Minimalist Framing – Skippin studs, ….
How light are you willing to go to get the wood out of your frames? Trading a few posts with likeminded BT’ers on how much wood we don’t waste in a frame got me thinking it’s time to come out of the closet. I’m wondering where you are willing to omit a stud, cripple, jack, top plate, backer, corner stud, joist, tail joist…….. And I’m wondering who thinks those of us who do skip redundent pieces are ‘hacks’ (a badge I wear proudly).
Here are my regular omissions:
Non-Bearing Exterior walls:
One 2x ‘flat’ header on openings.
King studs only for openings .
single window sills
No cripples above or below RO’s when the flat header or sill are less than 24″ from the plate and the opening is no more than 4′ wide. Wider openings get crips every 4′ just to keep the parts straight during assembly.
Bearing Exterior walls:
Code Minimum headers (usually double 2×4 or double 2×6) [and yes, I do install crips between plate and top of header]
Skip headers and jacks on openings where there are just 1 or 2 floor joists resting above. I use the rim joist (no breaks) as a header and just nail in hangers.
Corner backers:
Outside corners are 2 studs and a nailing block – one at end of each intersecting wall plate. Nailer on perpendicular edge of second wall framed.
Interior partition backer in exterior wall (T wall) – 1×6 or 2×6 on flat OR scrap 2x used as ladder blocking.
Inside / exterior wall corners – same as outside corners but in reverse. Nailer picks up outside sheathing.
Other Wall details:
Skip all studs that fall within 4″ of a king stud.
Spread out bottom plates so as to omit stock running through door openings. Saves time cutting them out later and uses less stock.
I won’t get started on minimalizing joists yet –
MG
Replies
Mike....you are the KING OF HACKS!
Hehehehehe....you have a lot of cajones posting this thread in here!
It looks like you're doing pretty good. I'm close...but not quite where you're at...although I'd embrace every idea you have if I'm building for myself.
I really like the skipping headers on small windows idea. I'd create a "flush" header using another 2x10 before I'd try to push through the single 2x10 idea on an inspector even though I know the single would be good.
I sill double up almost all king studs on non bearing walls, but I know for sure that it isn't necessary. It's just one of those weird ideas that is done because it seems like it should be done. I could understand it's necessity if we were still using solid core doors....
We/I wrestle with the t corner details. The ladder blocking style is good for insulation, but it's too slow for my tastes. So...I usually just put in a block flanked by two studs. I know its a waste of a stud...or a waste of a block...(now you're making me feel guilty). I have on occasion used the double stud "L" style backer in the places that your using a 2x6 or 1x6. The "L"style (two 2x4's L shaped) will give you a 3/4" drywall backer if you center it on the partition.
We also skip a lot of those studs landing near a corner or king. I tend to put all of them in exterior bearing walls because I know they're bringing in 14 1/2" batts.
I run all my bottom plates all the way though. cutting the door plates out is easy with my customized Makita and I immediately reuse the "scrap" for the 10" cripples on the next header (the ones that you don't put in) or I use it for some backing somewhere. Believe me, NO ONE tosses any of those door plates out...or they'll be heading downstairs to retrieve it. I'm always amazed at how little material is left after punch out, even though there was a lot of it when we were setting trusses.
I haven't found many ways to minimalize joist.
blue
Warning! Be cautious when taking any framing advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, all of it is considered bottom of the barrel by Gabe. I am not to be counted amongst the worst of the worst. If you want real framing information...don't listen to me..just ask Gabe!
Hmmm.....
Can't say I ever skipped a stud or cripple. Seems like it'd take more time to figure out if it's on layout or not, and with my luck it would be<G>
Seems like it's just faster to plan on doing it all the same; studs and cripples on layout no matter.; Backing full length. True headers.
A lot of my appraoch comes from a mechanic I used to work with. I remember we had a distributor that spun the rolled pin, sheared it off the gear but stayed in place on the outside so it looked ok. Once we figured it out it was a matter of trial and error as the fix could be 180 out. I came up with some mickey mouse fix and he insisted we think of the next guy who would be driven nuts that we timed the motor on #4 or switch the wires on the distributor cap or what ever stupid idea I had. Do it right, do it once.
I see it as there are standards that are expected to be in place for whatever reason down the road and could be frustrating for the next guy to have to figure out why there's not large header for nailing off trim or whatever, or his nails are flying through the sheathing where there should be wood, sheet rock screws not sinking etc...
You'd be doing a lot of pick-up work on my crew.
Cor.
Ive got to agree w you on the "frustrating for the next guy" thing. Trim carps are forever the "next guy" witching for studs and trying to nail trim to nothing but sheetrock sucks, wastes time, and leaves things looking sh***y. Ive got no problem with saving lumber and labor. Just try to remember what still has to be done before closing.
The framers ive been following lately have left me plenty of puzzles. Frustrating isnt the word!
The framers ive been following lately have left me plenty of puzzles. Frustrating isnt the word!
I'm with you there! The last few houses I worked on were framed by one of those guys who didn't run the bottom plate through the door. Trying to squeeze doors into some of these openings was possible only with the help of a sledgehammer, but you had to swing light, they saved alot on nails too.
I added a new line to my pricelist: Re-Framing Doorways..........$15.00 each
But you could only do so much, and glued most casings to the drywall, (which becomes structual, in a hack framed house).
What is really irritating about the whole concept of "Framing Lite" is, its all about saving a buck, which is fine, as long as it is passed on to the homeowner. But if Hackboy is pocketing the 20% timesave and throwing the lumber he saves into the back of his truck.
It's theft....plain and simple.
Yeah things are gettin pretty bad out here too. Not only are the ROs for the doors off. Im pretty sure they saved all their twisted and bowed lumber for the door openings too. except for a few "uglies" they made sure to put up behind the cabinets in the kitchen. Probably cut up the straight stuff for blocking (if they used any!)
Funny, you finish cats only complain about the lumber located in the areas YOU have to work. Before you go stabbing the framer in the back, have a look around the rest of the house. You may have actually got the best sticks in the whole pile. Lumber ain't what it used to be my friend. Strap your bags on and try putting together a nice tight frame yourself with some of this crap. Or keep blaming the framers.... that's probably easier, right?
I've been doin carpentry for a while, and while the gross of my gross now comes from trim, I've framed a bunch of houses. 'Bout 15 years worth. . .On the one hand you talk about how you are expected to do quality framing by your GCs, so this minmalist stuff is way below your talents or your clients wants...and now you're saying that if there just happened to be an ever so slight problem with something you framed, it's cause of the lumber. I know, I'm just an old fart, but I can figure out how to make which lumber that's on the job, do what I want...otherwise, we get new lumber for that task...I learned by having to trim houses that I framed...pretty big eye opener...I'm still learningHey, I like this minimalist stuff...somebdy post a pic of a two stud outside corner, Joe?And the hangers off the rim joists? Three rim joists??? Do you guys notch the joists over the hangers? I'm hanging crown on those ceilings, and those hangers do have a thickness<G> plus, you drivin a nail through one, Ha, ha, ha. Don't worry, we can fix that later!
BB,
You're comparing two posts chatting about two entirely different topics. One was "efficient" framing techniques and one was about minimizing lumber used. That's two very different topics. Where exactly are you going with this?
Yeah.... most of the GC's I frame for wouldn't go for that cowboy eyeballing crap
Yeah.... I don't think the framer should be blamed for the quality of available lumber. I don't supply the lumber for the homes that are subbed to me. I do the very best I can with the stock provided to me. It's not my call to send it all back.... AND I'd be getting similar crap back anyway cuz it's all from the same supplier brother! You gonna hop in your truck and head down to Home Depot to pick up 60 24' hem-fir 2X10's for me? Think a "hand's off" GC is going to?
As far as the "minimalist framing" topic goes.... I really don't yet have an opinion on it. I probably fall somewhere in the middle. That's why I was sitting back and taking it in.
I really don't see what the point you are trying to make is. Perhaps you could clarify?
FWIW... I've trimmed out plenty of my own frames. And I frame the same way no matter who is doing the trim out.
<Funny, you finish cats only complain about the lumber located in the areas YOU have to work. Before you go stabbing the framer in the back, have a look around the rest of the house. You may have actually got the best sticks in the whole pile. Lumber ain't what it used to be my friend. Strap your bags on and try putting together a nice tight frame yourself with some of this crap. Or keep blaming the framers.... that's probably easier, right?>What threads am I mixing up? My point would be with your answer, don't blame the lumber, blame the framer, but I think I already said that. Look, I know that building a house is tough...I've built 'em. We're building on a round planet with square framers<G> C'mon lighten up...we all need to learn how to deal with what we're dealt, and that includes you and your framing<G> Don't worry, we can fix that later!
Before we leave a house, a 6ft level is used[or string-lined] on all walls to check for bows etc.All knee walls in attic are string-lined/straightened.And 'crown blocks' are put in so you trim guys can nail something to.As for the metal hangers,if they are called for,we gotta install them.I DIDN'T DO IT...THE BUCK DOES NOT STOP HERE.
"Lumber ain't what it used to be my friend. Strap your bags on and try putting together a nice tight frame yourself with some of this crap. Or keep blaming the framers.... that's probably easier, right?" Wouldn't this be an argument for over framing as opposed to under framing? Using fewer twisted studs being a better option seems to be suggested here? Actually I hear ya. I learned from one of the 1st GCs I worked for to never blame or bad talk the other trademen, you should have enough skill to fix it yourself. Just file the guys name and don't work with them again. Obviously there are situations where you'd have to step back and re analyze a job if it's so out of whack. By being a knowledgable carpenter I expect there to be a stick where there should be a stick. I really don't want to have to try to figure out what's going on behind the sheathing as the framer saved himself $20.BTW Aren't materials part of the bid? This comes out of the HOs pocket not the carpenters. Where's the savings? Don't tell me ............!Cor.
Corr,
I wasn't defending minimalistic framing. Read it again. I was trying to stop this thread from turning into a "let's bash the framer" gang bang. As I just said to Bucksnort, I don't really have a concrete opinion on Mike Guertin's technique. My own style falls somewhere in the middle.
Out here in MA we framer's only supply the tools, labor, and fasteners. We frame, sheath, housewrap, install the windows and ex. doors, and install the roofing materials. Ocassionally we install siding if it's clapboards, shingles, or FC. We don't supply any of the lumber.
I'm pretty sure Mike Guertin is pretty much a "frame to finish" GC/remodeler. But I'm also getting the idea that Mike is trying to accomplish something more than just saving a buck or two..... like increasing the energy efficiency of the home by creating more space for insulation and also doing his part to reduce waste with our natural resources.
Damn, I thought the gloves were comin' out.........
Three studs in every corner, plus blocking on the inside corners!
What's minimalist framing anyway?
EricI Love A Hand That Meets My Own,
With A Hold That Causes Some Sensation.
I used to be a framing and trim sub. Ran a crew of 8 to 12 guys who were very skilled at both (had to train them to switch hammers out when we got to trim though - those waffel dings - yikes). We started tweaking frames as a group. It became a challenge - who could come up with the next 'minimalist idea'. We didn't pay for the lumber but we did care about the quality. We crowned every stud, culled out the crooked ones and oriented all the crowns the same direction. We'd cherry pick straightest studs for cabinet and built-in walls as well as stairways. We opposed crowns on jacks and kings so they 'cancelled' each other out.Tradesmen loved working behind us. We stacked as much as possible and had consistant nailing patterns so electricians and plumbers knew where they could cut and drill without dicing up their bits. MG
In fairness, I know that lumber sucks these days. Im not ragging on all framers, just these guys im following right now. Ive followed them several times before and it seems like they are getting worse and worse. No hard feelings OK? I just needed to bi*** about something because this house has been bad enough that my profit margin is getting a little too marginal. Good framers are my best friend!!
Sorry everyone!!! I didnt mean to open a hornets nest. I should of left the framers out of it. I was just whinin about my current job. I started out framin 10+- Years ago. It was tough enough then. Basically, studs on layout are a big plus and maybe rework those crappy pocket door kits enough to hold the trim on. 'nuff said. Apologies all around.
as a carpenter who can frame and finish I say yes, our lumber these days can tend to suck but we still have to consider the finished product when framing. I dont know about anyone else, but where I work word of mouth has alot to do with reputation and where our next job comes from. We get the most compliments on our framing from drywallers and finish guys because we dont just "hang it and bang it" and blame discrepencies on the lumber.
You completely missed my point rafterman. But I hope you feel better, anywho.
they saved all their twisted and bowed lumber for the door openings too.
You mean the 30+% waned sticks aren't for the door & window ROs . . . <g>?
Why'd the lumber company send out just enough for all the oopenings then . . . ?
(Me, bitter about getting trapezoidal studs--nah, that has to be somebody else, a happy person in his happy place, yeah, that's it . . . )Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
I know what you mean about doors. I am currently finishing a basement where I am following behind some insane framer/drywaller. Every wall is bowed, and I mean a WOW of 3/8 inch sticking out in the baseboard region for about 18 inches and then flat again. Every door is racked and the drywall proud or sunk realitive to teh jams. It is a mess.
First off, I'm pretty sure that Mike Guertin builds his own projects so it's not theft.Secondly you're complaining about sloppy framing which I don't think is synomous with efficient use of wood. I don't doubt that you might be coming in after some sloppy workers, but are they sloppy because they don't use unnecessary wood or because they're sloppy?
Jon Blakemore
First off, I'm pretty sure that Mike Guertin builds his own projects so it's not theft.
Secondly you're complaining about sloppy framing which I don't think is synomous with efficient use of wood. I don't doubt that you might be coming in after some sloppy workers, but are they sloppy because they don't use unnecessary wood or because they're sloppy?
Alright, I'll go with that. If its your own project and you are going to live in it, and you're going to drywall it and finish it and you know there isn't going to be anything but air to sink a nail in over windows and doors....its not theft. But if you are skipping studs and headers in the house I'm paying for and am going to live in...Would it be fair to say I was ripped off?
And I wasn't complaining about sloppy framing, the boys I was finishing behind were bang on 16 and 24 centers. What they had forgotten in their quest for speed was that cutting corners gets to be habit forming and expands beyond what the original intentions were. Pretty soon, framing one stud non-bearing doorways with a single 2x4 header is acceptable, because the drywallers are using glue now...
What ever happened to overbuilding? Wasn't the code book the absolute "minimum" standard we can build to? For a few years I made my living framing for a group of investors who bought two story homes near the university. I would rip off the roof, add another story and an addition out the back and we would turn the place into a four unit apartment. The houses were solidly framed in the 60's and 70's. I dread what would happen if I tried the same on a house framed by minimalists.
My clinets pay the framing lumber bill so they're cool with 'framing lite.' Sounds like the framer in your example was a hack as opposed to thinking about how he frames.Now, when I'm framing walls 'lite' I'm only talking about exterior walls. On interior walls I still use jacks and kings at doors. I trim my own houses so I know the problems you note when you can't find anything solid. After I'm done framing I mark every stud on the floor in red crayon so there's no guessing where studs are. After the electrician and plumber pass through I mark electric boxes on the floor with yellow and number the height off floor (this has saved the drywaller's butt a few times) and I mark the DWV in black (no nails there please).When I hang doors I pull at least one screw at each hinge and replace with 3"er (color to match of course). I hate callbacks for dragging doors a year or two later. I instruct clients how to adjust doors using "the screw". I tell them it's their job from on.MG
Mike, you obviously know what you're doing, framing to finish is old school. I don't have a problem with skilled tradespeople using their knowledge to make edjucated decisions on where to limit framing. I'm also sure there are instances where you increased the framing called for.
My beef is with the speed framers and the corner cutting it involves. Also the quality of aprentices coming out of those crews.
On exterior doors I find not shimming the top/ mid hinge and the long screws gives me more adjustment once the framing settles (shrinks, etc.) I only shim the bottom.
Interior doors get shimmed plumb and the big screw goes behind the top hinge plate to hold the jamb in place. Haven't had a door related callback in years.
You are right - you gotta know what you are doing when skippin' studs and minimizing headers or you'll really cause a problem.Unfortunately new guys fall into old-school methods just because they are 'safe' and they never learn the hows and whys.I propose that we institute required continuing education for all homebuilders. Field engineering, building science.....
>> I propose that we institute required continuing education for all homebuilders. Field engineering, building science.....
Now you're going political! ; )
Anyone in, or half in, the trades could learn current building info and implement it, but many don't. Cont. ed. is a standard part of so many professions that it doesn't sound like a bad idea to me, but putting it into practice for builders would be nearly impossible since laws regarding contracting are so varied.
I'm now in the real estate business. Cont. ed. requirements are not only standard, but I live in Colorado and our state has lead the country in real estate licensing reforms. That has translated into more and more class requirements and that has lead to more and more varied class offerings. I think it is a great thing, but I'm one of the few in our area who does. Every real estate licensee in Colorado is now required to have a "broker" level of training. We do not have real estate "salespersons" any longer. The big difference is the level of training and testing.
To translate the licensing requirements of the real estate profession to the construction trades would mean that every carpenter would have to be tested, licensed, and take continuing education every year.
I just can't imagine that ever happening. If it did hapen it could mean a whole new level of pay for carpenters and other tradespersons, but the correspondent price hike in homes and the immediate labor shortage would be tough to adjust to.
With the exception of vacation and retirement areas, my experience is that there is a much lower level of training, licensing, and inspection in rural areas than in more populated areas. Of course, no large scale builders find markets in truly rural areas. Perhaps new requirements for builders would work in cities, but even then I think it would be tough to enforce.
Do you have any thoughts on how such a training requirement would work in the trades?Language is my second language.
I agree, I think it would be extremely tough (and unlikely) to institute any continuing ed nationally. But some states do have it in place for 'GC's. Now that doesn't mean the framer has to have a license - he's just a sub. But the guy running the job does have to have a license and take continuing ed.I think Real Estate licensing and continuing ed requirements across the nation (state regulated in most instances) have helped clean up what was at one time an occupation on the level of 'used car salesperson'. (Hope there are not used carsalespeople out there).The Ntl Realtors Asso recognized years ago that the only way to clean up the image was to support legislation requiring education. Education is good for the agent and good for the client.I teach a few of real estate continuing education and appraisal courses. Some people just don't care (as you note), but I've found that most (especially the younger agents) take it very seriously. That's great. I don't know enough about state to state regs. regarding licensing and continuing ed. Here in RI we have licenses and continuing education requirements for Plumbers, Pipefitters, Mechanical contractors, Electricians, Telecom installers, and a few others. There are licenses for a couple of other specialties (hoisters, backhoe operators.....) but no continuing ed. I wonder if that could happen (licensing, testing and continuing ed for contractors). I agree, rural=less enforcement. But with most construction concentrated in certain areas of the country - we could make a big impact (in gross numbers) on the quality of construction. I think anyway....MG
I propose that we institute required continuing education for all homebuilders. Field engineering, building science.....
We aready have that Mike..... its called Trust.
And when that doesn't work for someone........Insurance.
Trust? I have friends who are builders that I wouldn't trust to frame a house for me. Of course, even uniform testing and education wouldn't guarrantee the workmanship to be 'hackfree'.Insurance is an interesting wildcard in all this. I suspect at some point insurance companies will push for licensing. heck it it weren't for insurance companies a lot of states would still enforce no building codes. Insurance companies are one of the industries most vested in building code development and adoption.MG
Educating oneself in the trade is one of the challenges. I get all the magazines, attend seminars when convenient yet I still feel like a dinosaur. I really have no idea how to be cutting edge in the trades. I must admit I build the old fashioned way. On the projects I've been on it's been small scale remodels the past few years with little to be gained from say engineered panels etc..But what happens when we get a job for an entire house? We'll build the most bitchen 1972 style home out there<G> Seems like it might be time to pop this out to another thread that deals with what's really at the heart of the matter here..progress and education. I get my info from FHB, JLC, FWW, and trips to the book store to browse the Tauton and other books. I gotta say the publications as a whole are becoming way to geared to HOs. Occationally I get to work with a real genius carpenter and I'll learn more in a week than a year elsewhere but I can't count on that.Local JC does have some classes but who has time? Thanks for keeping the thread going and answering what seems like every post Mike!Cor.
What I meant was you essentially trust the person who is building/ framing/ wiring/roofing/etc. to do a good job. If something goes wrong, you should expect their insurance to take care of it.
Ahh yes.
I gotta thank you for the head slap...I'd have kept on framing just like I've done for 30 years without ever thinking about it...well, maybe I shouldn't thank you, cause now I gotta think about it, that makes my head hurt almost as much as slapping<G>So 2x4 frame with 1/2" sheathing and 1" foam board...I like the total thermal break, but I hate fastening anything to foam that has to be pounded, like window and door trim. Of course,I'm using 1/2" blue styrofoam, it's too compresible for my taste. What's your buddy using? Or is all the 1" stuff just that much less squishable?Anyway, now I'm thinking, cutting stuff out where it's appropriate is a responsible way to to build. Don't worry, we can fix that later!
My friend Rick Arnold built his own house with polyiso 1" foam outside (and 3 1/2" inside - he lives in a big beer cooler). We ripped 2x stock into 1" strips and nailed them around ROs before foaming the walls. The window flanges nail right into the 1"x1 1/2" (actual measure) strips. Works like a charm.Siding was white cedar. Used 2" staples - looks fine. Not sure if he packed corners with blocking or nailed 5/4" trim over foam. MG PS I think any rigid foamboard would work - white, blue, pink or al covered.
"Not sure if he packed corners with blocking or nailed 5/4" trim over foam. "
I believe the PVC cornerboards were screwed in over the polyi.
"...required continuing education for all homebuilders..."
Why not? Teachers are required as are numerous other professions. Nobody "trusts" us. We have to show proof. Of course I know several who show up and sleep through it or sign in and go for coffee and do not return until the afternoon sessions where they sign in and leave again (teachers).
john
I see your point about the 'down the line' guys and thier expectations. But looking at it that way, nothing will change.I used to be a Bug mechanic - I got fooled more than once by a sheared pin on the distributor shaft. Nothing a 16d wouldn't fix.Mg
Sounds like you do use double top plates since you say you skip studs w/in 4" of a king stud. Is that correct?
I'm curious as you your primary reason for leaving out this and that.
You're unique! Just like everyone else! Scott Adams
I do still double top plate though OVE framing (and model codes) allow single top plates. I haven't broken that habit yet but maybe someday....I skip the sticks for 3 reasons:Stop waisting lumber (and $) On a 2400sf house I end up saving about 84 board feet of lumber or about $75.Leave more space for insulation - Studs are thermal deficiencies in walls so the more lumber I take out the better thermal performance I get.Saves time. Once I got handy with the tricks, I frame faster.
Those were the reasons I imagined, but I didn't want to jump to conclusions.
Another point is that with ladder blocking for an intersecting wall it is much easier to run the wire. Drilling through a four stud intersection is a b!tch!
Do you usually frame with 2x4 or 2x6? What sort of insulation system do you favor?
I don't do framing for others anymore so I don't try very hard to save time.You're unique! Just like everyone else! Scott Adams
I have been frami 2x6 but may return to 2x4 and put 1" foamboard over sheathing. Talking to an associate (Bruce Harley - author of "Insulate and Weatherize") about the system and it makes a lot of sense expecially when you figure you eliminate all thermal briding of the studs and minimize condensation problems.For cavity insulation I like cellulose. Foam is king and some buddies of mine have a couple rigs - but the cost is way more than it warrants. I get the same preformance from cels at 1/3 the price.MG
I had this electronic kit when I was a kid. Maybe you've seen them, a board with all this electronic gear connected to springs you hook wires to. You could make an AM radio, with about 20 wires connected to transistors, resistors, a tuner, vol control, batteries. I ran one wire out the window for an antenna and another to a hot air duct for a ground.
It brought in a few stations real good and I would listen to them at night on an earphone. It was cool, I was about 6.
One day I got bored with it and started pulling out wires, and to my amazement the radio kept working. By trial and error I managed to pull almost all of the wires except for the connections to one transistor, a resistor, the antenna and the ground, and I could still listen as plain as day to the strongest local radio station. It wasn't anywhere near as good as the radio I started with,
but it was a radio.
I could never get the one I had to do anything. I figured it was a piece of junk and that none of them ever worked. You've just burst my bubble. Somewhere in my mother's attic that thing must be buried. I'll have to dig it out and try again - then sell it on ebay.
Around here it is common for engineered prints to have a note saying "all headers on load bearing walls are 2x10 unless otherwise noted" or similar. (all prints must be engineered) I think it is a big waste of lumber, but if that is what it says on the prints, that's what the inspector demands.
I get the same thing from time to time. I've had to train engineers and architects. They always fall back on old habits. I asked one to show me his calculations once. "Calculations?" was his reply. "Yeah you bonehead, the double 2x10 you speced over the 9 ft. french door won't pass the inspector and he needs your calculations by 4pm or I get a red sticker." The 'engineer' had to write me a check for $3500 - Pull the french doors, pull the header, replace with LVL and button it back up.And I made him call the building official so I didn't look like a dummy.
So, the Archi actually paid for his mistake???
Now that's a first...
Definitely code minimum headers, or better yet, use the rim joist (sometimes doubled) above as the header. Two stud outside corners, shaped as an L with the long leg running by the end stud on the connecting wall. Both of these details allow for better insulation. Because I've been a trim carpenter, I never skip a stud on layout.
There's a second very good reason to use code minimum headers. Two by tens shrink a lot more than 2x6s. You get fewer drywall cracks with code minimum headers. Keeping headers in the ceiling virtually eliminates cracks, because all the shrinking takes place in the ceiling at a uniform rate.
Andy
Arguing with a Breaktimer is like mud-wrestling a pig -- Sooner or later you find out the pig loves it.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
Good point about headers and cracking drywall. As soon as I switched from double 2x12's to double 2x4's - I stopped getting cracks. Took me a while to figure out why.
I'm SHOCKED! SHOCKED I say!!!
This is Fine Homebuilding! Not Hack City!!
I'm going to start a petition to Taunton to ban you from this site and the magazine.
I've already gone through all of my past issues and torn out all the stuff you wrote. To the recycling bin!!
Rich Beckman
This post not to be taken too seriously...or seriously at all!
Edited 11/23/2004 8:03 am ET by Rich Beckman
Yea , I agree, throw this jerk out.
All he accomplishes is to save a paltry couple of bucks and put a building in jeopardy.
My wife's asking why I'm laughing (again).I learned this stuff from FHB actually. Hope you ripped out the article on OVE framing in the Oct/Nov '93 issue . )
I'm in favor of saving lumber where you can. And getting more insulation in where you take the lumber out.
Around here, pretty much everybody uses double 2X12 headers for EVERYTHING. From 30" windows in non-bearing walls to 16' garage door headers which are grossly overstressed. Very little thought is put into it.
I'd like to see more of the Simpson header hangers used. Where headers are lightly loaded I think they make a lot of sense.
I also like insulated headers, like these: http://www.swi-joist.com/p_04.htm
Seems like a waste to stick in a bunch of lumber where insulation would better serve the occupants of the house for the next 50 years...
Have you tried the simpson header hangers or the insulated headers? I haven't yet and don't know anyone who has. I only see them recommended by Dr Joe.
"Have you tried the simpson header hangers or the insulated headers? "
I used unsulated headers in my spec house. Couldn't be happier with them. The last place I worked at used them in wall panels.
They're a lot more consistent and easier to work with than conventional lumber. No bows or twists to work with. They're a bit more expensive, but I don't remember how much exactly.
Never used the header hangers. Seems to me the combination of the header hangers and insulated headers would be a great combo.
I used to work in a blanket factory, but it folded.
I have most of my experience in remodeling, so I can understand if the "pure" framers amongst you would snort in derision at the following but what the hell:
I build with a combination of steel and wood because the virtue of one is the fault of the other. Each framing member does a certain job. Does this piece transfer a load or catch a sliver of drywall? Do I need a nailer for cabinets or not? Should I try to shave or tweak these funky 2x4's or just attach steel studs to them to get to form a flat wall?
If you are building to the whole job and don't answer these questions while framing, you are only delaying these questions for yourself or others to answer later.
Using a combination is also great if you sheetrock "through" framing and then plate a steel stud on top to turn the corner. The trim crew will have to use a trim screw there but at least you have something to bite which clips don't provide.
I better leave it at that.
I also like insulated headers, like these
Those look cool. I'd be sore tempted to stamp/stencil that note about "Do Not Bore Flanges" on the outside, though (thinking of the next guy).Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
I frame a lot 24" oc, and instead of omitting a stud that's within 4" of a king, I'll work to try to move the window or door to make the king fall on the 24" layout.
If exterior walls have symmetrical window/door layouts, which they often have, I'll layout/center the framing from the CENTERPOINT of the exterior wall, so windows can fall symetrically without too much craziness.
Cedar siding gets nailed to the studs, so with the studs falling nicely from mudsill to the attic platform it makes for a nice nailing pattern with all the nailheads lined up. A bit too anal? Maybe.<g>
Agree with Andy about corners and about raising the headers up to the rim. With a lot of 9-10' first floor celing heights and taller windows, or window/transom units being used, it's easy to do and makes framing easier/faster and more effective. Plus, it makes change orders for window heghts SO much easier.
I did try one time leaving out the bottom plates on door openings, but I found it faster to leave the bottom plate continuous, as it keeps the opening square. I've never not been able to find somewhere to use a 3' chunk of timber later on.
I'm still using double top plates, I won't ever not use them, for several reasons.
There's always give and take in framing, and a lot of variation in personal preference/comfort levels.
I like your idea of orienting the stud layout to the windows. I never thought about it.And I doubt I'll ever give up double top plates either.MG
Mike,"And I doubt I'll ever give up double top plates either".Whithout raeding this entire thread who doesn't use double top plates?Joe Carola
OVE framing techiniques developed in the late 60's first by the NFS and then 'codefied' by NAHB research and model building codes in the early 70's proposed using single top plates when joists are stacked over studs. It still hasn't caught on generally. But single top plating is making inroads. You'll see it in some track house developments where the framing plans are determined right down to the blocking. It's really simple for the framers in those projects - one house after another - they know just where studs and joists go. The reason I don't like single top plates is that it's a bugger to lift the walls up without popping the metal plates that join the butt ends together.That, and I still strap my ceilings so the drywaller (me) hates having no place to screw into at the ceiling line of the walls.Good thing you didn't try to figure out this thread - you'd likely have never found the 'single top plate' origin.MG
Good post.
I'm in favor of redundancy. Here's my logic. I tear into alot of homes that have the king/jack studs rotted away at the sill, only to leave about 4 inches of air to support that spot. Yet in must cases there is not a corrspoding drop in the header or adjacent ceiling. I'm left to believe that the load is now dispersed through other studs, plywood sheathing, and maybe even vertical siding. So, based on this I guess I'm glad the framer didn't skimp.
In re-reading your post it sounds like your pretty judicious about where you decide to eliminate framing.
MES
Isn't it amazing how well rotting buildings stand up. My friend just put a garage addition to an old house. When they tore off the old clapboard to tie-in, they discovered nothing left. And I mean NOTHING - unless you consider the lath and plaster structural. Old baloon frame I guess - sill - gone, studs-gone, sheathing-mostly gone. And we aren't talking just 4" up; more like 6' up! And to take your rationalizing for reduncency one step further - hey, if this house didn't fall down (and I've seen others likewise rotted out) what where those studs doing in the first place? Let's skip them ! )
Isn't it amazing how well rotting buildings stand up
It is, and it isn't. A "modern" stud will carry around 1500-2000# along its length in compression. That's before tying it to a diaphram with sheathing. Now, start totaling up the carrying ability versus the dead loads aloong a wall. A person can get nice big fat numbers to make a belt & suspenders safety engineer all warm and cuddly.
"We" actually frame for the convenience of the sheathing, not to a minimum structural capacity. We could likely "get away" with a 4'-0" O.C. stud spacing, with a plywood exterior sheathing. Sound outlandish? Think of the structural members in a SIP.
I'm no fan of built-up headers--I've had to rock around one too many of the warped, cupped, & twisted things (let alone the house where Elmer used 3/8" ply to make up every stinking header, and left them proud to the inside). So, I like simpler answers--like the various alternatives we have now.
That being said, I'm still a tad leary of interior/non load bearing walls with no header at all. Mostly because people will do dumb things down the road. Like "convert" their attic into a room by putting down a sub floor & finished floor on the existing ceiling joists. "Bearing? Yah, gottem on the ride . . . ") And, really, it wouldn't take very much to stiffen up most interior door heads--2x6 vertically blocked between the cripples, for instance. Not a lot; would not look at all traditional (read "right" for some)--but would work enough.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
You're right, you never know what people are going to do. However if you frame with the future in mind then you'd have to really beef up the floor system to take on the loads.I'll be starting a remodel in the spring where the second floor rests on a headered opening (8') of a wall in the first floor. Wall runs parrallel to the joists and in the middle of a joist bay. Absolutely nothing in the basement to support. For 100 years it's been settling. the cracks get bigger and bigger. First job will be to stablize the floor / wall.
"lets skip them" thats foolish. some day a stong wind storm will collapse that rotting house on somebody and you will remember that post. just because a rotting structure is still standing doesnt mean its going to stay that way. When did this profession turn from a craft to a hack and butcher fest?
"just because a rotting structure is still standing doesnt mean its going to stay that way."I quote Hammurabi..The first written Building codes:229. If a builder has built a house for a man and his work is not
strong, and if the house he has built falls in and kills the
householder, that builder shall be slain.I know I'm taking it to ridiculus lengths but on a cursory glance at this thread and to those not familiar with MGs writings as indicative of his abilities it tends to suggest you know more than the engineer/code. That it's not all that nessasary and feel free to omit to make your job easier. When that is clearly not the case. MG seems to be an intelligent builder who is designing a better home not a cheaper......in his mind anyway. This apraoch doesn't take into account local concerns. Here in So. Cal. we have earthquakes, FLA hurricanes, Montana snow loads etc...Each demand a different approach and understanding. Geez with this litigeous society a fire in the back yard could be blamed on the lack of headers! Ya really wanna risk it???Cor.
Several years ago in Professional Builder magazine the editor did an editorial "The first building code". It was the first time I heard of Hammurabi. The editor quoted 4 or 5 laws you could identify as "building codes". I use the one you noted as an introduction to a course I teach on Building Codes. I'm all for 'cheap insurance' however just putting studs in a wall and headers of a certian size doesn't guarantee seismic, wind loading or snow loading protection. It's the manner things are put together thats' most important.In one of my local wind zones (120 mph) I have to double the stud at 4' in from any outside corner, solid block all rafters or trusses horizontally at 4' down from the ridge and 4' up from the eave edge. This in addition to the metal connectors and load paths. I would never propose reducing these elements that have been proven in tests to improve the structure.I only propose that building elements that add no structural support to a building can be eliminated. Channel backers, 4 stud corner blocking, jacks and extra cripples in non bearing walls and full height headers have not (to the best of my knowledge) been shown to add more to the structure than engineered structural load path tie downs in high wind and seismic areas.I feel exteremly confident that in all but tornado and tsunami prone areas, you can minimize a lot of 'overbuild' in frames without sacrificing structural integrity during a natural disaster. (In Tornado Alley they should be living in underground concrete homes with no windows to be safe - but that's way beyond what most people would accept).There are many more important things we can do when framing homes that will improve the structure much more than having a couple of extra studs. Use deformed nails (screw shank are my favorite), nail wall floor and roof sheathig on a 3" edge and 6" field schedule, make sure nailers are adjusted so no nail breaks the surface of the sheathing, use construction adhesive in addition to nails to apply sheathing, use T&G roof sheathing, install 35 mph projectile proof windows and doors, ..... Many of these 'upgrades' take minutes and cost little but have been proven to produce a much more stable building.
I think you misunderstood the context in which I made that statement. It was in reply to M&D's post. I was trying to show that if you take the logic he uses one step further then you could reach "let's skip them all" Maybe I didn't state it well.
Hmmmm? Didn't think I meant that at all. Still a good thread though...thought provoking!
MES
WOW! can-0-worms..My WIFE freaked out when I started to frame 2' centers, here at the shack..I dunno, I better not disclose my tactics ,the walls have eyes.
Spheramid Enterprises Architectural Woodworks
Repairs, Remodeling, Restorations.
Re skipping studs, remember that they serve to fasten the siding and drywall. If you don't have them on regular centers then the siding guys will have some choice terms for your mother.
But, of course, if the siding is vinyl nailed to OSB then who cares?
I stopped nailing lap siding into studs in 1984. I've only random nailed with SS ring shanks since then. Nailed into every type of sheathing except foamboard and thermoply. And I've never had a problem. Reason I stopped nailing into studs - customer complained that the nail heads weren't perfectly straight up the rows (man they were only off 3/4" or so) AND on another house that had isocyanurate board over sheathing - the claps bowed between nailing - looked like hell.And I hang my own drywall so I never get complaints - but I could see that being a problem with some drywallers.MG
Skip headers and jacks on openings where there are just 1 or 2 floor joists resting above. I use the rim joist (no breaks) as a header and just nail in hangers.
I love this idea of skipping headers and using the rim joist above as header. FHB wrote about this idea. Saves time and fuss of cripples. Saves wood. And perhaps best of all is much better on insulation.
What do other people think of the practice? I have never seen it done. Perhaps since it only applies to first floor consturtion in two story homes.
I did it on both floors of my house. On the second floor, that means there's a rim joist around the ceiling joists and the rafters rest on a plate nailed to the top of the attic floor framing. You need to add hurricane ties in this case, but you also end up with full depth attic insulation over the wall plates.
My framer couldn't believe all the headers I told him to leave out. He also didn't think the inspector would approve my two stud corners.
Another wood saver is to simply use a 2x6 or 2x8 nailed flat to the last stud of an intersecting interior partition, instead of building a two-stud-and-spacer-block post in the exterior wall. Leaves lots of room for insulation, pulling wires, and gives plenty of drywall nailing.
AndyArguing with a Breaktimer is like mud-wrestling a pig -- Sooner or later you find out the pig loves it.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
"Another wood saver is to simply use a 2x6 or 2x8 nailed flat to the last stud of an intersecting interior partition, instead of building a two-stud-and-spacer-block post in the exterior wall."
Ever leave the nailer out, and use drywall clips?
I have no luck with women. I went on a date and asked the woman if she'd brought protection. She pulled a switchblade on me.
No, because I like having good nailing for base molding.Arguing with a Breaktimer is like mud-wrestling a pig -- Sooner or later you find out the pig loves it.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
I sometimes leave out the nailer AND drywall clips on 'T' walls. I leave the interior wall plates and stud back 3/4" from the exterior wall and just run drywall 'through'. Saves time hanging drywall actually, no need to cut to fit except in the last room. The when the interior wall is boarded and taped the corner's stiff as can be.
"Skip headers and jacks on openings where there are just 1 or 2 floor joists resting above....What do other people think of the practice?
I think you ned to consider more than just the next floor - There's also a roof up there.
If you're under a gable, there's probably not much load there at all. Unless you happen to be under a ridge beam.
With a trussed roof, you could have more load than with stick framed. Worst case scenario would be if there's a girder truss directly above that carries a lot of weight.
Seems to me each case needs to be looked at individually.
The final test of a leader is that he leaves behind him in other men the conviction and the will to carry on. [Walter Lippman, "Roosevelt Has Gone"]
Each case, yes and no. You need to remember that the idea of doubling the rim joist gives you two 2x10, the header senerio gives you two 2x10s. Same deal. In the header case the double 2x10 carries teh floor and perhaps teh roof. In the doubled rim joist, it carries teh same floor and roof load. I suppose you could argue with some success taht the header case also gives you one rim joist in addition to teh heade to carry teh load.
Heck if worried triple the rim joist. It would still simplify the fraing and improve insulation.
I get a lot of double-takes. The inspectors I've had love it (of course they know me) they go brag about it on other jobs. I guess it breaks up the mundane.I use it on the second floor wall also when I built cut roofs. I no longer frame rafters that set on the top of walls. I rim the ceiling joists (just like a floor) and set rafters on top of the attic "floor". Saves time, and gives me full insulation over the top of walls. Eliminates 'wind wash' of the insulation, and it's a lot easier to air seal. Best part - No Ice Dams because there's no insulation in the rafter tails to impede air flow.
Mike, what kind of insulation and ceiling joist do you use on these rimmed conventional framings?
I've done a lot of very similar type stuff, but don't cut many conventional roofs other than small sections on trussed roofs.
The last full conventional roof system I did, I framed the entire attic floor in 2x10, rimmed and sheathed. It's ready for a second story but it never was intended that way. I did it to make the roof framing easy, while creating that coveted "free attic" space.
blue Warning! Be cautious when taking any framing advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, all of it is considered bottom of the barrel by Gabe. I am not to be counted amongst the worst of the worst. If you want real framing information...don't listen to me..just ask Gabe!
It depends. I frame the attic as if it could be living space someday. So it may be 2x8, 2x10 or 2x12 depending on span. Whatever size is required is a minimal upgrade to required 'ceiling joist only' span ratings.To insulate I ordinarily use blown in cellulose but if I know the 'attic' will be turned into living space in the near future (5 years?) I just use fiberglass batts. I also tend to cut steeper roofs than the plans may call for (if appropriate) to facilitate future use.I'm a big fan if 'attic' living space. It kills me to see these complicated, steep pitched, multi-gable roofs so common on many homes where only the first floor is used. The entire roof us built from trusses so there's no chance for attic space. There's such a big cost to building a fancy roof (labor and materials), and hand cutting a roof with a ceiling that can be someday used as a floor makes economical sense.MG
Mike,
Thought about e-mailing you but figure Ill just post here.............
THANKS!!!!
Thank you for the post's/ threads that you put up. I get a lot from them and I think that you get a lot of people thinking. Thanks for the books and articles also.
Now stop it!!! Or I might sell my house, pack up all my tools and dogs into my trucks, drive up to R.I., and camp out on your doorstep begging you to let me work for you ( if your smart you'll say no). Eventually you'd probably break down and hire me, maybe even with pay, becuase of your neighbors complaining about me hanging outside your house, digging through the garbage cans for food.....
Jokeing aside, I really do appreciate your post's and input.
-m2akita
p.s. this goes out to you too, Blue. I think both you guys are getting people to think.
Thanks M2akita.
It's funny, but all this banter actually makes me think about what and why everyone else is doing. We're all a product of our enviorment and one thing that I love about this forum is the chance to exchange ideas and techniques. I'm really nothing more than a great big sponge. I've learned a lot by watching what others do and then adopting some, or all of the techniques, then merging it with my own experiences. Even though I've been doing this more than 30 years, I still try new stuff on a very regular basis.
I liken these worldwide forums as an extension of what I do in my real life. In my real life, I constantly get out and walk through other people's rough frames. I especially like to walk through other framer's work if it's in our sub. I'll walk it daily from start to finish. I watch their progression and analyze their thought process and techniques. If I find anything in their process that I can use, I'm delighted. This site allows me to extend my "voyerism" all over the continent....and for that I'm thankful.
Don't be afraid to share some of your techniques, or talk about some of the things your changing as a result of these dialogues.
blueWarning! Be cautious when taking any framing advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, all of it is considered bottom of the barrel by Gabe. I am not to be counted amongst the worst of the worst. If you want real framing information...don't listen to me..just ask Gabe!
Really, I thought I was some kind of progressive builder cause I moved from box up to using sinkers...every time I tune in here I learn something<G> Don't worry, we can fix that later!
Your post to M2akita.... now that was a great post.
FWIW.... yesterday I was cutting a layover or California valley. As usual, I cut all the rafters on the ground and boomed 'em up. This time I didn't cut the last two "shorties" but instead threw a few short scraps of stock on the pile and sent them up. I tried.... I really did..... but my first two attempts at eyeballing those jacks were ABYSMAL!!!! And I had just cut a whole pile with 40* and 50* miters so it had to be somewhat "fresh" in my memory. I gave up after two, cuz I only had two more pieces of stock up there with me and it was getting late.....plus it's about 30 risers and two ramps down to the mud-ridden stock pile!
Anyway, I'm not giving up yet. You've got my attention. But I'm still not convinced. I'll keep you posted though!
Sorry Diesel...it can't be done with wormdrives!
blueWarning! Be cautious when taking any framing advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, all of it is considered bottom of the barrel by Gabe. I am not to be counted amongst the worst of the worst. If you want real framing information...don't listen to me..just ask Gabe!
Thanks, (I think). I don't know how much I know but I do know one thing - Lots of other people know a whole lot more than me. I'm just foolish enough to try to explain what I know only to display how much I don't. There are so few 'rules' to this business. Either from a business operation side or from a 'how-to' side. There are so many ways to muddle our ways through it. I learn more reading FHB and BT than I'd like to admit.MG
It kills me to see these complicated, steep pitched, multi-gable roofs
Have to agree with you there. They go to all of the trouble of putting a 9/12, 12/12, 15/12 roof over the 8 or 9 foot ceilinged one floor only floor plan. That makes the roof structure taller than the house. I saw one the other day, 8-6 to the finished ceiling, had to be 18-19' from joist top to rafter bottom--almost double the first floor height. Not one lick of it usable, either.
Even worse is when they are stick-framed because there's no real way to truss in all of the hanging valleys, hanging ridges, and "circus tent" bump outs on the plan. Scary to see one of these wonders going up--it's like there's more lumbbr above the top plate than below--and after all the supports and jacks go in, there's seldom 3 feet wide of usable attic space.
Ok, I'll stop ranting now.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
It's OK to rant - get it out of your system. When a client comes up with one of those plans with the rediculous gables and pitches I recommend revising the roof for living space. If they are keen on the idea - I'll do the job. If not (because of a little extra cost) I don't bother. Principles I guess.
Mike, glad to hear the inspectors like the double rim joist idea. I wondered if some would object on the grounds that, "that is not the way it has always been done".
I've been lucky that most inspectors "get it". I can see some old timers who don't really understand their job would take the "That's not the way it's supposed to be done" attitude
I think Mike's point is being missed.
His concern is about wasting lumber in redundant areas, not about saving a few bucks. Not that it shouln't be a consideration, too.
I do many of the same things as Mike, skipping headers on non-bearing walls, etc. On my bearing walls with smaller openings (or light roof loads), instead of 2x6 headers I will just use a single 2x12 placed to the outside of the framing. This eliminates cutting and placing any cripples above the opening. At punch list time, I will rip a 2x to fill out the bottom edge of the header flush to the inside of the wall. This works well with the spray cellouse or foams that I generally use for wall insulation, giving me an insulated header.
I also use a 2x6 in an "L" to provide backing and insulation space like Andy does.
As far as providing for the trimmers, If I hear any thing from them at all, it is a comment that it's nice to work with a frame job that is put together like someone gave a damn.
Terry
I believe thats why houses creek and sag prematurely.
"I believe thats why houses creek and sag prematurely."You mean you think houses creak and sag prematurely because of framing exterior walls without some redundent studs and oversized headers?Done right, I can pull 10 to 15% of the wood out of any 'conventional' wall and it will be just as or more stable and creak free than an ordinary frame.I've got 13 years of 'tests' going out there and I check in with past clients occasionally. Great preformance. The problems that cause creaks and sags are usually related to the quality of wood, layout and execution by the framer - not the amount of lumber in a wall.MG
They're growing more trees all the time ...
code's are minimums ....
steel studs are great with wood in the right places ...
comparing old house to new houses is silly ...
More is gooder.
Buck Construction
Artistry in Carpentry
Pgh, PA