Looking to get advice on whether or not my dream house I'm in the planning stages of is even possible to build, I'm having trouble finding any information online that isn't historical. Basically, I'm planning on building a garrison house. This is a traditional timber-framed house that was popular in the early colonial days, it consists of a jettied/cantilevered second story. I have two separate dilemmas.Firstly, while I wish for the house to be either entirely or partially timber framed, I do not want the timbers to show except in the basement and attic. In other words, I want them not only sheathed on the outside, but also cased on the inside (preferably with traditional lath-and-plaster walls). But this presents a problem. Historically buildings weren't airtight so the green timbers could breathe easily, but I'm worried that if I not only sealed the exterior with a vapor barrier but also cased the timbers inside that it would essentially lock in the moisture from the green timbers and rot them. Is this a valid concern or no? Would lath-and-plaster allow enough interior air transfer to avoid rot?Secondly, would it be better to build the first story in cinder block masonry and then have a timber second story? In case people are wondering why I'm insisting on such heavy duty construction if the timbers won't even be visible, there's two reasons. Firstly is that I would like this home to not only be my forever home but also to be something that could be passed down for literally centuries. Secondly, I intend on having not only a slate roof, but preferably I want to shingle the second story exterior walls with clay tile. I'm worried that if I used conventional dimensional lumber framing that it would not be able to support the immense weight of all of this unless I doubled everything up, at which point the cost would probably be close to that of a timber frame anyway.
>>2973535>my dream house8 year old girl detected.
>>2973535how old are you?
>>2973541>>2973540What exactly about having a house you've always wanted to build is immature or childish?
>>2973542because at about 28.3 years old you start to realize that not everything you wanted in life is attainable unless you accidentally kick a sack of gold coins laying on the side of the road. and at that point youre already behind the 8 ball so its time to settle for something kinda acceptable plus you talk like youve never assembled an ikea coffee table and definitely dont own land or even a skilsaw and have no clue about permitting and dickhead inspectors and how expensive slate roofs are etc
>>2973544I do own a home, and I'm aware of how expensive everything I'm describing is. I do not have enough cash to do everything in one go but I'm hoping I could basically get the thing dried in and then finish it over time myself. I'm not building something the size of an English country manor, it would be about 2000sqft. And I'm not clueless when it comes to framing, I've built sheds and garages before. But obviously what I'm describing is a little different from conventional construction in this country. Ultimately I don't really give a shit if you don't approve or think it's stupid or that I'm poor, I have money and I have an architectural vision that I'm going for, and if you don't have any helpful input relating to the questions I asked feel free to ignore the thread.
>>2973542>dream housea term used by 8 year old girls who have yet to realize the disappointments of life.My house is really nice but I have never once had a "dream house". dream houses are for spoiled rich kids. everyone else lives in a house barbie.
>>2973546Alright man, I'm sorry that you've given up on life and resigned yourself to mediocrity but I haven't.
>>2973545>I'm not clueless when it comes to framingthe previous posts (heh) say otherwise and you dont seem to grasp how prohibitively difficult to get large beams that arent centercut twisty shitwood in modern times vs ye olde days when trees grew big>architectural visionoh that explains a lot. architects are the bane of the rational and exist only to annoy engineers
>>2973551You're acting like nobody in this country has built a timber frame house since the 1800s, they're built all the time at a much larger scale and cost than what I'm talking about. All I'm asking is firstly whether or not you can case a modern timber frame on the interior and avoid problems with rot considering how airtight homes are now, and secondly whether or not it would be a better idea to have a CMU first story to simplify the joinery. Honestly I don't even really give a shit about whether the timbers are mortised and braced and have all the other fancy carpentry that goes into them since they won't even be visible, I'd just as happily use steel fasteners if it accomplishes the same thing.>architects are the bane of the rational and exist only to annoy engineersYeah man I'm sure Palladio and Wren and Lutyens were all complete dipshits
>>2973553>Palladio and Wren and Lutyensreject vain faggotryembrace utilitarianism
>>2973535useless retard here. shouldn't you ask an engineer or an architect about this?
>>2973585If it gets to the point where I'm actually going through with construction then yes obviously I'm going to be getting my plans approved by an engineer. But I'm trying to suss out if what I'm thinking is a good idea or not without having to pay someone $5000 to tell me no. My main concern is that if I both sheath the timbers on the outside (obviously) and case them on the inside with lath and plaster walls, it's going to be so airtight that the moisture loss from the timbers as they season will get trapped and cause rot.Honestly there's probably so few architects/engineers/builders in this country that have built a timber home that's cased on the interior I don't know if they could really give me a good answer either. I imagine 99% of people building timber frame homes specifically want the timbers visible from the inside to show them off. In all my digging I only found one forum thread from 2007 of a builder that was building a home for a client that wanted the timbers cased, and he was also asking whether it should be done or if rot would be a problem. And the question wasn't properly answered before the end of the thread. Nobody seems to know
There is a difference between vapor permeance and air tightness... Please Google it. Lath and plaster will dry to the interior of you don't use an interior vapor barrier, which maybe you should depending on your climate. Regarding clay tile siding, just like other mass masonry materials you need a capillary break and a drainage plane between the tile and any wood sheathing. Regarding a framing, timber frames are awesome but there's a reason they display the timbers... It's expensive and laborious. If you don't want to see the timbers I'd suggest just frame with 2x6 it'll be cheaper and easier. You can double or triple them up where you want... Of course I'd suggest an engineer decide that given the roof and wall loads. Your "dream house" is doable, anything is doable, with enough time and money. Cantalievered second story is very doable, happens everyday.
>>2973544What a loser lol
>>2973542>>2973535Not him but if you can even consider building a dream house I suggest you have an underdeveloped imagination
>>2973589Thank you for the actual answers. I mean I want the timbers to show in certain areas of the house, like the basement and attic, and I wouldn't mind them visible in other more private areas like bedrooms. But I definitely do not want an open concept house, I want the house very well divided up into rooms, and especially in the living and dining rooms I want the walls completely cased so the timbers aren't visible. But in any case maybe you're right and I should just go with conventional 2x6. I didn't intend on using SIPs so I'm pretty sure I'd have to use convention 2x6 framing anyway. Putting it between the timbers as actual infill would probably be a nightmare as the house settles and the timber seasons over the next few years so it would have to be built outside of the frame anyway. And at that point I'm not sure how much heavy lifting the timbers are actually doing.As I said I already own a home so I'm not scrambling for shelter, this is a project that I can afford and intend on spending the next few years working on.
>>2973586I guess you could do a little of research by yourself and/or look for specialized forums, tools or whatever (chatgpt, even yt or facebook groups) where you could get more specific answers.>>2973592>if you can even consider building a dream house I suggest you have an underdeveloped imaginationnot the OP, but please elaborate. I don't get the logic here. what if the OP has a lot of money and time?
>>2973535Well I have built a small wodden shed (4x4m) and 2 relative big barns (12x20).My advice would be avoid using wood walls at all costs, they deteriorate very quickly and make repairing very cumbersome. See german walls vs American Walls.My wood shed lasted 4 years until it needed wall repairs and 8 years until it needed foundation repairs.Cement flooring or a pillar is a must if you want it to last more than a generation. If you want to return to 1700s stone flooring, you will have houses that last like 1700s: no more than 2 generations.The reason shingles were used was to protect old wood walls from moisture. In modern days walls are often treated with a polymer sealant and waterproof paint, so shingles are unecessary, unless you really want for beau.As long as the main frames are properly treated and you open the windows during baths, moisture should not be a concern, cant say the same for walls.Is a two-story house a necessity? If you dont have horizontal space issues having a larger segmented area just makes building much easier, you dont even need horizontal roofing(pic related)
>>2973535why is this house so lacking in overhangs and balconies
are roof shingles easier to transport and harder to install than corrugated sheet
>>2973544>>2973551wow kinda pathetic. there are plenty of proper beams to be had for a price, it isn't the apocalypse. yeah "dream homes" are retarded but timber framed homes don't need jew engineers or worse jew architects to charge you 80 grand to tell you your lincoln logs will stress. they built these things in all sorts of brazilian shapes and sizes and can easily end up lasting more than 200 years. I like OPs study of garrison form as there are not enough storied timber frames being lived in as dreamy as it is.
>>2973671how did they cut those profiles man
this is my dream house
>>2973546i own my dream housesorry life isnt working out for you
>>2973690Molding planes.
>>2973586Get google to translate websites and look up ‚Fachwerkhaus‘. The building style is traditional to Germany and is still done today albeit seldomly.
>>2973793i don't think those are for large beams anon
>>2973712who dis nigga on the nag
>>2973845They come in many sizes homie. The pic was just an example. You can also use a different place for each part of the detail.
>>2973555what kinda roof is that
Back in the day, those drying tobacco or keeping animals would treat it more like a barn, and so lumber was used below as it was more breathable and allowed for better airflow. Structurally, masonry whether stone or block is better for the first level, as it will not rot from water or splashing. Masonry also serves as a heat sink for sun and warms and dries wood above it. Many houses with masonry also have the advantage of being able to have a cistern if you build it deep enough, where lumber houses would have moisture and humidity issues. If I was building it, I would absolutely do masonry as the first level.
>>2973888roll roofing
>>2973935but why not masonry as the second level too?
>>2974039because wood is comfy and fast
>>2974039The more weight the first story has to support, the thicker the walls need to be. The Monadnock Building has walls that are about 6 feet thick on the ground level. Also, hauling brick up stairs sucks.
>>2973551>architects are the bane of the rational and exist only to annoy engineersPretty rich coming from somebody whose entire profession is so out of touch with reality that they had to invent a whole new degree field (Engineering Tech) just to train people whose job it is to unfuck Engineers' nonsense into stuff that can actually be manufactured. (Admittedly structural Es don't actually seem that bad, MEs are a fucking atrocity these days though, I don't know how these schools get away with churning out people who have absolutely zero understanding of the world outside CAD.)
>>2973535The timber framing guild's website has a ton of information on this, as well as the forum. If you can't find what you're looking for there, the best option is to find an engineer tied to the guild (they have a page for this) and go ask him questions. Be prepared to pay a consult fee, and to face the skepticism of an experienced timber frame professional. But he'll answer your questions if you've got the cash for a consultation.
>>2974234i have no idea how americans build houses. we have at most a single load carrying wall at the center, but usually it's all pillars that support concrete slab above, walls are just for looks and insulation. also we have little electric hoist to lift material
>>2974234>>2974261now post that pic where whole american big building like this was just osb and tubafores
>>2973535dude/girlyou are freakin about shit that just doesnt matter right now. the fuck does shingle with tile mean?all you really want is a house that slightly looks like a garrison house. so build a house a bump out the top floor.
>>2973553>Yeah man I'm sure Palladio and Wren and Lutyens were all complete dipshitsof course they werebut someone putting those three in a sentence is
>>2974553He's talking about vertical clay tiling, a common siding method in England and especially in southeast England, like Surrey. It developed in the middle ages. Many English homes in this area had a masonry first floor and a timber framed second floor. At the time most second story timber frames were infilled with wattle and daub and had exposed timbers which were prone to rot and were not very insulated. Clay tile developed as a way to keep the weather off the timbers and shitty wattle and daub while being relatively lightweight. The practice died out for a while once cheaper construction and weatherproofing methods became available but it experienced a surge in popularity in the late 19th century with the Arts & Crafts movement.>>2974553>all you really want is a house that slightly looks like a garrison house. so build a house a bump out the top floor.OP said he wants a house that will last centuries. Your average stick framed American house built by a scummy contractor and a bunch of drunk Mexicans will maybe last the length of your mortgage if you're lucky, the ones being built in the last 5 years might not even make it that long. I live in New England and there's a house down the street from me that was built in like 1710 and is in better shape (despite having spent most of its life without any modern weatherproofing, sealants, wraps, insulation, etc.) than my neighbor whose house was built in like 2006. Believe it or not people didn't used to be selfish cunts who only thought about their immediate ROI
