nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Timber Frames

Ginger83

Hi, I have heard there are many advantages with building timber framed homes. Would it be worth looking into and could anyone recommend a good company?

Also, we are applying for a local needs pp in the north east area but only one of us is from the area. Would there be any drawbacks applying in one parties name? Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

dogg_r_69

Advantages: Definately the speed of construction You can have a normal sized house's frame built and roofed in about a week The whole build will only take a fraction of the time of building a block house

Also they seem to be much easier to heat and to keep the heat

yop

Definate advantage is heat, we are coming towards the end of self build TF. The amount of insulation that goes into them they are bound to be very warm.

Speed of construction, yes it can be much faster but that is if u are very organised and have all tradesmen ready to move in on time.

Our kit was up within 3 days and we had it felt in 2 more, so it was closed in.

YAPP

Timber Frame Homes.

Due to predesigned, factory fabricated wall panels, timber frames are very fast to erect on a well prepared foundation and building site.

As mentioned, if you manage your trades well, you can have a 3000 sqft timber frame kit & roof erected in less than a week, with windows and felt & battens fitted by the middle ofthe following week; thus providing you with a weather proof envelope to push through your follow on trades (Elec, Plumbers, Blocklayers, plasterers, carpenters, tilers, etc,..

We just moved into our new self build tf home after an 8 month period from first digging out the road way in, to sweeping out and polishing up furnishings....

A 6" Timber Frame wall holds 6" of quilt insulation in the dry structure, compared to a block house with 2" of aeroboard, fitted outside the structure, thus leaving your nearest surface/structure cold & wet on the outside...!!!!!!

We ran services through the attic and drilled the top plate of the internal walls to allow elec & plumbing run down through the wall - No chasing....Self build made easy.!!!!!

Have you any designs in mind ginger83?
There are some good companies in the North, and they sell at good prices to the ROI... We bought off Clarke Homes TF.

Send on a plan to companies and get the best quote, cost nothing to get a quote usually and you see then what you get for your money!

Sean

Tobi2

Ginger83 wrote:

Also, we are applying for a local needs pp in the north east area but only one of us is from the area. Would there be any drawbacks applying in one parties name? Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Hi Ginger83, can't comment specifically on North East area but we applied for pp in my name only as I am the local party, and no problems encountered.
Hubby's name not on pp at all.

Best of luck.
Tobi

towbar

We also applied in North East (Louth) Local needs and only 1 of us from area, planning was also only in one name - worked out ok, thankfully no issues.

We are using Timber Frame from Younger Homes in Derry, they seem similiar in all ways to Carkes however they will price a full supply errect and trim out of the timber frame, so you only need supply builder for foundations, exterior walls and electrical and plumbing.

yop

What you mean trim out Towbar??? Doors and that is it?

towbar

Insultaion and Plasterboard fitted and taped, doors hung, skirtings fitted etc

Ginger83

Is that trim not a standard fitting during the erection period or is that considered extra?

towbar

Very much an extra in fact they were the only ones to quote it although we didnt need it, standard quote is supply and erect frame.
That usually includes:-

Supply only felt and roof battens
supply only plasterboard and insulation
supply only doors and skirting.

Also most quotes are priced based on 600mm centres between studs. Our builder would not work with that and insisted on 400mm centres for studs and roofing. Much debate on this but I'm happier to have the 400's but you are looking at about 5-7% etc.

kadman

towbar wrote:

Also most quotes are priced based on 600mm centres between studs. Our builder would not work with that and insisted on 400mm centres for studs and roofing. Much debate on this but I'm happier to have the 400's but you are looking at about 5-7% etc.

Quotes are not price based on 600 centres. The quotes would be based on the required engineering specification, to carry the loads of the structure. It would be wrong to assume that 600 centres is the norm for pricing. The centres are designated accordingly depending on the load it has to carry. Also the timber section sizes are specified by the engineering calculations, required to support the structure. It may be misleading for some selfbuilders to think that they can specify their own sections, and spacings to suit their budget. You would be allowed to overspecify, as your builder has done. But definitely not under spec.

I agree with your builder that 400 centres are more suitable all round for tf construction. And in my opinion 150 studs are more preferable al round as well, for insulation , structural support ect. But that is my preferred method, and my opinion. Best to stick with your engineered spec, or better.

kadman:)

Victor

There is no absolute difference between timber-frame and traditional construction. While timber-frame is quick once it gets on site, it has a long lead in time.

towbar wrote:

Also most quotes are priced based on 600mm centres between studs. Our builder would not work with that and insisted on 400mm centres for studs and roofing. Much debate on this but I'm happier to have the 400's but you are looking at about 5-7% etc.

Fitting plasterboard (1220 x 2440mm) is easier with 400mm spacing. You paid extra to make thigns easier for your builder.

CJhaughey

kadman wrote:

And in my opinion 150 studs are more preferable al round as well, for insulation , structural support ect. But that is my preferred method, and my opinion. Best to stick with your engineered spec, or better.

kadman:)

Just out of interest why do you think that 150 centres are better for insulation?I would have thought that the less cold bridging the better.
My Trussed roof for instance has 1200 centres but is fully sarked with 17mm T+G to minimise cold bridging.
(even wood is a cold bridge to some extent).

Victor

He means 150mm deep, so that the insulation can be ~150mm thick.

towbar

The 400 centres will increase the cold bridging and I guess thats why the debate arises - the engineering spec will show 600mm centres to be adequate. As Victor said the 400 centres makes it easier for plasterboard to be erected but 600 is a long span for holding up a sheet of plasterboard as well. Who knows, personally happier with the extra studs but it may be unnecessary overkill...

CJhaughey

Victor wrote:

He means 150mm deep, so that the insulation can be ~150mm thick.

I see

I assume thats for external walls only though?

towbar wrote:

The 400 centres will increase the cold bridging and I guess thats why the debate arises - the engineering spec will show 600mm centres to be adequate. As Victor said the 400 centres makes it easier for plasterboard to be erected but 600 is a long span for holding up a sheet of plasterboard as well. Who knows, personally happier with the extra studs but it may be unnecessary overkill...

Yes I feel that it is very much a personal preference internally my mate opted for 400 centres on 100*50 studs however we went with 95*45 studs and 600 centres and double slabbed as well as filled with 4" rockwool.
I am happy as the walls are very dense with the double slab and are almost soundproof.
As long as you put plenty of screws in the boards won't fall off 600's

kadman

CJhaughey wrote:

I see I assume thats for external walls only though?

Yes I feel that it is very much a personal preference internally my mate opted for 400 centres on 100*50 studs however we went with 95*45 studs and 600 centres and double slabbed as well as filled with 4" rockwool.
I am happy as the walls are very dense with the double slab and are almost soundproof.
As long as you put plenty of screws in the boards won't fall off 600's

As you say its a personal preference thing. I would opt for 400 centres both internal, and external wall panels. In my opinion , this gives you a better option for fitting units, built ins, skirtings ect, radiators, rather than fishing around for studs to fix to.

I would also go for 150 studs internally, gives you a better option for soundproofing, running your services in studwork ect.

At 600 centres, a 1200 slab only gets 1 support stud in the middle, it would be more flexible than a 400 arrangement , and there fore more prone for the appearence of cracks. Although 600 centres may be basic spec called for, through out the construction process, it may not be the most user friendly.
But that is just my opinion , based on my experience.

As usual , Victor is spot on, in regard to the 150 stud.

kadman:)

Ginger83

In agreement with kadman, my dad will be our overall finisher to kitchen units etc and has insisted I budget for 400 studs, he believes it will make things a hell of a lot easier to fit plasterboard, units etc, leave things easier for the electrics and reduce the possibility of cracks appearing in the finished interior walls.

I have heard good reports from rockwool insulation. Would this have an advantage over others? I'm hoping to double slab part or all of the house for sound proofing.

CJhaughey

Rockwool seems to be a lot denser than the equivalent fibreglass rolls and seems to deaden the sound a lot more.
Double slab makes a big difference. Try putting a thin layer of jiffy foam under all the plates to insulate any gaps that may be around the plates.
I found that to fit grounds etc you will need to screw a piece of 4x1 between the studs anyway to get a nice flat surface to fix to, whether you use 600 or 400 centres you will have to do this.
I am taping and joining so possibly the issue of cracks appearing are less than if you use a more rigid method like skimming.
However I don't like the hard echo that you get from a room that has been skimmed all over, plus I can't skim but I can tape and join:)
Double slabbing is harder than you think you will have to mark accurately any services that run through the studs so as not to screw into them.
I used 50mm screws in the Screwgun and found it OK the screws are about twice as hard to drive as the normal 35mm plasterboard screws.
150mm studs + 25mm double slab each side=200mm (8")thick wall you will lose a lot of room space in a house if you use this method. whereas 75mm studs +50mm slab = 125(5")mm thick wall. A difference of around 3 inches per wall.
Just something to be aware of.

kadman

I dont know any instance in a timber frame build, where 75 mm studs would be an acceptable size material to use. In my experience 3x2's are not widely used for tf builds,

kadman

CJhaughey

There is no problem with a 3x2 as far as strength goes, it all depends on where exactly you use them.
You should know that with your Cad skills.
I would not like to have them in my external walls however in the internal studs there is no problem.
You do have to be careful with screw placement but that would apply equally with 4x2 studs.
I would say that you are correct in that 3x2 is not widely used in this country but this country lags behind europe in a lot of building practice.
Witness the still widespread practice of allowing open cold water tanks in the attic.

towbar

This probably deserves another thread but since its specifically timber frame related I'll ask anyway.

There has been much debate on the insulation options for timber frame anyone care to list what they are using.

We are currently planning to use 150mm fibre glass in external walls and 100mm internal and 200 in attic (its a bungalow) but I am reviewing this again to see if there is a better option. Does Rockwool offer an additional insultaion option or is it only for soundproofing that it is used?

kadman

CJhaughey wrote:

There is no problem with a 3x2 as far as strength goes, it all depends on where exactly you use them.
You should know that with your Cad skills.
I would not like to have them in my external walls however in the internal studs there is no problem.
You do have to be careful with screw placement but that would apply equally with 4x2 studs.
I would say that you are correct in that 3x2 is not widely used in this country but this country lags behind europe in a lot of building practice.
Witness the still widespread practice of allowing open cold water tanks in the attic.

There is a major problem using 3x2 for internal wall studs. They are entirely unsuitable for load bearing internal studwork, even from the point of running services, fixing units, soundproofing ect. All the timberframe companies in Ireland, would be of the same opinion, thats why they do not use them. if they were suitable, they would offer them as an option on their quotations. They do not.

If you know of a timberframe company, or indeed a tf designer, that reccomends 3x2's for internal or external wall paneling, please post a link, as I imagine a lot of self builders would be interested in a quote, for the cheaper alternative. I would also be interested to see their specs on them.

I do not understand the relation ship between my cad skills, and the suitability of 3x2 for timberframe panels. Please explain. I can draw 3x2 's in any area of a house, it does not make them suitable.

My construction experience tells me this, my timberframe experience, both design and erection , tells me this. I have never seen a tf build using 3x2's, nor a design or engineering spec for 3x2's. I would be very interested to see one.

kadman:)

rooferPete

Hi,

As I read it there appears to be a bit of confusion regarding the 3" x 2" timber for internal walls.

Kadman appears to be reading the studding as structural walls where CJ is referring to them as non structural partitions ?

I can recall when 8' x 4' plaster boards came on the market here with truss roofs, the 600 centres were not supposed to be important where the slabs were concerned.

Because the under side of the truss was supposed to be cross lathed at 400 centres for two reasons ;

The main reason was to prevent the truss from twisting at the ceiling level because of the extra strength supplied by the cross laths.

The second reason was to allow the slabs to be nailed up at the correct centres without them forming part of the building structure which seems to be happening a lot now due to the longer spans the trusses are covering.

I believe T/F has one main enemy in this country and that is abuse of what is a system proven in other countries.

150 mm would be considered the minimum size acceptable in places like the USA where they envy our concrete walls.

They have a lot more experience with T/F than we do considering 2 x 4 's has been a standard part of their construction language for over 150 years, 600 mm or 2 foot centres is standard with them but they would never consider a truss roof without a plywood deck (sheeting).

Even the old structures I have studied in the U.S. were close boarded with 6" x 1" regardless of the roof finish be it slate, tile, metal or felt shingles.

I am not saying their system is perfect considering in some places the decking is now 1/2" OSB or plywood but they do have the experience of harsher climates in some places too much sun and others have Ice Dams, but I believe we should be learning from them.

They do not fool themselves that a cheap T/F construction is a house built for what we refer to as a "Life Time", the official "Life" in today's Irish Construction Industry is fifty years.

Take a 25 year mortgage into consideration and it should not be too long before the lenders will start to value Irish Homes by the age and site value.

I mean no disrespect to Kadman, CJ and others, but this thread should not need to exist if proper standards of construction were covered and enforced by our Building Regulations.

I read threads where people who bought apartments and semi detached homes may as well be living with their neighbours due to the noise transfer between the walls and floors.

There should be no need for this discussion with the so called Standards Authority in this country causing materials to cost more by charging large amounts for IAB Certificates that mean nothing when the materials are used and drawing up regulations that are based on no true Quality Standard remaining totally unaccountable.

I know this is way off topic but it may be worth a look to those in the Industry and the consumers who are considering buying an apartment or semi detached home, http://www.firebar.ie/Legal_Proceedings.htm

.

kadman

rooferPete wrote:

I mean no disrespect to Kadman, CJ and others, but this thread should not need to exist if proper standards of construction were covered and enforced by our Building Regulations.

I read threads where people who bought apartments and semi detached homes may as well be living with their neighbours due to the noise transfer between the walls and floors.

[/url]

.

Hi Rooferpete,

I think you have raised two very valuable points in your last post.

As you say, if proper construction methods prevailed, this thread should not exist. Unfortunately you are only too aware that the current construction methods predominately used, are of a very low standard. I suppose that standard now is dictated by volume and quantity , more so than by quality.
There may be some relation ship to the current requirements of tradesmen in their early apprenticeship training, as the standard they have to achieve in some areas of training is only set at 40% for pass rates. It seems low to me, but thats a whole other thread.

Indeed the current lifetime of a timberframe / block house has been stated in various quarters at between 25-50 years. Strange , when most of us expect to live into our octegenarian years. Stranger again I suppose, that my own cottage is over 200 years old, and still going strong, and would probably not conform by current day regs. But it will last alot longer than some of the tf builds I have seen.

OBTW as to the disrespect, non taken.

But I still would not use 3x2's for internal wall panels, load bearing or non load bearing. I served my apprenticeship with one of the first tf companies in Ireland. And their first houses were with 3x2's. And I have not seen any since , with 3x2. And thats 30 years ago.

150 x 44 for me , my good man, if you please.:)

kadman:)

rooferPete

Hi Kadman,

Looking at the quote I wonder would it be ethical for the next new contractor to adopt the old saying "Never mind the Quality, Feel The Width" as the company motto

I suppose that standard now is dictated by volume and quantity , more so than by quality.
There may be some relation ship to the current requirements of tradesmen in their early apprenticeship training, as the standard they have to achieve in some areas of training is only set at 40% for pass rates. It seems low to me, but thats a whole other thread.

There are still a few around who work to "Ye Olde Standards"

150 x 44 for me , my good man, if you please.:)

Would a fair reply be, Building a Bungalow old chap ?

Happy New Year,

.

CJhaughey

kadman wrote:

T
If you know of a timberframe company, or indeed a tf designer, that reccomends 3x2's for internal or external wall paneling, please post a link, as I imagine a lot of self builders would be interested in a quote, for the cheaper alternative. I would also be interested to see their specs on them.
kadman:)

http://www.scanhome.ie/houses.php
4th Paragraph

kadman

Thank you for the link.

I have been unable to find any other reference to 3x2 on that site, other than in that paragraph.

I have checked through out, but came up with nothing. Indeed any reference to wall panels was concerned with the externals at 145x45. I have checked through their technical manual, and found no other refernce to 3x2. Even their sections ( which i have attached ) , show no sections of the break down of their internal panels.

In fairness , I may still be suffering from the after effects of the chrimbo, and may not have been as thorough as I could have. So if you have any other ref, please post.

Their construction would not be regarded as the norm, as far as peoples concept of a timber frame build in Ireland. It would be nearer to a chalet type construction, and by the sites own documentation, does have its limitations. Lighter section timbers like 3x2 is more prone to distortion, twisting ect, and due regard has to be given to this consideration. It is not the same as a standard tf build, in terms of its external plasterboard / timber cladding finish. As opposed to the norm of brick or block veneer, that people are used to.

I cannot imagine that the soundproofing, or running of services in a 3x2 stud would compare with a 95x45 or 145x45, but as I was unable to get a section through their internal stud ( 3x2 ) arrangement, I cant say anymore on it.

I accept that there is a reference to 3x2 for studwork on their site. But I am confused why I could not find any technical reference to any limitations on using it, or indeed any sections. Maybe I missed it.

Still if I was building a house tomorrow, I would opt for 150x44 studs at 400 centres, both internal and external.

I do believe that size matters;)

Kadman:)

Victor

I think what the amateurs (no offence intended) are missing and the professionals aren't necessarily pointing out on this thread is that timber framed houses are an engineered product. They are designed to normal standards. Taking away from one part of that engineered designed, while not affecting that part, may affect another part - adversely.

YAPP

Framing Timber Section sizing
being used by current NSAI Approved Companies in Ireland that
I can see are standard as follows:
89x38mm for Internal and
140x38mm For External Panels.
600mm c/c pass for majority, but some companies
recommend 400mm c/c, as do I.
We got 400mm c/c for both Internal & External Panels - Great sturdy
construction!!!

Victor:
Lead time for a block layer would be at least 4-7 weeks at the moment, or so I'm told,
and Lead in time from TF co is 4 to 6 weeks... SO I dont think that theres much of a difference, however at wk 7 or 8 when the Erectors are finished you have alot more on site to work with for your follow on trades (sparks, etc); roof up, felted & lathed, windows ready to go in.....
than you'd have when the brickies are finished and cleaned up...!!!
TF definately faster (depending on how you manage you build!)

Rockwool:
Far greater sound properties, but same thermal properties as Fibreglass.
We used 150mm FG in ext, 100mm Rockwool to internals and 200mm FG to attic. - Only way to satisfy yourselves is to experiment in a real finished TF and you'll see for your self - way to go!

Next project is looking like Sheepwool Insulation:
... slightly more expensive, but easier to work with and extra eco brownie points.

Q.
Has anyone ever heard of a Lobby Group to tackle the Govt for Grants for use of ecological building systems like they have in the Norht of Ireland?????

S

PoolDude

I am currently getting quotes from builders on a house I plan to build in the SE. I have access to the Timber Frame kit at a discounted price but based on the prices I have received from 2 reputable builders a block built house is substantially cheaper.

I've looked at www.irishconcrete.ie that gives a compelling argument in favour of block but the TF person who is giving me the deal on the kit and is a good friend is adamant TF is worth the extra cost (they're is nothing in for them).

I also cannot get over the price differences from builder to builder, up to €60k, although I have yet to get an apples with apples comparison.

I'm getting towards decision making time and would appreciate input as to whether TF is worth the significant additional cost over block build?