We have finished the floor plans but have not yet built/ordered the house.
The architect suggests that visible beams are needed on the lower floor, and I have no objections to this as I understand that the loads from the upper floor need to be transferred. But do the beams need to be visible? Of course, we want the ceiling to be as smooth as possible, and I asked if possible steel beams would solve the problem but got the response that they could act as thermal bridges, which I also don't want.
Does anyone have a suggestion or opinion?
The visible beams are black on the sketch, and there is a dashed line indicating underlying insulation under the balcony.
We have a ceiling height of 2.70 on the entrance level but want to minimize beams for the eye. One alternative would be to lower the ceiling in the entire middle section, but then the ceiling height would drop to 2.40, which is also not desirable.
The architect suggests that visible beams are needed on the lower floor, and I have no objections to this as I understand that the loads from the upper floor need to be transferred. But do the beams need to be visible? Of course, we want the ceiling to be as smooth as possible, and I asked if possible steel beams would solve the problem but got the response that they could act as thermal bridges, which I also don't want.
Does anyone have a suggestion or opinion?
The visible beams are black on the sketch, and there is a dashed line indicating underlying insulation under the balcony.
We have a ceiling height of 2.70 on the entrance level but want to minimize beams for the eye. One alternative would be to lower the ceiling in the entire middle section, but then the ceiling height would drop to 2.40, which is also not desirable.
Who will build the house? What technology?
If it's some sort of "catalog house," this often means limitations in which bearing solutions are possible.
Most of the beams just go over a doorway or similar?
It's not a problem to fit that bearing in the floor structure.
Where it can be a bit trickier is at the dining area. There's a longer span, and the underlying insulation complicates the execution. However, it doesn't seem impossible.
It also depends on to what extent the layout of the house is locked with load-bearing walls.
If it's some sort of "catalog house," this often means limitations in which bearing solutions are possible.
Most of the beams just go over a doorway or similar?
It's not a problem to fit that bearing in the floor structure.
Where it can be a bit trickier is at the dining area. There's a longer span, and the underlying insulation complicates the execution. However, it doesn't seem impossible.
It also depends on to what extent the layout of the house is locked with load-bearing walls.
I don't want to flag which house company it is, but it's not a stick-built house.
I can live with beams over doorways, but it’s specifically at the dining area and entrance that I want to avoid having sections/boxes in the ceiling.
I'm trying to find the timber dimension of the floor joist, but I can't find it right now.
The beam at the dining area, do you think it could be replaced with a strong steel beam that runs exactly along the dashed line under the balcony instead? That is, from the kitchen to the living room and essentially as an extension of the outer wall line?
I understand that you can't say yes or no just like that, of course, it needs to be calculated, but I'm looking for suggestions for the architect who has otherwise done a good job.
I can live with beams over doorways, but it’s specifically at the dining area and entrance that I want to avoid having sections/boxes in the ceiling.
I'm trying to find the timber dimension of the floor joist, but I can't find it right now.
The beam at the dining area, do you think it could be replaced with a strong steel beam that runs exactly along the dashed line under the balcony instead? That is, from the kitchen to the living room and essentially as an extension of the outer wall line?
I understand that you can't say yes or no just like that, of course, it needs to be calculated, but I'm looking for suggestions for the architect who has otherwise done a good job.
Last edited:
Replacing it directly won't work since the support seems to run in the other direction. Keeping the support hidden should be possible though, as mentioned. For example with steel beams.Fabrikör Stava said:
Whether such a solution works with the current building system, only they would know.
(Reach out to a structural engineer at the company and they can probably give you a clear answer.)