Why did the ceiling sink, took down interior wall

[krambriw]

Aha

 

[Pontus juthstrand]

Can everyone stop with the d*ck measuring contest, it helps no one…….

 

[StrukturalAB]

Another question about load-bearing walls, I'm in the process of taking down a wall between the kitchen and the living room. Both I and others assessed the wall as non-load-bearing. The house is a Gullringshus from 1966. The wall runs parallel with the roof ridge. The distance between outer walls is 7.4m. The only walls I can find marked as load-bearing in the drawings are the basement walls.

I have truss rafters, and the studs in the wall were, in my assessment, very flimsy, 50x35mm. Even the distance between the studs was over 100 cm in one place; none of the studs were centered with a floor joist. The wall was between 2 door openings and ends with an opening of 4 m.

Upon demolition, there was pressure on the last stud closest to the outer wall, but upon sawing, the stud easily snapped, and the ceiling dropped about 10 mm. The ceiling is now supported up to the height before demolition. So my question is, did the wall have a load-bearing function, or is it normal for the ceiling to sag slightly over time?

Wood creeps over time. So, the emergence of a deformation when an interior wall is removed does not mean the wall was load-bearing. In the design of the truss, there is no brace meeting the interior wall, so the wall should not be load-bearing. Such a high truss easily spans the distance. The timber has thus deformed over time and "hung" itself on the interior wall.

Also note the shear reinforcement over the outer walls. That also indicates that the load lands there.

A standing stud of 50x35 does not bear much load.

 

[Huddingebo]

Don't think those trusses look the least bit self-supporting.
Would they manage a 7-8m free span?

If it sank 10mm initially, it's guaranteed to keep sinking.

 

[Langos]

[image]

Yes, but according to the same drawing, no exterior wall is needed either, since the roof is flying in the air!

You, on the other hand, seem to be an expert who has an incredibly clear picture of how it is thanks to a post on a forum. Maybe you should become a structural engineer?

If that's true, the wall OP tore down is at least extremely load-bearing 😂

 

[stefan xom]

Another question about load-bearing walls, I'm in the process of taking down the wall between the kitchen and living room. I and several others assessed the wall as non-load-bearing. The house is a Gullringshus from 1966. The wall is longitudinal with the roof ridge. Distance between exterior walls is 7.4m. The only walls I can find marked as load-bearing in the drawings are the basement walls.

I have truss roof trusses and the studs in the wall seemed very flimsy, 50x35mm. The distance between the studs was over 100 cm in one place, none of the studs were centered with a floor joist. The wall was between 2 door openings and ends with an opening of 4 m.

During demolition, pressure had been applied to the last stud closest to the exterior wall, but when sawn, the stud easily broke, and the roof dropped about 10 mm. The roof is now supported up to the height before demolition. So my thought is, did the wall have a load-bearing function, or is it normal for the roof to sag somewhat over time?

How close were the studs in the wall you tore down, in the 60s-70s they often had closer than 60 between the studs in the load-bearing walls.

 

[jonte0]

because there goes the roof flying in the air!

The house has something as unusual as a window ;-D

//

 

[13th Marine]

I don't think those rafters look the least bit load-bearing.
Would they handle a 7-8m free span?

If it sank 10mm initially, it will definitely continue to sink.

Why wouldn't they be load-bearing?
We have the same ones in our house, and they are load-bearing.
We have 4m in the living room where we don't have a "support wall."
There, the ceiling hangs down about 3cm in the middle.

 

[JoLi81]

Feel like I have to join the game... 😅

We have almost identical trusses, with a drawn-in wall in the sectional drawing. We removed that wall after consulting with an engineer, and a load-bearing wall should, neither then nor now, be so flimsy. So, walls can be drawn in even if they are not load-bearing.

Well, we have a 7m span, and the trusses are self-supporting over the entire span. But our house was completed in -52 (or 53, or 55, depending on which document you look at), and over time materials weaken, and there is settling. To counteract precisely the settling you describe, the engineer recommended a glulam beam in the middle of the trusses that "braces up" the span and spreads the force over more trusses.

This measure was taken 10 years ago with a new smooth gypsum interior ceiling, and it is still completely smooth without settlements or cracks. This despite probably significantly increased load on our roof as previous owners switched from clay tiles to concrete tiles.

Unfortunately (or perhaps, luckily) I'm not an engineer, but my strong belief is that you can sleep soundly at night. However, it might be a good idea to talk to an engineer to see how you can counteract settlements in your case, so you avoid cracking in the new beautiful structure that's to come!

 

[Tekeste92]

I also have a house from '69, with a similarly long span and very similar layout and roof trusses. Chose to tear down the same wall between the kitchen and living room. Spoke to a structural engineer beforehand who recommended relieving with a beam in the attic - which we did. When tearing down the wall, we noticed that the ceiling beam didn't even touch the wall as there was panel material between the ceiling beam and the wall, so it shouldn't be a load-bearing wall.

At the same time, it feels good to know that we've done everything to ensure the house isn't negatively affected by our modification.

I was mostly surprised at how difficult it is to determine if a wall is actually load-bearing or not in old houses. It seems like no one with training in this dares to say either way. 🤷🏼‍♂️

 

[Henrik Lindberg]

Looks like a regular W truss that has been customized on the right side to extend further at the recessed facade by the living room. Pretty convinced that it is dimensioned without considering the demolished wall.

I can imagine that they put in the wall before the roofing was applied if it is tile/concrete tiles, plus creep deformation over time caused the truss to be supported by that wall even if it was not intended to be.

 

[QULTEC]

Yet another question about load-bearing walls, I'm in the process of taking down a wall between the kitchen and living room. I and several others assessed the wall as non-load-bearing. The house is a Gullringshus from 1966. The wall runs along the roof ridge. The distance between the outer walls is 7.4m. The only walls I can find marked as load-bearing in the plans are the basement walls.

I have truss roof rafters, and the studs in the wall seemed very weak to me, 50x35mm. The distance between studs was over 100 cm in one place, none of the studs were centered with floor joists. The wall was between two door openings and ends with an opening of 4 m.

During demolition, there was pressure on the last stud closest to the outer wall, but when sawing, the stud broke easily and the ceiling dropped about 10 mm. The ceiling is now supported to the height before demolition. So my question is, did the wall have a load-bearing function, or is it normal for the ceiling to settle slightly over time?

Hi
Are you sure that the one who assembled the house didn't use the wrong lumber in the roof trusses? At that time, trusses were often built on-site from included lumber. A few years later, they used 195x45 in the lower arm, 140x45 mm on the upper arms, and 90x45 on the support legs for about an 8 m span. I have such a house built with factory-made trusses a few years later.
T Quist

 

[hjulia]

We have almost identical trusses, with a wall drawn in the sectional drawing. We removed that wall after consulting with a structural engineer, and a load-bearing wall, neither then nor now, should be so weak. So, walls can be drawn in even if they are not load-bearing.

Our house is a catalog house from Finland (they have built some both here and in Finland) that was built in 1972, and our framework is 56 mm thick with a 6 m free-spanning truss. So at least in the 70s, there was no problem getting a building permit for such a weak load-bearing wall. A couple of years ago, we also had two 30-meter spruces fall right over the house in the open part (6 m span) during a storm without even getting any settling in the house. The only thing that happened was that parts of the tongue and groove boards + metal sheet were damaged. So a 56 mm structure is obviously more than sufficient for a house the size of 6x14 m.

Just in TS's case, I would guess that the wall has become "load-bearing" over time as many others believe.

 

[S N Jörgen Magnusson]

Another question about a load-bearing wall, I'm in the process of taking down the wall between the kitchen and living room. Both I and several others assessed the wall as non-load-bearing. The house is a Gullringshus from 1966. The wall runs lengthwise with the roof ridge. The distance between the outer walls is 7.4m. The only walls I can find marked as load-bearing in the drawings are the basement walls.

I have truss roof trusses, and the studs in the wall seemed very weak to me, 50x35mm. Even the distance between the studs was over 100 cm at one point, and none of the studs were centered with a floor joist. The wall was between 2 doorways and ends with an opening of 4 m.

During demolition, there was pressure on the last stud closest to the exterior wall, but when sawing, the stud easily cracked and the ceiling sank about 10 mm. The ceiling is now propped up to its original height before demolition. So my question is, did the wall have a load-bearing function or is it normal for the ceiling to sink somewhat over time?

Likely a load-bearing wall according to the drawing, and I can contribute hearsay. I spent a lot of time in Gullringen during my teenage years in the 1970s when the house factory was in full operation. What was said was that the manufacturer Krister Ansgarius was frugal and wanted the smallest possible stud size, and the factory used lightweight studs early on.

But the Ansgarius family invested a lot of money in the Gullringen community, building a public swimming pool, a golf course, and the football team was almost full-time professionals with salary.

 

[grovspacklarn]

Can everyone stop measuring their d*cks now, it helps no one…….

I feel like I have to join in the match... 😅

We have pretty much the same roof trusses, with a wall drawn in the sectional drawing. We demolished that wall after consultation with the engineer, as a load-bearing wall, neither then nor now, could be so weak. So, walls can be drawn even if they are not load-bearing.

Well, we have a 7m span, and the trusses are self-supporting over the entire span. But our house was completed in '52 (or '53, or '55, depending on which document one looks at), and over time materials weaken, and there are settlements. To counter exactly the settlement you describe, the engineer recommended a glulam beam in the middle of the trusses that "suspend" the span and distribute the force over more trusses.

This measure was done 10 years ago with a new smooth gypsum interior ceiling, it's still completely smooth without settlements or cracks. This is despite probably significantly increased load on our roof since the previous owners switched from clay tiles to concrete tiles.

I am unfortunately (or maybe, luckily?) not an engineer, but my strong belief is that you can sleep peacefully at night.
However, it might be a good idea to talk to an engineer and see how you can prevent settlements in your case, so you avoid cracks in the new nice things to come!

Now, concrete tiles aren't that much heavier than clay tiles, as previously extensively discussed here on the forum.