I have looked around a bit here on the forum and concluded that I should have a "svensk takstol" on my house from 1951. Can the gathered expertise look at the pictures and assess if the knee wall can be removed without affecting the load-bearing capacity? Shouldn't it be possible with a svensk takstol?
I only see one picture, but it definitely looks like a svensk takstol. If the house doesn't have any extreme dimensions, very wide, etc., then that wall doesn't have a load-bearing function. If you tear it down a bit, you'll see how the kneewall is attached to the rafters; it's usually pretty clear if it has a load-bearing function.arne said:
Thank you for the answer! I also don't think the kattvindsvägen should be load-bearing. The house has normal proportions, about 8 meters wide and about a 45-degree slope. As usual, it's always nice to be as sure as possible before starting to tear down. Difficult to take some decent pictures, but here's at least another one of the "stödbenet" or whatever it might be called.
excuse me, just asking. but why redo the attic?
I have this type of truss myself and I think it works excellently, the offsets can be used as sorting space, that is, nail boards and such, on top.
The only downside I can see is that you might stub your toes when walking up there...
I have this type of truss myself and I think it works excellently, the offsets can be used as sorting space, that is, nail boards and such, on top.
The only downside I can see is that you might stub your toes when walking up there...
I think you misunderstand a bit, it's the wall to the crawl space that Arne wants to remove. It's barely visible in the pictures. The supports and all that must of course remain. Or maybe I misunderstand you..Milkshaken said:excuse my question. but why redo the attic? I have this type of truss myself and think it works perfectly, the gaps can be used as sorting space, i.e., nail boards and such, upwards. The only downside I can see is that you might stub your toes when walking up there...
It is entirely correct that I want to move the kattvind wall so that I get more floor space in the living area. The current kattvind visible in the pictures will thus more or less disappear. I do not intend to touch the roof trusses except for some additional insulation. It is the wall you glimpse on the right in the first picture that I want to move out approximately to the support beams. Then I can convert one bedroom into two on the upper floor. The family is growing and thus the need for an extra bedroom.
Please show a picture of the actual kattvind wall, how it attaches to the truss's upper and lower arm is the most interesting part. You might be able to remove some surface material if the fastening is not visible.
Hello again,
Since it has become cold now, I have no desire to open up the construction, as the sawdust will spill out. Maybe it will be easier to determine if the existing knee wall is load-bearing by looking at the drawing? See the image. The red is where I want to move the wall. The question is if I can do this without affecting the load-bearing capacity of the roof truss construction?
Since it has become cold now, I have no desire to open up the construction, as the sawdust will spill out. Maybe it will be easier to determine if the existing knee wall is load-bearing by looking at the drawing? See the image. The red is where I want to move the wall. The question is if I can do this without affecting the load-bearing capacity of the roof truss construction?
First of all, thank you for all the answers.
The timbers are 2.5"x6", so not as thick as "Byggaren" estimated. The cross-beams are nailed with two 5" nails that are bent on the backside. The strut is thus attached with four nails in total in the double cross-beams.
The other potential question mark regarding the placement of the beams in relation to the rafters is that they are not placed in the same line. The diagonal braces are attached at the bottom to a 3"x5" stud that runs crosswise to the floor beams, see image.
Is there anything about this information that speaks against my remodeling?
The timbers are 2.5"x6", so not as thick as "Byggaren" estimated. The cross-beams are nailed with two 5" nails that are bent on the backside. The strut is thus attached with four nails in total in the double cross-beams.
The other potential question mark regarding the placement of the beams in relation to the rafters is that they are not placed in the same line. The diagonal braces are attached at the bottom to a 3"x5" stud that runs crosswise to the floor beams, see image.
Is there anything about this information that speaks against my remodeling?
