's about a vacation house, and then so much insulation is a bit unnecessary. A bigger issue I would have thought more about is how large a wall plate to have and how the trusses should be dimensioned. After all, it's in those parts that all the forces mainly need to be absorbed.
 
KnockOnWood said:
What difference does it make that the cabin is to be located on an esker, do you mean?

Greetings from Hallandsåsen :)
It's extremely windy most of the time, strongly. Thought it should be considered when thinking about dimensions. Besides that, the third floor is to become an open terrace.
 
Janus82 said:
My house is built with 45x70 studs at cc 1200 and that house has been standing since 1962, so likely 45x70 studs at cc 60 should be sufficient without any problems. However, 70mm insulation is often on the low side, so it's probably best if you follow KOW's suggestion and size the studs based on how much insulation you want.
What kind of environment is the house in? How many stories does it have? What dimensions do the roof trusses have? Very interested in the dimensions you wrote, would love to know more.
 
Thomas_Blekinge said:
The top plate doesn't really carry much snow load, it mostly ensures that the studs maintain the same distance from each other.
Check here:
[link]
Great link there. But from what I can see, it's only about pitched roofs. It would be interesting to find something for flat roofs.
 
Aron D said:
What kind of environment is the house located in? How many floors does it have? What are the dimensions of the roof trusses? Very interested in the dimensions you've written about, would love to know more.
The house is situated in the middle of the Örebro urban area, so it's not in any particularly exposed location. Admittedly, Örebro is quite a windy city, but around here "full storm" means about 14 m/s...

The house is a single-story with a basement, so the only loads the somewhat limited framework needs to handle are the roof's dead weight with snow. I don't have the dimensions of the roof trusses in my head, but they are W-trusses with a 27[SUP]o[/SUP] slope, and I would guess the boards the trusses are made of are about 150x45, but those are rather approximate figures.

The roof trusses are placed with the usual cc1200, but they do not align with the framework in the walls, which also have cc1200. Instead, there is a rather substantial wall plate of about 180x45 that transfers the forces from the roof trusses to the standing studs. It might be worth mentioning that the entire house has tongue and groove boards on the interior walls, which probably helps stiffen the construction a bit.
 
The thickness of the studs in the walls is generally not a determining factor, whether it concerns horizontal load (wind) or vertical load (snow/wind).

What can happen with a poorly constructed stud frame under high wind load is that it may shear. This is not avoided by having sturdier studs but by having diagonal braces. The most common diagonal braces are panel materials, but it can also be solved in other ways.

For vertical load, it is the roof that needs to be dimensioned. Wall studs are generally sufficiently strong.
 
vectrex said:
The thickness of studs in the walls is usually not a determining factor, whether it concerns horizontal load (wind) or vertical load (snow/wind).

What can happen with a poorly constructed stud frame in high wind loads is that it shears. This is avoided not by using stronger studs but by using diagonal braces. The most common diagonal braces are sheet materials, but it can also be solved in other ways.

For vertical load, it is the roof that needs to be dimensioned. Wall studs are usually strong enough,
Hello again :)

Can't help but show this picture, regarding the house framework's ability to withstand wind loads, etc. Our latest autumn storm Gorm certainly showed that buildings and forests had to prove what they could withstand. Here's a neighbor who was in the middle of building a large garage. It seems he'll have to start over from scratch... A man and a dog stand in front of a collapsed wooden garage structure after a storm. Scattered timber and trusses are visible.

And the forest has also taken its toll. Especially the sparse spruce forest in the square in Laholm: Fallen tree on a cobblestone square after a storm, with buildings in the background in Laholm.

PS Hard not to peek in at Bygga Hus now and then. Hello to all dear old friends! It's in the blood, as those with MRSA say :o
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Anna_H and 1 other
  • Laddar…
A bit OT, but the big danger with the wind is when it gets inside and gains leverage with something. I saw a test with two identical houses where they broke the windows while it was windy. In a test facility, of course. The house held up well until the windows went. Then it collapsed like a house of cards.
My advice to TS is to go with 120x45 in the walls.
 
evojenza said:
A bit OT, but the main danger with wind is when it comes in and catches something. I saw a test with two identical houses where the windows were smashed while it was blowing. In a test facility of course. The house held up well until the windows broke. Then it fell like a house of cards.
My advice to TS is to go with 120x45 in the walls.
Do you have a link to a source or a video of that test?
Spontaneously, it sounds very unreasonable that a house would be more easily blown apart just because the windows are opened/broken.
 
Hello. I will look for it. I'll get back to you.
 
Click here to reply
Vi vill skicka notiser för ämnen du bevakar och händelser som berör dig.