How many of you are using Optimum Value framing.
I am looking at doing more of it. Makes a lot of sense to me.
How many of you are using Optimum Value framing.
I am looking at doing more of it. Makes a lot of sense to me.
Few people understand it. Nobody agrees what it is, how to learn about it, or who's responsible for it. It has never been more important
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox
Fine Homebuilding
Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox
© 2024 Active Interest Media. All rights reserved.
Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox
Become a member and get instant access to thousands of videos, how-tos, tool reviews, and design features.
Start Your Free TrialStart your subscription today and save up to 81%
SubscribeGet complete site access to expert advice, how-to videos, Code Check, and more, plus the print magazine.
Already a member? Log in
Replies
How many of you are using Optimum Value framing.
I am looking at doing more of it. Makes a lot of sense to me.
What is "Optimum Value Framing"?
Do a search and you will learn lots.It is framing using a few different methods that still give you a strong wall but saves materials & time, and allows for more insulation.You use Lvl all the way around? Or just above the window and door openings? Would the cost not outweigh the benefit of time and materials saves? (No individual headers or trimmers, but you do need a plate above the window opening and short cripples? Or if it is below 2' no cripples?When we do a wood basement we use LVL in the floor joist system so we do not have to put it in the wall right above the wdw. This allows for a higher window top so you get a bigger window before you hit the ground with the bottom of the window.
1st time I saw that I read it as opium value farming...
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!
Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
"Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints"
Edited 11/16/2009 9:15 am by IMERC
"1st time I saw that I read it as opium value farming... "
Maybe that helps? LOL~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Woodshed Tavern BackroomThe Topics Too Hot For Taunton's Breaktime Forum Tavern
Elephants are grey, but not all grey things are elephants.
http://www.drawingwithlight.smugmug.com
would it be a lot less painful if ya got hurt...
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!
Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
"Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints"
i do know some thing about that to from the day long ago
Edited 11/16/2009 11:43 am ET by pappagor
Might be referring what I've always called 'advanced framing' ... i.e. framing with no more than what you really need structurally ... primary goal was to increase energy efficiency on exterior walls, but you can use it on other walls to minimize material use and the labor associated w/ all the extra pieces.
After framing my own house, though there are issues associated w/ finishes. e.g. a 1x4 door casing ... nice to have more to nail to. Blocking out switch boxes far enough to clear that trim. I paid attention to extra blocking for various purposes and I still fell short of really having what I needed; seems like the list is endless.
I had wondered about trim at wdw's and such. So it really is nicer to have more.I usually end up blocking for light switches (or leave scraps for the electrician) on interior walls, so no big deal there.
Start thinking about alternatives to e.g. using another stud just so you can nail a piece of trim to it. It's not always easy, but the goal is worth the effort. One thing we did on windows on non bearing walls was to let in a 2x6 vertically on the inside for e.g. curtain hardware or valance, etc. Ran it long (say 6") to accomodate the full curtain hardware.
You can also use up extra subfloor and rip to say 4 inches to use instead of an extra stud in corners for drywall support.
I framed all my windows on non bearing walls w/ a flat 2x on the header. Meets code and since I had no window header trim, it wasn't an 'issue'. Also minimize individual window sizes to limit header size ... or double 2x header and insulation between. If you stack the roof joists on the studs, you can use single top plates (there is a detail for splicing plates togeter and corners, but I forget what it is ... likely a Simpson product).
there is a detail for splicing plates togeter and corners, but I forget what it is ... likely a Simpson product).
Yup, it's Simpson. Has waaaaaaaaaaay to many holes in it, my last project the inspector wanted them all filled.
Joe H
I'm all for eliminating as much framing lumber as possibleExtra lumber wouldn't help your 1 x 4 casing suggestion. 1x6...yes...1x4..no.
i have for the last 3 years and also have went to rim headers on all 2 story homes in all i save over 1000$ in materials and about the same in labor
"...rim headers..."?
e.g. LVL instead of rim joist, no headers needed above individual doors/windows.AitchKay
that is it. makes easy work out of moving openings as long as u get the the eng. to sing off. i allso use hangers instead of crippes
>>i have for the last 3 years and also have went to rim headers on all 2 story homes in all i save over 1000$ in materials and about the same in labor<<When you say rim headers, do you mean doubling up the rim/box making a header above and hanging the floor joists off of them? Also you don't need headers for all windows and doors underneath, you just have to frame down to the header height with 2x4's or 2x6's depending on the wall thickness. Is this correct?If so, how is that saving 2000.00 in time and material?The rimboard/box is always one and the joists sit on the top plate nailed to the plate and the rim. Doing what I think you're say, you're adding another rim to create a header, so that's more material for a rim. Now you have to add how much joist hangers cost and the time to nail them in.Doing what your saying does however eliminate the double header underneath because with just one rim you have 2-2x10's for example for a header underneath compared to a double rim and no header underneath, but now you have to frame down the opening to the correct header height with 2x4's or 2x6's.Your way.1) 1 extra rim
2) Joist hangers time and material
3) Pack down header height underneath using 2x4's or 2x6'sTraditional way.1) Single rim
2) Double 2x10 w/2x4 on bottom for headerCompare the cost of material being used.Your way.1) Extra rim
2) Joist hangers
3) 2x4's to pack down header.Traditional way.1) Single rim
2) double 2x10 + 2x4 bottomYour way your probably eliminating jack studs?I still don't see how you can save 2000.00
Joe Carola
Edited 11/16/2009 10:04 am ET by Framer
joe i can do a 80 ft wall with rim header in less then 20 min it will take 2 men 2 hours to cut and install 20 window header
pappa, please explain YOUR version of optimum value framing. I know what it means to me. I would reject the idea of running lvl continuous around the entire perimeter for many, many reasons...most of them would be dollars...or yen...or whatever our currency is right now. Have I ever incorporated the header support into the rim? Many, many times. I don't call that Optimum value framing, I call it common sense...when it makes sense.
I'm thinking the optimum value they're talking about is the cost to the enduser aka HO and the costs to operate such house. Optimum Value as in the least thermal bridging and a boost to the wall average r-value.
Not about the speed or costs to frame it but the costs to own and maintain it.
Even with those parameters, I wouldn't believe that running lvls continuously would make for good value. For one thing, they are 1/4" thicker. That would leave 1/4" less insulation.
I think the rim can be efficiently be insulated with spray foam since there's usually plenty of room to add r- at the rim (joist bays) whereas any header limits or eliminates the ability to add r-.
1/4" of spray foam has some r value so no matter how you do the math, you lose.
how are you limited to only 1/4" in the joist bays?
You aren't limited but the cold air get 1/4" closer. The bigger point is the waste of lvls spanning over walls that don't contain windows and never will. Maybe I'm missing something...but I did ask for HIS details so the topic could be properly debated.
my walls are r42 or greater my roofs are r 60 to 80.
my blower door test are under 2 that is what i call value framing
>> joe i can do a 80 ft wall with rim header in less then 20 min it will take 2 men 2 hours to cut and install 20 window header <<Are you installing a rim header on the whole 80' wall?How long does it take two men to install all the joists hangers and then go back and cut and frame down 20 windows?Joe Carola
If every wall was 80' and it contained 20 windows, it might make sense to install a continuous header. I've installed dozens or maybe hundreds of continuous headers in walls...some were lvls. Each situation is different. If a wall is 22' long and it contains two windows each measuring 3', does it really need a continuous lvl?
I put in flush headers all the time for certain reasons. I can't see doing a continuous header where there are no openings underneath. That's a waste of time and material, especially hanging every joist.Also screws up all mechanical. Some situations a whole wall is one big beam fro a specific reason carrying a load above.Joe Carola
>> If every wall was 80' and it contained 20 windows, it might make sense to install a continuous header. <<If you were to frame that way with this type of framing, but I still can't see the savings time and material when you have to hang every single joist and then go back and pack down every single opening with 2x4's or 2x6's. Isn't that called thermal bridging?Joe Carola
>> If a wall is 22' long and it contains two windows each measuring 3', does it really need a continuous lvl? <<If someone were to frame like this, why would they need to use lvl's? If they are using 2x10 joists they can just use 2 2x10's double box. Lvl's would be a waste of money. I can see using lvl's it you were using 11-7/8" I-joists. But doing that wouldn't make sense if you framed with headers underneath when you can get away with 2x10 headers.Joe Carola
Edited 11/16/2009 1:40 pm ET by Framer
joe a wall 22 ft are u builbing a play house or a sub compact garage.
the homes i build are 5000sq ft to over 12000. i use spray insulation for the hole house
Edited 11/17/2009 4:58 am ET by pappagor
no joist hangers need
joe no joist hangers are need
>> joe no joist hangers are need <<Why are joist hangers not need whether you have a 2x4 or 2x6 wall when joists land over an opening?Joe Carola
because the eng say so and the insp approve it the top plate and the header act as one. at this time the max header lenght is about 7 1/2 feet use this sym
Edited 11/17/2009 6:19 am ET by pappagor
because the eng say so and the insp approve it the top plate and the header act as one. at this time the max header lenght is about 7 1/2 feet use this sym
Pappa,
I am with framer Joe...you need hangers over openings.
What keeps the top plate from sagging? nails in tension?
>> because the eng say so and the insp approve it the top plate and the header act as one. at this time the max header lenght is about 7 1/2 feet use this sym <<That's a new one. Obviously this is for a 2x6 wall. 2" of plate if using lvl's and 2-1/2" if using 2x's and toenailed joists to the header acts as one? Are you using one or two top plates? What about a 2x4 wall, you need hangers for that.When we frame over window and door openings in basement using a double box header, we always have to put hangers over those openings and I use a double 2x6 mudsill. This is the exact same thing as what you're doing and the only thing different is that you might be using a single top plate, that would make it worse.Can you take a picture of your plans showing your detail that you are describing?Joe Carola
Edited 11/17/2009 6:30 am ET by Framer
how are u attaching top plates to the header
the way i have to do it is called out in the planes and toe nailing is not allowed in no way.the decking and sidewall sheating are all used in the eng prosedure.
the house that i'am working on now the owner spent over $120000 to have it designed and eneg to post that kind of info would be in total disrespect to them. have one of your eng show u how they would do it and go from there.
>> how are u attaching top plates to the headerthe way i have to do it is called out in the planes and toe nailing is not allowed in no way.the decking and sidewall sheating are all used in the eng prosedure. the house that i'am working on now the owner spent over $120000 to have it designed and eneg to post that kind of info would be in total disrespect to them. have one of your eng show u how they would do it and go from there. <<12,000 Wow! I guess it's top secret to tell anyone how a house is framed. If this is the case, every single person on this forum is disrespecting their customers by talking about how they frame houses. I guess that means the house I framed where the HO pay $56,000.00 for their plans that I have discussed before I'm disrespecting.You post stuff here that don't make sense but when asked you don't want to tell how what you're doing works. Why post at all when asked how your system works when you don't want to explain? If you think people should start framing this way, how are you going to convince them that it works without explanation?Joe Carola
joe talk to eng in your aera to get the details u need explaned to u for your code that u have to build under not the code that i build under. i can not post or even tack pic of the work i do for the people that i build .the one i just started is for a county singer that u know.he might invite you to his lake home in mn if you are good boy.
yes i respect the contract that i build under. if you want free info call a free eng in yuor aera to nhelp u out once you cet the help u need u will see what i mean
Only problem is that we all work under similar codes. That is the reason we would like to see the details. We could care less who you are framing for.
Would you like me to name some of my customers? Trust me, as well know and as rich as any you name. I think Joe could do similar.
We are interested in the nuts and bolts of the construction. Yes there may be regional differences, but for the most part we build very close to each other.
We would like to see your definitions and how your engineer has you doing things.
Trust me, we are just interested in the how, not the who you frame for.
By the way, we are at a forum that speaks english and would prefer you to type it out. The texting shortcuts you are taking are not familiar to everyone.
Dave
>> joe talk to eng in your aera to get the details u need explaned to u for your code that u have to build under not the code that i build under.,,If the day ever comes where I would have to frame this way, it would already be on the plans drawn from an Architect. Until then no need to talk to anyone. Just thought that since you came here bragging about OVF framing you would explain yourself to simple questions that would NEVER get you in trouble.Is your Engineer and client reading this forum? >>i can not post or even tack pic of the work i do for the people that i build .<<I never told you take take pictures of your work. I asked you to take a picture of the detail your not explaining buy talking about how good it is. I thought maybe you could snap a small picture of the plans just of the cross section detail or just draw something on a piece of paper. No one would even know where it came from.>>the one i just started is for a county singer that u know.he might invite you to his lake home in mn if you are good boy.<<Doesn't matter who your framing for because he doesn't know your here does he? I would never ask who he is either because it's none of my business and they do like to keep their privacy. I framed a huge addition last spring a famous movie stars house that everyone knows. I've never talked about it until just now. I wouldn't be disrespecting him if I talked about the design of his house...yes i respect the contract that i build under. if you want free info call a free eng in yuor aera to nhelp u out once you cet the help u need u will see what i mean <<Free ifo? That means this whole forum is giving out free inf. So your purpose here is to hype up OVF framing without any explanation. Why bother posting if you think this top secret way of framing is such a good way to frame when you can't even explain the way this framing goes? I just though I asked a simple question and you made it top secret. As of now I couldn't care less about this OVF framing because until I see a set of plans drawn for one I won't be doing one anytime soon.Joe Carola
I like that idea. You must have to use hangers on the joists above where the header(s) would have been, don't you?Maybe set the LVL to the inside face of the framing and insulate the outside?
no as long as you have 1 1/2 in support on the top plate and top plate it nail to rim header but u can for sure do it but do not have to.
"no as long as you have 1 1/2 in support on the top plate and top plate it nail to rim header but u can for sure do it but do not have to."
I'm not sure I agree. You don't have an 1 1/2" bearing because the wall underneath is not loadbearing, it's just an unsupported top plate, so why would nails be enough rather than hangers?
If you have 2x6 walls you won't need hangers using a rim header because you have 2-1/2" of top plate bearing the joist sits on. It's like a 2x4 wall with a single box, the joist has 2" of top plate it sits on. Joe Carola
Right, but where the rim header is acting as a header, over openings, then you don't have top plate bearing because the top plate has nothing under it. If anything the top plate is being supported by the joists above.
>> Right, but where the rim header is acting as a header, over openings, then you don't have top plate bearing because the top plate has nothing under it. If anything the top plate is being supported by the joists above. <<Your right they do need hangers when they're over the openings.Joe Carola
Think we just had a thread about this, different name though.
2x6 walls on 2' centers, single plate and stacked roof, California corners ect.
Joe H
>> 2x6 walls on 2' centers, single plate and stacked roof, California corners ect. <<Joe,If they are using 8'precuts (92-5/8")using a single top plate screws up the wall height. What do they do about that? I read her I think that they make 94-1/4" studs. Do they use those with a single top plate instead of 92-5/8" precuts?Joe Carola
Joe, I just moved here from another state & don't know what's available here.
But knocking a couple inches off the end of 8s would work.
Guess it depends on the attitude of the builder as to what's worth doing.
Joe H
>> But knocking a couple inches off the end of 8s would work. <<If they have to do that because they're saving using a single top plate, that means they're wasting lumber when they could be using precuts with no waste..........;-) I thought this OVF thing is about not wasting material.Joe Carola
Some places can get pre-cuts for a single top plate.
Unfortunately I can not. I think the lumber wasted in the cutting would be far less then another plate also you gain more area for insulation.
Save all those little ends, ship to China and they'll come back as something else?
I thought this OVF thing is about not wasting material.
But also reducing energy costs.
I don't guess the actual $ saved framing amounts to much, but the additional insulation is where the savings will eventually occur.
Joe H
I should've said time and material. With a house that requires 500 precuts, buying 8'500 8' studs and cutting them is wasting time and material. No big deal but when OVF is talking about saving in time and material, things like this they're not. However, if you can get the 94-1/4" studs to account for one less top plate there's no time and material lost.I'm just talking about new houses with 8', 9' and 10' walls that require precuts. The sheetrock for all three size walls doesn't have to be cut.Joe Carola
Joe.I have seen some OVF details but not the big picture. One top plate? were did this come in?Sorry for sounding like I just fell off the truck. Do you hurricane clip every stud, plate ,truss?Can you show me a link?
Thanks
Do you hurricane clip every stud, plate ,truss?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No
One top plate? were did this come in?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actually has been around for awhile. The thinking is that if you stake your loads, the extra plate is uneccessary! Add to that the savings for a 2 stud corner and 2' centers and supposedly you have a $750 savings. There are some other details.
The reason is to optimize the r value in the walls.
I understand there is now a shear wall that can be used for 2' centers in Cal. and other earthquake zones.
>> I have seen some OVF details but not the big picture. One top plate? were did this come in? <<I don't do this OVFb or whatever it is type of framing. From what has been said and I saw a video people say they use one top plate. It's funny though because the video I saw shows them using two top plates.>>Sorry for sounding like I just fell off the truck. Do you hurricane clip every stud, plate ,truss?<<
Your guess is as good as mine. Apparently from one of the posters here in this thread some of this framing is top secret.Joe Carola
There is a lot of info out there. The problem is the poster makes it sound like a deap dark secret.
I do admit, I was confused by some of his descriptions of how the Arch. or engineer specced it, but it looks like we are not going to get a response after both you and I took him to task!
I wish he would come back and do some more explaining, but....
>> There is a lot of info out there. The problem is the poster makes it sound like a deap dark secret. <<That's where he became useless.>> I do admit, I was confused by some of his descriptions of how the Arch. or engineer specced it,<<So was I because framing isn't usually done that way. But,if he is doing it that way and it's engineered, I believe him 100%. Nothing surprises me anymore. >>but it looks like we are not going to get a response after both you and I took him to task! <<That's because he thinks he's something special and has something that's top secret and everyone is looking for free advise. Since this is OVF, why would it be a secret? He shouldn't come here and brag about a system without any explanations.>>I wish he would come back and do some more explaining, but.... <<He said he uses no hangers and doesn't teonail the headers to the top plates. With that said, the plates must be either facenailed/screwed to the bottom of the headers and maybe even some glue. Maybe the ends of the joists are glued to the header. Maybe they install a single box first facenailing and gluing to the joists. The decking is obviously nailed/screwed and glued to the top of the joists. The sheathing could also be glued.Like I said, if he says it's engineered I believe him. I bid a job once where the first floor ceiling hight had to raised 18". The GC asked me if I could think of anyway to do that. I said that I've never heard of such a thing and that there would be a hinged effect. I've aways raised the first floor 1' using 3-1/2" x 11-7/8" lvl's, but not 18".I said maybe they can use 18" lvl's and sit them on the top plate. We can sheath the outside walls with 3/4 starting at the center of the 4' side of the sheathing so that 2' goes up the 18" lvl and 2' goes down. I also said that we can glue the sheathing. It was just a thought. Then Architect comes back with drawing using what I thought about but using 1/2" sheathing and using simpson straps 1-1/2" wide by 4' high nailed on the sheathing and on the inside walls on every stud.That's how it was framed. I would not believe you can raise a wall 18" high until IO seen it. With this guy and the engineer who designed what he's doing sounds like a good thing and something new that we've never heard of before.Joe Carola
Some of the secrets, I downloaded this years ago and don't have the URL.
Joe H
Joe,Thanks for that. One question so far. Why do you need let-in bracing?Joe Carola
Some places use a 1" or maybe even 1/2" styrofoam board instead of OSB or plywood.so the let in brace, or metal strap is used for racking strength.In my reading I have seen different variations and techniques.
>> Some places use a 1" or maybe even 1/2" styrofoam board instead of OSB or plywood.<<Why would they do that? If the siding is cedar shakes, nailing it to Styrofoam is a good practice?Joe Carola
I'm not sure what they would side with.I am looking at a modified approach.2' OC studs, Double top plate so drywall fits with my precut studs (can't get ones for single top plates and not sure I like just 1 top plate I like tyeing interior walls in with double top plate, and like stiffness of double top plate.), single 2X10 header where span allows, 2 stud corners with strips of OSB, ladder backing where interior meets exterior walls, higher heel on rafter for more insulation, still use OSB on exterior walls, no extra studs on ends of sill plates,
Joe, not the way I'd do it, I just happened to have that download.'
I don't know if that metal stuff is allowed anywhere anymore?
In Calif they used to use 1x6 let in and then stucco on the outside.
About 9 zillion houses were built that way after WWII, but now everything is sheathed.
Those government pubs have a lot of info, doesn't all apply.
Lots of "How to build your own trusses" stuff too, just to PO Bosshog.
Joe H
One question so far. Why do you need let-in bracing?
Didn't think of this this way the first time.
Because there is no sheathing, just that tin which isn't much thicker than drywall corner bead.
Joe H
Same question. Why would they do that? If the siding is cedar shakes, nailing it to Styrofoam is a good practice?Is this another way of eliminating wood and worrying about insulation? How strong can a house be with Styrofoam insulation and no sheathing. I guess the metal let-in holds it together.Joe Carola
Edited 11/18/2009 8:33 pm ET by Framer
The metal was all there was, no sheathing to nail anything to.
With stucco it was wire from stud to stud about every 16" from top to bottom then 15# tarpaper then chicken wire and stucco.
Seismic demands eliminated this technique years ago.
When I was a kid we used to snip wire out of the wire in the garage if we needed a piece of baling wire for something.
Joe H
If I told you then I'd have to kill you.AitchKay
Back in the day it was cheaper and less waste full to get 16' sticks cut them to size and then use the scrap as blocking for window/door trim/electrical boxes. Plus it meant you had lots of 16' stock to pick through for plates.
Helps to have a trailer mounted 16" Comet radial arm saw for gang cutting the studs on a big project.
Most of the framing stuff brought up in this thread was first brought out in the early seventies .. I learned it as the "Arkansas Framing Method" ,supposedly named that because somebody at one of the universities there did an value study on framing and insulation. Still have the booklet on it around here somewhere.
24" o.c. studs,2 stud corners,using the rim as a header on 1st. story , single header out of 2x let in to studs or hung from hangers or dbl. header if needed with foam between the pieces on second level and notches cut into the bottom of the ext. studs for electrical to be run through at the base of the wall (no drilling exterior studs).
Biggest problem I had with it was on the finish work side of things.. combine minimal framing with elaborate built up trim and the lack of backing becomes problematic.
And don't even think about hanging drapery without installing blocking at the framing stage.
Edited 11/18/2009 8:59 pm by dovetail97128
I've used 91 1/4 studs with single plate construction.
Joe,
I have been reading many different things and there are different ideas. Some may cost more but do save in long term heating. Others cost less but may not be quite as good at heating.I am looking at a middle approach. 2x6 stud 2' OC, Still a double top plate as in my area we only get 92 5/8" studs. Using a single 2x10 header on windows and doors under 4', double if above that, both with a 2x6 forming an L, then insulate. To do right sized headers with small cripples above to keep wdw and door heights even seems like more work to me. 2 stud corners with drywall clips. Even considering going with a higher heal on the trusses so more insulation over the top plate on the wall, not sure if I can get appropriate insulation stops for this.
Still a double top plate as in my area we only get 92 5/8" studs.
You could cut 8s to fit. How big a price change from 8's and the time to gang cut them?
2 stud corners with drywall clips.
All those OSB scraps lying about are cheaper than clips and better backing.
"Energy heel" is what you're looking for on the truss, see Mike Smith & Mooney Wall.
Joe H
Edited 11/17/2009 2:17 am by JoeH
I think it would be more time and money to get 8's and cut them for a single top plate.With the OSB scraps they are 3/8 or 7/16 do you screw them to the back of the end stud then screw the drywall to that? Not much for screw to hold in, but i suppose a clip is not any more. LOL
I have done this in renovations but always try to use 5/8 or 3/4 ply.
https://www.finehomebuilding.com/pages/efficient-framing-interactive/index.aspBrian P. from FHB
it would be more time and money to get 8's and cut them for a single top plate
True, but the reason for doing it is to save energy costs down the road.
do you screw them to the back of the end stud then screw the drywall to that
Stapled to the studs, yes. OSB scrap is better than that 3 ply garbage sheathing.
Joe H
With a double top plate we stagger joinst for stiffness, a single top plate would be flimsier? Or does the special simpson plate help a lot to make a long wall, say 48', stiff? Or do the rafters and sheeting do that?Can not seem to find a lot on the internet of this aspect.
It is a funny situation. You could argue that there is a lot of redundancy in traditional wood framing, but at the same time more structural requirements to resist extreme situations like high winds and seismic events are being added to codes. There seems to be people pulling in both directions right now.
The approach I am most comfortable is to use the building envelope to add more energy efficiency, reduce the size and complexity of the building to use less materials and leave the structure alone.
Those plates are 12" or less in length, no stiffness from then.
Can't really tell you what they add, I think a block would do better (double plate just at the splice) but they're code.
Joe H
"I think it would be more time and money to get 8's and cut them for a single top plate."As long as the stud you're using is a PET/exact-length stud, who cares what ceiling height it gives? If you end up with 8'-2 1/2", say, under the GWB lid, cut a strip of 3/8" GWB to infill between the two horizontally-hung main boards.There's no law that says ceilings have to be exactly 8' high.AitchKay
It would be interesting to see what your drywaller would charge you for that 2" strip throughout the house. I bet the boarders might cut 10" off the bottom of 5 foot sheets rather than monkey with the strip.
I can't get 54" drywall never mind 5" LOL
I come from a primarily remodeling POV, so I'm always working some cheat. And since I've never worked with the new, wider sheets, that wasn't my first thought.You're almost certainly right, though, and in that situation, I'd go for a 5-footer in a heartbeat -- they come in 4'-6" widths as well, don't they? Anyway, I'll have to remember that. Obviously, the secret to economical building is avoiding cheats.But compared to cutting every single stud down a few inches, I think I'd go with a GWB cheat, even if 5' sheets weren't available in my area.BTW, most stud lengths avoid best-practice use of GWB, and assume that the tapered edge of the wall boards will be butted up to the ceiling, which is a no-no. Back in the 70s, a good rocker would cut off the tapered top edge, throw it away, and do the 3/8" infill thing to avoid the build-up of excess mud in the corner, which inevitably cracks.I still bring a drywall stripper along when I hang, and cut off the tapered edge for inside corners -- I'm one of the few guys out there who has actually read the USG Gypsum Construction Handbook!AitchKay
I hate the tapers in the corner too but I don't agree that it leads to cracks. I've seen millions of feet that prove otherwise.
We all get away with a lot, a lot of the time.But USG's Construction Handbook, a 500-page bible on the subject, says take the tapered edge of to reduce the risk of cracking.If USG says that's best practice, I'll trust that over anecdotal evidence. And I'll continue to take the taper off.AitchKay
"I'll trust that over anecdotal evidence."Ummmm...millions of feet.....zero cracks.....I know you are going to continue doing it your way but lets be honest about the "whys" and it has nothing to do with "ancedotal evidence". The only reason I don't like the tapers in the corners is because it takes the mud longer to dry. If I'm mudding in dry conditions, it's not a problem.
"...but lets be honest about the "whys" and it has nothing to do with "ancedotal evidence". ??Not sure what you're trying to say...But take it up with USG, not me -- they're the ones who've done all of the lab testing. They say that your goal should be to have zero mud at the very inside of your corner, and that's the best way to ensure that you won't get cracks -- As we all have learned the hard way, different walls/ceilings move differently. And mud is brittle, and cracks when flexed. Obviously, zero mud ain't gonna happen a lot (most?) of the time, but we do what we can do.That's why I cut off the taper, and if there are any 1/4" or larger gaps after hanging, I fill them with setting compound and allow it to harden before taping, whether I'm the guy who's going to be mudding or not.That way there's no chance of the tape getting pushed deep, making for a mud buildup.I don't like callbacks, so I play the odds, and follow best practice.AitchKayPS Download that handbook. You can find it at their site. It's actually good reading.
In the NW, the biggest problem is all the added earth quake engineering. I've sat through several meetings with arch.s, city reviewers, and the framer(me) and the code requirements make it difficult.
As for some of the mentioned methods, doubling rim with lvls where openings are often works, but seems like they always add a step as you dont have end nailing through a king stud into the header so some type of attachment gets called out. Bearing for joist is usually ok with 2x6 walls.
The header hanger usually needs two studs so why not use a king stud trimmer?
Todays designs make it a tough sell.
Did not realize that the header hangers need 2 studs. Never used them yet. Not even available around here.
Got a post saying you don't, probably a different product our archi missed?
Simpson header hangers do not require 2 studs. I've never seen a header hanger that does.http://www.strongtie.com/products/connectors/hh.aspThere is an OPTION for a higher load value with double studs.
Yea, I think it's new enough that the archi's probably didn't spec the right product, this was about two years ago. I think the designers and archi's really have to be up on the program as the city reviewers are tough to convince.
There have been quite a few LEED houses on the market advertising highest ratings...I know somebodies doing it, just takes the education.
"Simpson header hangers do not require 2 studs. I've never seen a header hanger that does."
As recently as the 2008 Simpson catalog, 2-1/2" was required for the supporting post (the king stud).
The 2009 catalog shows the same information that your link shows.
View Image
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
What the picture you posted shows may be an alternate with higher load capacity if you have a thicker stud. But I'm pretty sure that using them on a single 2x4 stud has always been acceptable.
There is absolutely no substitute for a genuine lack of preparation.
Attached is the page from the 2008 catalog along with the next page.It shows 2.5" minimum rather clearly, with no mention of a "derating" for 1.5" posts.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
you have a hole new world in the qua zone i have not had to build in it yet and hope i never have to. to much new stuff to learn.
Arguably anyone that is smart is doing it. Do it ... it just makes sense in all the ways you slice/dice it. While you may need to think just a little different (because it is different), it's a superior approach and less wasteful of the products that take 50 years to make.