Waist on cottage!

[Perstorp]

Hello.

I have a thread going under holiday homes where I asked a question that I later realized I might instead ask here. It's that I'm sitting and pondering a bit why on two sides of the house there is a "waist" in the form of a sloping board that separates the upper and lower parts, while on the other two sides there are boards all the way from the foundation to the roof? The cottage was built sometime in the 1700s and added onto in the 1800s.

Does anyone have any suggestions as to why one would do it that way?

 

[jon_h]

It may be that the lower part of the panel needed to be replaced, and in doing so, this method was used to save wood. It could also be that there was not enough wood in sufficiently long lengths, and it was solved in this way.

 

[Perstorp]

Okay, I understand.
Is there reason to be concerned about the quality of the frame under the panel, perhaps?
If it has been such that the lower part of the panel was bad and perhaps damp?
Would this also show signs on the inside of the house? On the interior walls?
How was the frame usually constructed in the 1700s? Horizontal solid logs or what do you think?
I have looked at this cottage and am thinking about going for it, hence all these questions!

 

[jon_h]

Well, I wouldn't think that this in itself would suggest damage to the frame. Needing to replace the panel after a certain time is normal, and if it's as I believe, they have simply just replaced what was necessary. That being said, it's not to say there isn't damage to the frame; it's rather more common than not to have some rot in the timber in houses that old. Primarily, the sill and the wood beneath windows are affected.

It is likely log construction, yes.

 

[Perstorp]

Ok, good to know.
The feeling I get from the cottage is that it is fresh and well-maintained, so I believe the framework is okay, or rather, I hope it is .
Everything can be fixed in one way or another if there are any oddities.
Thank you for your quick response!

 

[aivo]

I recall reading in a book about old houses that it was a way to save timber. Using short lengths that were left over. Nowadays, we probably do it mostly because it looks nice and gives life to the facade.

 

[Sara_B]

Above all, you don't need to rely on intuition or hope, it's easy to check when you're doing an inspection. Carefully remove one or a couple of the panel boards and check/let the inspector check the condition of the timber underneath. A knife is a good tool - a log that is a bit soft on the surface is okay, but if the whole blade goes in, it's time to repair. Then nail the panel back. Done!

 

[Johan Gunverth]

...Nowadays we mostly do it because it's aesthetically pleasing and brings life to the facade.

Nowadays it's done because there's extreme large-scale production of panel wood and because most houses are built as wall modules in a carpentry factory. The panel wood is delivered in ready-made lengths and primed just right for one floor. It's difficult to transport 7-meter high house modules on the roads.
Thus, it's a necessary production solution that has created the "style". For older houses, it's understandable with economy because back then building materials were the major cost.

 

[Perstorp]

Thank you so much for all the brilliant answers!