elTorito
2014-08-07 10:55:37
- #1
Good morning,
my wife and I bought an old building last year (1960), a detached single-family house in the countryside. Since then, we have been actively renovating. Essentially a complete refurbishment.
The building consists more or less of 2 parts, a main house (approx. 100 sqm) with an annex, both have a gable roof, the annex somewhat lower with a gable roof at a 20° pitch. The roofs are/were not insulated and the surface consists of Eternit asbestos panels.
It's about the roof of the main house, which slopes to the south and to the north. On the north side, the roof extends very low down to the eaves, so that in the upper floor, from about halfway through the room, someone (at 1.65 m) can no longer stand upright; at the eaves side there are only 20 cm from the floor to the roof, so we have decided to raise the north side to create an isosceles (is that the right term?) gable roof, so that the ceiling height in the entire upper floor is equal and the rooms can be used.
The main house consists of a lower floor, above it a concrete slab, and above that the roof without any further intermediate ceiling.
The actual problem is the raising. I am currently in discussion with the structural engineer and am not quite sure how to proceed. The upper floor consists of two masonry and clinker brick gables (east and west), the north and south sides are timber frame walls, internally covered with (seems to me) Teraklit panels, exterior façade with wood (below I don’t know, probably also Teraklit?).
Both walls will be demolished and rebuilt (the old roof truss and as it is constructed would probably not support a tiled roof with the insulation package, (200 mm continuous insulation above rafters and tiles)), the north side will be raised. Now the question is whether we should rebuild these walls with timber frame or masonry.
I prefer masonry; the approximately 10-12 houses my parents built and renovated were all masonry, I know nothing else. In the past, there was never a case where any energy saving regulations had to be observed. Since we are demolishing the walls upstairs and renewing the roof, we apparently have to comply with the energy saving regulations.
My (original) plan was: demolish old walls, build up with calcium silicate bricks, roof truss and roof on top, plaster the outer façade, on the inside a 5 cm Ytong wall plus 3 cm polystyrene and 1 cm gypsum... and sometime later, when the garage is built or the interior finishes are done, we would address the façade and apply clinker brick.
Now the structural engineer (who also has to issue the energy performance certificate) says we cannot do it that way, we must immediately comply with the prescribed energy saving regulation values, and with a 24 cm masonry wall we would not achieve this (okay, I have not yet told him about the interior insulation plan, probably because I am afraid that this is not correct either). With a timber frame wall of that thickness, however, one could meet the energy saving regulation values.
I find it really difficult to come to terms with timber frame construction, and I notice that the structural engineer prefers this method (no surprise, since the recommendation came from the carpenter...).
The structural engineer is already calculating the roof truss, but in order to calculate the stability of the building, we must clarify as soon as possible what we want, masonry or timber... if we still want a chance to finish the roof this year...
Now I understand that if we do timber frame, we must first cast a ring beam on the upper floor (if none exists, which I do not know, the old plans and statics are very cryptic), I also do not know if the concrete slab can serve as a ring beam (the slab is about 12 cm thick I believe).
If masonry is done, probably a ring beam must be placed on the wall? That was the case with the annex.
Time is very important, we already live in the lower floor with 3 rooms, after demolition there is not much time as the next rain will surely come. The plan was: demolish, seal the concrete slab, prop up the old roof truss and cover with a tarp (that's how we did it with the annex), to make it somewhat weatherproof, we would then have to seal the stairwell somehow.
Well, but this sequence comes after the planning, and planning is currently underway. I would still like to have masonry done, I have an appointment with the builder this week, but I do not understand the energy saving regulations, new walls will be built upstairs that must comply with the energy saving regulations, okay accepted, the outer façade should be clinker, but in the ground floor we do not have to comply with the energy saving regulations, so we are basically forced to also apply clinker in the ground floor because we need a foundation for the clinker of the upper floor...
If there's no other way, then timber, but the thought of hollow walls... and every time you want to hang something you have to know where the timber frame is (outside and inside), I imagine subsequent changes will also be more difficult, what if one wants to put an outlet outside for Christmas lights, and/or, you can't plan all this completely in advance, you always forget something or want it differently later... And I also do not know how the sound insulation will be, in the basement it already bothers me that you hear the highway 5 kilometers away when lying in bed (depending on wind direction).
The foundations on the ground floor are probably pumice blocks, gable sides are clinker brick from ground level up, the north/south side on the lower floor is plastered from outside.
To carry out my planned project (masonry, plaster the exterior), and eventually when money/time is available, to do the façade in clinker or some other cladding, what options do we have to comply with the energy saving regulations if we want to work with masonry?
Sorry for the long text
Thank you
my wife and I bought an old building last year (1960), a detached single-family house in the countryside. Since then, we have been actively renovating. Essentially a complete refurbishment.
The building consists more or less of 2 parts, a main house (approx. 100 sqm) with an annex, both have a gable roof, the annex somewhat lower with a gable roof at a 20° pitch. The roofs are/were not insulated and the surface consists of Eternit asbestos panels.
It's about the roof of the main house, which slopes to the south and to the north. On the north side, the roof extends very low down to the eaves, so that in the upper floor, from about halfway through the room, someone (at 1.65 m) can no longer stand upright; at the eaves side there are only 20 cm from the floor to the roof, so we have decided to raise the north side to create an isosceles (is that the right term?) gable roof, so that the ceiling height in the entire upper floor is equal and the rooms can be used.
The main house consists of a lower floor, above it a concrete slab, and above that the roof without any further intermediate ceiling.
The actual problem is the raising. I am currently in discussion with the structural engineer and am not quite sure how to proceed. The upper floor consists of two masonry and clinker brick gables (east and west), the north and south sides are timber frame walls, internally covered with (seems to me) Teraklit panels, exterior façade with wood (below I don’t know, probably also Teraklit?).
Both walls will be demolished and rebuilt (the old roof truss and as it is constructed would probably not support a tiled roof with the insulation package, (200 mm continuous insulation above rafters and tiles)), the north side will be raised. Now the question is whether we should rebuild these walls with timber frame or masonry.
I prefer masonry; the approximately 10-12 houses my parents built and renovated were all masonry, I know nothing else. In the past, there was never a case where any energy saving regulations had to be observed. Since we are demolishing the walls upstairs and renewing the roof, we apparently have to comply with the energy saving regulations.
My (original) plan was: demolish old walls, build up with calcium silicate bricks, roof truss and roof on top, plaster the outer façade, on the inside a 5 cm Ytong wall plus 3 cm polystyrene and 1 cm gypsum... and sometime later, when the garage is built or the interior finishes are done, we would address the façade and apply clinker brick.
Now the structural engineer (who also has to issue the energy performance certificate) says we cannot do it that way, we must immediately comply with the prescribed energy saving regulation values, and with a 24 cm masonry wall we would not achieve this (okay, I have not yet told him about the interior insulation plan, probably because I am afraid that this is not correct either). With a timber frame wall of that thickness, however, one could meet the energy saving regulation values.
I find it really difficult to come to terms with timber frame construction, and I notice that the structural engineer prefers this method (no surprise, since the recommendation came from the carpenter...).
The structural engineer is already calculating the roof truss, but in order to calculate the stability of the building, we must clarify as soon as possible what we want, masonry or timber... if we still want a chance to finish the roof this year...
Now I understand that if we do timber frame, we must first cast a ring beam on the upper floor (if none exists, which I do not know, the old plans and statics are very cryptic), I also do not know if the concrete slab can serve as a ring beam (the slab is about 12 cm thick I believe).
If masonry is done, probably a ring beam must be placed on the wall? That was the case with the annex.
Time is very important, we already live in the lower floor with 3 rooms, after demolition there is not much time as the next rain will surely come. The plan was: demolish, seal the concrete slab, prop up the old roof truss and cover with a tarp (that's how we did it with the annex), to make it somewhat weatherproof, we would then have to seal the stairwell somehow.
Well, but this sequence comes after the planning, and planning is currently underway. I would still like to have masonry done, I have an appointment with the builder this week, but I do not understand the energy saving regulations, new walls will be built upstairs that must comply with the energy saving regulations, okay accepted, the outer façade should be clinker, but in the ground floor we do not have to comply with the energy saving regulations, so we are basically forced to also apply clinker in the ground floor because we need a foundation for the clinker of the upper floor...
If there's no other way, then timber, but the thought of hollow walls... and every time you want to hang something you have to know where the timber frame is (outside and inside), I imagine subsequent changes will also be more difficult, what if one wants to put an outlet outside for Christmas lights, and/or, you can't plan all this completely in advance, you always forget something or want it differently later... And I also do not know how the sound insulation will be, in the basement it already bothers me that you hear the highway 5 kilometers away when lying in bed (depending on wind direction).
The foundations on the ground floor are probably pumice blocks, gable sides are clinker brick from ground level up, the north/south side on the lower floor is plastered from outside.
To carry out my planned project (masonry, plaster the exterior), and eventually when money/time is available, to do the façade in clinker or some other cladding, what options do we have to comply with the energy saving regulations if we want to work with masonry?
Sorry for the long text
Thank you