35 ms·

Balloon framing is worse-is-better (2021)

218 points by chiffre01 4y ago

dbrueck 4y ago
I recently built a largish shed in my back yard and although it's obviously far simpler than an actual house, it has many of the same core elements (including balloon framing), and it really struck me that someone like me could go from idea to a reasonably well done shed with only a little past experience plus some Googling. The traditional mortise-and-tenons approach would have far exceeded my time budget and probably been too far beyond my skill level. The most eye opening bit of learning for me was also mentioned in the article: "The skin of the building, which previously only served as a barrier to keep the elements out, now also braces the wood stud walls, increasing their load bearing capacity." Prior to sheathing, the framing is downright rickety!
- analog31 4y ago
  Oddly enough airplanes are like this too, as I understand it -- the skin is integral to the structure.
  - thereddaikon 4y ago
    Yes most if not all modern aircraft are monocoque.
  - bewaretheirs 4y ago
    Not odd at all -- when weight is critical, you want to make the most out of every gram of material, ideally getting overall structure, aero skin, and pressure vessel in one. Rockets with balloon tanks (such as the original Atlas) even rely on pressure from the propellant tank contents to strengthen the structure.
    - adolph 4y ago
      Which is the reason for the corrugated sections—the space between tanks that needed extra structure. https://apollo11space.com/why-are-the-interstage-rings-of-the-saturn-v-corrugated/ https://apollo11space.com/why-are-the-interstage-rings-of-th...
  - kens 4y ago
    Also automobiles; in the 1960s cars mostly moved from body-on-frame to unibody construction, where the skin is an integral part. The Lincoln Town Car was one of the rare body-on-frame cars, which is why it was often used for stretch limousines; it is much easier to extend the body.
    - twobitshifter 4y ago
      Interestingly electric cars are going back to body on frame. Canoo is a good example of this.
      - 0x457 4y ago
        Well, if you had a giant, heavy slab at the lowest possible point - silly not to use it as a frame. Some EVs are somewhere in-between - not strictly body on frame, but also no unibody.
      - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
        And they have to call it a "skateboard" to get around the biases of a generation of textbook engineers who grew up thinking that body on frame is dumb and old.
  - adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
    With newer carbon fiber airplanes, there isn't much structure other than the skin.
- simonsarris 4y ago
  Funny, I just built a largish (12x16 two story) shed in my back yard, but decided to just learn timber framing because how hard could it really be? The final cost was $5,206.72 (all local pine including boards, no plywood or glue, cedar shingles), and I partly took off about 2 months of work (working on this during the day) to frame it. There are some photos here, though far more on twitter: https://simonsarris.substack.com/p/the-goose-palace https://simonsarris.substack.com/p/the-goose-palace If you can stick frame a shed its certainly not beyond you to timber frame one. You'll need to read a book or two and buy a few hundred $ of chisels. But no part of it is fundamentally difficult. Before this project I've used my circular saw more for cutting down brush than building. Some budget item detail if you want to build something like it: https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1592159452995944449 https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1592159452995944449 And more construction pictures: https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1584169368203956225 https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1584169368203956225
  - rsync 4y ago
    "You'll need to read a book or two and buy a few hundred $ of chisels." There is a third way ... timber framing with steel column caps and timber connectors, etc. ... steel plates from Simpson that you connect with lag or through bolts.
    - simonsarris 4y ago
      Yeah, though this would greatly increase the expense over the chisels, I'd think. For my build you need one 1.5" and one 2" chisel (I have Sorby, ~$125 each), though a 2.5" slick is nice to have. And then some sharpening stones.
    - bewaretheirs 4y ago
      But see the recent discussion of the failure of a bridge in Norway which used wood beams connected by steel elements -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33907276 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33907276
      - 4y ago
- avgDev 4y ago
  I'm getting ready for a shed build in the spring! Love hearing other nerds doing this stuff. I just finished a horizontal cedar fence. Building physical stuff is much more fun than programming, a bit more wear and tear on the body though.
  - dbrueck 4y ago
    It is really gratifying to look outside every day and see the finished project, that's for sure. Overall I really enjoyed it, but I found that my ability to estimate the time for each step was way off - everything took far longer than I planned. Probably lack of experience. > bit more wear and tear on the body though So true - it took me a loooooong time to recover from the day I poured the cement pad under the shed. Good luck on your shed in the spring!
- djaychela 4y ago
  I'm currently extending my house in the UK (where this construction is less common for full houses) and the upstairs dormer is built in much the same way. While I wouldn't have described it as rickety before sheathing, it's definitely much more solid once the walls have each side covered in well nailed-on OSB - it gains a lot of stability that's otherwise lacking to a degree as there's no diagonal bracing (other than some temporary elements which are removed as you add strength). I'm not a builder (I'm a musician for the most part), but what I've built is to a pro standard and millimetre-accurate. That wouldn't have been the case had it been post-and-beam!
- twobitshifter 4y ago
  For barns and barndominiums there’s a the third technique which is a pole barn with set poles and trusses. For the poles today some people use tripled up 2x6s or doubled with 3/4” plywood in between. It’s easier than mortise and tenon, but setting the trusses is where things can get tricky if it’s tall.
  - rsync 4y ago
    Nonononnonono. That is, yes on pole structures which can be great. But remember, a pole building is, ipso facto, a temporary structure. The poles are always rotting. Even the 8x8 heartwood columns 30x coated in creosote ... after 30 years of service they had to be chopped and under-joined to prefab concrete columns. And so with that in mind, the idea that you would replace a 6x6 column (with 6x4 = 24 inches of surface exposure to ground and fungi) with a 6x6 exterior exposure and another 24 inches of interior* exposure (between each 2x6) is crazy. I know people are doing it. I know the wood is treated. It is in the ground and wet and if you dig it up in ten years you'll have 3 little 1x5 wedges surrounded by rich, fungus filled dirt. I don't know if a pole structure is the right choice for (you or your project) but do yourself a favor and use actual poles.
    - mikeyouse 4y ago
      Most barns / barndomminiums don't bury the wood - they pour concrete footings like any other normal structure and then use steel stand-off brackets proud of ground level to ensure there's no wood in contact with the earth. Then yeah, tripled up LVLs are common as well; https://permacolumn.com/products/sturdi-wall-brackets.html https://permacolumn.com/products/sturdi-wall-brackets.html
      - rsync 4y ago
        Maybe semantics but I don't really think of that as a pole structure anymore. When I think of a pole structure, I think of continuous poles that extend into the ground. Almost all of your sway strength is dependent on a continuous member going below ground level and most of the economies of a pole structure are realized by not building the footing all the way around. That said, if you are not bound by seismic it is perfectly reasonable and I agree with you - Brettstapel[1] columns, such as sistered 2x6, would be just fine. From your link - here is what I would think of as a pole structure: https://permacolumn.com/products/perma-column-system.html https://permacolumn.com/products/perma-column-system.html ... and we have used that product (Perma-Column) to retrofit one of our barns: 24 reps of jack up, chainsaw off, dig out hole, and insert from below ... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brettstapel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brettstapel
- dimitrios1 4y ago
  > Learning to cut mortise and tenons took years of training as a carpenter For the same reason you mentioned, namely Googling and YouTube videos, I don't believe this is the case either. When the pandemic first struck, I took an interest in carpentry. I found a guy named Paul Sellers who guided me through constructing not only my first project in a set of durable trestles that I still use most days today, but also my first workbench, which I built the frame using, of course, M&T joinery. Each joint while not exactly the most beautiful work is still functional and holds true. It takes some time, patience, the willingness to be steady and not rush -- traits I think we all possess or can learn to posses. I have also since undertook some more modern carpentry jobs using construction lumber and built garage shelving, a playground for my kids, a back deck, and replaced some rotting facia boards on my home. The takeaway for me was, while I was pleased with being able to produce useful things for my family to enjoy, the act of using a powered circular saw, wrestling with an air hose to run a dangerous nail gun, and fussing about with construction adhesive and caulk was definitely no where near as enjoyable (or therapeutic) as the process of chiseling out those mortices, or sawing wood by hand. And I am proud of all the projects I have done, but the thing I am the most proud in a weird way was the work I was able to be more intimate with. So better here may mean more efficient and economical, which I 100% agree with. But it also comes at a loss in my view. I dream of building a house one day, of modest size. When that time comes, I am almost certain I will attempt to do it the traditional way. (fyi If anyone is interested in learning balloon framing, I cannot recommend Larry Haun's house framing series enough)
  - mikeg8 4y ago
    Nice comment. You hit the wood dowel on the head ;) regarding the chisel work being more intimate. I think it comes down to commodity vs craft - and if the goal is to simply produce a house or to produce a house where the process and craftsmanship was good for your soul.
    - dimitrios1 4y ago
      Thanks. The loss of craftsmanship is something I think about and lament on frequently. It's not just about making things. Of course modern methods are more "efficient" in the strictest capitalistic sense. But there is more to the puzzle than that. I fear we aren't considering what we have lost in return, not limited to relationship between master and apprentice, knowledge transfer in the most natural way, and the connection to your work, to name a few. And with the ongoing improvements to AI via things like ChatGPT, and the learning tools and tricks and opportunities they open up, and more of the old craftsman and tradesmen and women of old passing on to the next life, we may soon start to also see the decline of knowledge soon, as we will relegate more and more of that to our models.
- swayvil 4y ago
  I skinned my freestyle shed with metal roofing stuff. Heck yes it adds to the strength.
- hunter2_ 4y ago
  > Prior to sheathing, the framing is downright rickety! Some IKEA furniture, such as their cheap bookshelves, are an amazing example of this. Basically it's a rectangle that wants to lean into being a parallelogram, and it readily does, until you tack up the backing piece which is like 1mm cardboard with dozens of nails. Cardboard that would bend, twist, rip, etc. in many directions, but works perfectly at keeping that parallelogram rectangular! Same idea with sheathing/framing.
  - otikik 4y ago
    It will be even more solid if you add some carpentry glue and an extra beam. It takes the same time to build and makes them more solid too. https://youtu.be/u_caV1-mj_o https://youtu.be/u_caV1-mj_o
  - xattt 4y ago
    Specific examples are the classic BILLY bookcase and the IVAR shelving system. The latter is absolutely unusable without the crossbrace piece.
  - Bluestrike2 4y ago
    Traditionally, furniture makers have used different types of backs to increase the rigidity of the carcass, depending on how the carcass was constructed. If it's just an open box, for example, it'll require a more significant back compared to if it has multiple dividers spanning the interior. This excerpt[0] describes a few common types with relevant illustrations. Ikea--and other flat pack furniture--takes this approach to an extreme. Their backs are the absolute bare minimum to keep the carcass sides square under their own weight. Apply a bit of pressure to the corner of one of their bookcases, for example, and you can easily move it out of square. Cheap knockdown joinery that's meant to be easy to assemble make the problem worse. The bookcase won't have a very long lifespan, but that's acceptable for most of their customers. They're cheap and easy to replace for a reason. Other Ikea cabinets, with internal dividers, are a bit stronger because they're no longer relying on just the back to increase rigidity. As for homebuilding, exterior sheathing plays a critical role in racking strength, resisting wind loads, etc. by effectively tying the stud wall assembly together. But as with the Ikea bookcases, for builders looking to save every penny that can be found, there are options. Stuff like Thermo-Ply--basically, aluminum-faced cardboard--is used in lieu of plywood or OSB. It might not immediately disintegrate if it's properly covered with a quality house wrap as a water-resistant barrier, but how common is that with most production builders? And that's completely ignoring serious weather events like hurricanes, which will turn all that cardboard into mush. You can even take it a step further and rely on metal strapping and tension ties instead of structural sheathing.[1] That kind of house should at least use panels of foam insulation on the exterior, but given that it's generally a radical cost-saving measure, you'd be lucky if you even get that. Here's a terrifying video[2] walking through a new spec home that just relies on a cheap and ineffective house wrap. The unlucky buyers are going to have lots of fun with water damage, mold, bug infestation, and more. To say nothing of the house's other problems. 0. https://blog.lostartpress.com/2021/03/09/types-of-cabinet-backs/ https://blog.lostartpress.com/2021/03/09/types-of-cabinet-ba... 1. https://www.continuousinsulation.org/sites/default/files/H309RU.pdf https://www.continuousinsulation.org/sites/default/files/H30... 2. https://youtu.be/zRy1AZYrUE8?t=75 https://youtu.be/zRy1AZYrUE8?t=75
- jccooper 4y ago
  Framers use a variety of temporary braces and download to make the building work before the sheathing. (In stick framed buildings pre plywood, those diagonals are permanent, and let into the studs.) It's one of the things newbies can miss, and makes a big difference.
- baremetal 4y ago
  You can 'X' brace the wall and its rigidity is greatly improved. I recently used this technique when building a temporary support wall to cut a 10'x7' hole in the side of a commercial building and had to temporarily brace several of the roof trusses
rr888 4y ago
> sprinkler systems have reduced the risk fire poses Not so fast. My 5+1 has loads of sprinklers and its a nightmare. Every few years the sprinklers start leaking, or someone drills a hole or breaks a spinkler pipe. It causes catastrophic damage. Its one of the main reasons my next place will be concrete.
- ltbarcly3 4y ago
  Sprinklers slow fire spread in buildings that are properly constructed. If fire can spread inside the walls and above ceilings a sprinkler is not going to do much.
  - rr888 4y ago
    We have sprinklers in the space above the ceiling too, which I presume is building code. The walls a sealed.
    - ltbarcly3 4y ago
      I meant in regards to the article mentioning the need for fire blocking and other additional work to prevent spread of fires in walls.
- jdhn 4y ago
  There's been some very interesting advances made with ICF (insulated concrete forms). If you live in a natural disaster prone area and are building from scratch, I'd check them out.
- rch 4y ago
  Take a look at Insulating Concrete Forms (ICFs). They can incorporate diverted waste styrofoam, bulk mycelium, or maybe even biocomposite lattices.
- jeffbee 4y ago
  This is why insurance costs more for sprinkler buildings.
ajuc 4y ago
I wonder why people don't use this in Europe. It's mostly airbrick or brick detached houses and concrete apartment blocks.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
  One reason I've heard is the much higher cost (and lower availability) of appropriate lumber. The forests were mostly cut down hundreds of years ago, while in north America, that process is still underway (though thankfully slowing a bit).
  - eugenekolo 4y ago
    I'm not sure forests being cut down is the problem these days. Wood is one of the most renewable and sustainable materials out there. Old growth has been cut down, or become out of most people's price range at this point in NA, but farmed fast growing pine is cheap and sustainable. Perhaps NA has more land to support such farms though.
    - wiredfool 4y ago
      It's not in Europe. Wood is expensive here. A 2x4 stick here (Ireland) is ~ 12 eur at the local home center. And yes, we have tree plantations, but they're mostly sitka spruce, and there aren't _that_ many of them compared to potential demand for wood.
  - flavius29663 4y ago
    The US cut down its forests too! Since the early 20th century, it started to replant more trees than it cut, and now has an ever increasing area of forests, much more than in 1930s for example.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
      Total area is up .. from the 1930s. However, some of the most wooded areas (e.g. the Pacific NW) are currently at about 20% of what they were when europeans arrived.
PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
I find the terminology here odd. I've always been told that it's * timber frame construction vs * stud frame construction and that stud framing is divided into ballon framing (now rarely used, because of fire hazards, as noted by the article) and platform framing. I've never come across "balloon framing" as the generic term for "build a house with lots of small wooden vertical pieces, plus sheathing".
- jessaustin 4y ago
  It's a matter of perspective. TFA is a history, and has a historical perspective. That is, it uses the original meaning of "balloon frame". You've been talking to carpenters, who don't care much about the history but do need a name for the weird stuff they occasionally have to remodel. "Balloon-type" balloon framing is still practiced even for new houses, because it allows a lot of exterior work to be done on the ground instead of three stories up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_jmNLNnqSM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_jmNLNnqSM
- shortstuffsushi 4y ago
  In my experience, "balloon framing" meant that a two story house was framed with two story studs. That is, 14-16 foot studs, sometimes sistered if the local wood wasn't long enough.
- dmtroyer 4y ago
  I had the same understanding and it was very distracting reading this article.
londons_explore 4y ago
It's notable how building construction is very regional. For example, balloon framing is very rare in most of Europe - where people generally prefer brick, stone, blocks or even cast concrete. Something that won't rot away or creak in the wind.
- gonzo41 4y ago
  Wealthy Europeans 'generally' build for the next generation. Also they have winter to deal with.
  - makeitdouble 4y ago
    True, also to note brick construction traditionally can be dirt cheap if you adjust for materials and processes that are readily available locally. Nowadays there’s the option to go with hollow concrete blocks which makes building way faster and cheaper as well.
  - crazygringo 4y ago
    Ballon framing filled with insulation and covered with insulating sheathing is far more energy-efficient than old walls made of brick, stone, or concrete in the winter. That's why in the freezing northeast of the USA, it's all balloon framing -- while in sunny Florida they can build with cinder blocks instead.
  - prottog 4y ago
    > Also they have winter to deal with. Europe doesn't really have winter compared to North America, unless you're making a quip about their energy crisis ;-). Compare someplace continental and ridiculously far north like Rovaniemi, Finland to, say, Fargo, ND; the latter has colder winters, despite being 20 degrees of latitude further south. And yet everyone in Fargo builds with stick frames. A well-built and well-maintained wood house can last multiple generations and keep warm in the meantime. Though, granted it's probably more expensive to maintain than equivalent masonry.
    - ilyt 4y ago
maerF0x0 4y ago
And prefab has had it's own evolution. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNv13fY_3jY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNv13fY_3jY
londons_explore 4y ago
It isn't easy to build a thermally efficient building with balloon framing. That's because you have solid wood between the inner and outer skin in hundreds of places. And wood has a thermal conductivity of 0.2 W/mK, which is pretty bad compared to say PIR foam insulation at 0.02 W/mK. Anywhere with high energy prices, hot/cold climates, or environmentally conscious buyers, thats a no-go!
- csours 4y ago
  Interesting solution: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtviZ2GHWCI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtviZ2GHWCI If you don't want to click it's T-Studs - 2x3s with diagonals dowels with a 1.5 inch air gap
  - londons_explore 4y ago
    Frustrating to find that they're more expensive than regular studs - they ought to be cheaper because they need less wood to make, less mass to transport, etc. The actual manufacturing steps I'm sure are all automated, and not exactly complex, so the added manufacturing steps should be far outweighed by the reduced raw material and logistics cost. I'm going to guess the increased price is some combination of 'we have a patent on it' and 'we charge more because there are no competitors, because we have a patent on it'.
- crazygringo 4y ago
  Huh? Yes it is -- that's what insulation sheathing is for, a layer in between the wood and the exterior. They're the gigantic pink foam panels you see covering buildings under construction. Balloon framing is extremely thermally efficient, which is why it's used in places like the northeast US which have freezing winters!
  - mikeg8 4y ago
    Eh, kind of. Builders in the northeast didn’t choose balloon framing because it’s thermally efficient - they just didn’t have alternatives in the same cost range. Many homes in that region were build with masonry claddings as well to increase thermal mass and R value of the wall. The foam sheet insulation you speak of is relatively new to the industry, at least for middle class homes. Having a continuous layer of insulation outside the framing definitely makes stick framing more energy efficient than it would be with traditional fiberglass batt insulation in a wall cavity.
gbronner 4y ago
The author fails to connect the dots: 1) Nails were expensive. Timber framing does not require any nails -- it uses dowels which can be made cheaply with a drawknife. 2) Unlike @simonsarris' wood, most wood available to post and beam constructors was not particularly straight. Post and beam is very tolerant of faults in lumber. 3) With post and beam, you don't need to square all four sides of a beam. You can get away with squaring off one(the external one) plus the spots where any corner braces go. If you are hewing with a broad axe and an adze, this is a huge time saver. 4) In rural post and beam construction, the beams do not all need to be the same size. You can use whatever tree you have lying around, as long as it is big enough. This is an advantage, as you can use a local tree and save the extremely laborious trip to the sawmill So to summarize, you can have a bunch of low-skill farmers harvesting and preparing trees for beams. Then you need a high-skill carpenter to put the mortises in and assemble the whole thing.
- bigmattystyles 4y ago
  Shouldn't the author have also mentioned cheap drywall? To me that led to worse yet much faster and cheaper construction. It's also so easy to work with that even I learned how to do most things (slowly but well). My expensive bay-area wall feels like a carton box and I think it's because i grew up in a masoned house. (I know masoned buildings are not viable in CA due to earthquakes, but man does my house feel like it could just get blown away by a mild gust here)
  - csours 4y ago
    They have talked about drywall in a previous post.
  - maherbeg 4y ago
    They actually wrote a whole article on dry-wall and theorizing on what the next iteration of it could look like https://constructionphysics.substack.com/p/comparing-process-improvement-in https://constructionphysics.substack.com/p/comparing-process...
    - 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mikeg8 4y ago
As a builder, I really don't get the point of this piece arguing that stick framing is "worse". The author makes very weak arguments for the "worse" category to make a connection to tech engineering/ software development. > Balloon frame has a few disadvantages. One major one is that the exterior wall studs all the way to the roof, which provides an unbroken path for fire to travel. Fire blocking is a very simple and well-known practice that avoids this pitfall completely. the failure to mention fire blocking makes me question the authors overall construction competence. It feels as if they are arguing that stick framing is worse than timber frame construction because it's "more difficult to engineer many more smaller connection points". which may have been the case in the early days of stick framing, but like in software development, builders have developed codes, standards, conventions etc. that make modern framing very much a straightforward process. As well as all the fasteners and metal hardware has been exhaustively engineered. > And beyond that, as a structural system, it lacks any sort of aesthetic elegance or simplicity. It’s made up of lots of flimsy-looking members. Yea, thats the point! Structural elements do not need to have any aesthetic appeal as they are hidden by finishes and cladding. Its a feature, not a bug. As long as it is structurally sound, that is all that matters. > It’s undesirable from an architectural perspective as well. Balloon framing has largely been used for simple residential structures (or worse, mobile homes) that have historically had little architectural involvement. The size and strength of dimensional lumber makes it difficult to use it to create large or architecturally impressive spaces... The architecturally influential residential buildings are more often built from more flexible materials such as concrete or steel. I disagree with this as I've seen some incredibly beautiful "architectural" homes that used wood framing but that's subjective and not my primary objection. Where i have more of an issue that now the author is comparing wood stud framing to concrete and steel which is an apples to oranges comparison. It's an inconsistency it what the main subject is being compared to that makes the overall thesis of this fall very flat for me. The "worse is better" paradigm may make sense for many software applications, but the connection here to residential construction and framing practices is such a strecth.
- grosswait 4y ago
  My impression was completely opposite of yours. The whole article is on the merits of this construction method and how and why it has become dominant.
swayvil 4y ago
I built a shed in my back yard a couple years ago. I got yelled at by the people on a certain carpentry forum for straying from the balloonframe orthodoxy. Nonetheless, my shed is solid as a brick and widely admired for its looks AND engineering. (PIX : https://imgur.com/a/4Yr21PR https://imgur.com/a/4Yr21PR ) Much of what is called proper modern shed engineering (IE the building code) is actually just how to meet the minimum legal requirements for the least amount of cash. So keep that in mind. My next shed is going to be a bag of air sprayed with foam.
- turtlebits 4y ago
  Looking at your shed, I would be concerned about the lack of sheathing to give it structural integrity from lateral loads/shear. I do see the two 2x4"s on the back wall, and I guess it's fairly light with the metal roofing as walls...
  - swayvil 4y ago
    By lateral loads/shear do you mean pressure from the wind? Like, sideways pressure? That roofing on the walls is pretty tough stuff. Serves as a diagonal brace and more. I don't think it's gonna fold over.
legitster 4y ago
This... isn't quite right. Balloon framing as traditionally defined is all but non-existent anymore. The author is smooshing concepts together. Balloon framing was purely a method of convenience back when consumers were able to get their hands on 30-40 foot framing timber. As such, it was only popular during a limited window when sawmills were popping up across the West and virgin old-growth forests were being clear cut. The author is using "balloon framing" to describe the entire concept of modern framing. But if you start throwing around "balloon framing" to describe modern houses you will at best get weird looks from contractors and at worse draw the eye of fire inspectors.
- jccooper 4y ago
  The author was actually looking for "stick framing", of which balloon framing is a particular technique. (The term was originally derogatory, coming from the perspective of the timber framers.) The image comparing balloon and platform techniques should probably have suggested the existence of a broader term.
  - thaumasiotes 4y ago
    This is what the author says: > Today in the US, most houses and apartments are built using light framed wood construction. > This system is a variant of a framing style known as balloon framed construction Also, to the guy sidethread, the distinction between balloon framing and platform framing is the subject of several paragraphs, with illustrations.
    - brudgers 4y ago
      Balloon framing has a specific legally binding definition as described in building codes. In the building codes it is a method of light wood framing (not the other way round). It can also be a method of light metal framing…in practice this is probably more common in the wild (in the US), because long light metal studs are straight and lightweight and hence more “wieldy.”
    - legitster 4y ago
ilyt 4y ago
This sounds more like optimizing for different features than "worse". Being easy to build with easy to access materials is advantage all on its own.
nine_k 4y ago
I don't see how is this comparable to "worse is better". It's just "simpler is better for simpler things", which is hardly controversial. Use two dimensions of wood, simple connectors like nails, simple hand tools, less precision work. Heck, you end up using less wood even if you heavily overprovision and thus tolerate local faults, compared to large-beam construction. It's an aerospace-grade win. What "worse is better" means in the software world is that an easy-to-do solution overtakes all, from simplest things where it belongs to the very top. This way PHP, which was a poorly-made thing even according to its creator, not just took over the space of simple dynamic websites, but also ended up powering world's largest services, such as Wikipedia and Facebook. (Now PHP looks hip; back when Wikipedia and FB experienced their meteoric growth, it sucked as hard as the legends have it, at everything about programming craft, but was a piece of cake to run and host.) For the author's analogy to hold, the Empire State Building would have to be built with balloon frame technology, and somehow stand.
- ltbarcly3 4y ago
  I agree with most of your points, the article gets it backwards in lots of ways. The worse solution generally comes first, it's worse because it was 'quick and dirty' and didn't try to elegantly and optimally solve the problem. The worse solution generally is actually worse in some significant ways, but these defects are small compared to the advantage of being a solution that is available much earlier and conceptually simple enough for users to successfully apply without lots of training and false starts. Balloon framing is so easy that you can watch a video and then go do it, it requires simpler tools, cheaper lumber, and much less precision. There's no working worse-is-better analogy here, which is why nobody uses post-and-beam framing for anything outside of niche luxury homes. It's not better in any way other than looking older.
throwawaaarrgh 4y ago
Luckily we are not allowed to build houses like software bros on HN are allowed to build billion dollar companies. A shitty tech stack going down doesn't often burn down other companies. But a city full of balloon frames leads to an entire city burning to the ground. If anything, the modern building code is a testament to why the way people on HN build software is at best irresponsible and at worst a threat to society.
- haihaibye 4y ago
  Gerald Weinberg put it better: "If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization."
baremetal 4y ago
It is interesting to note that post and beam construction is still fairly common in the US. Just not for residential buildings. It is used extensively for agricultural barns and commercial and light industrial buildings particularly in rural areas. Often buildings that have sheet metal exteriors are "post framed". Post framing is quite similar to post and beam. A "mortise and tenon" connection is implemented for securing the roof trusses to the posts. On site laminated 2x material is used or a notch is cut in post.
notJim 4y ago
> Prefabrication of larger components, outside of a few building types optimized for it, remains elusive I thought this was a weird one. Aren't roof trusses pretty often made off-site and delivered and craned into place? I also see trucks with framed-out walls driving around that just seem to need to be lifted and nailed into place. Is that not what those are?
- ltbarcly3 4y ago
  Yes, but trusses can only be used in houses where you use trusses? It means you do not have much or any usable attic space, and the roof shape has to be a very simple gable roof with the living space completely non-intersecting with the roof structure space.
gregschlom 4y ago
The thing about "X is worse-is-better" is that it applies to pretty much anything. Take "X", observe that it has pros and cons, and you can go on and claim worse (cons) is better (pros). Not a very useful analytical framework. Interesting article otherwise.
ratstew 4y ago
,
adolph 4y ago
This video is worth watching on the topic: The Genius of 2x4 Framing by Stewart Hicks It covers similar ground and has a thesis that “what allowed the hamburger to take over as the quintessential American cuisine and get exported everywhere are the same historical, cultural and economic confluences that contribute to the proliferation of the light wood frame for construction. . . . Light wood framing is the hamburger of the building industry” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S6mUFrXexAk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S6mUFrXexAk
LarsDu88 4y ago
Since this is hacker news, I feel like the direct analogue here is the dominance of Python and Javascript over other (higher activation energy) programming languages.
magicbuzz 4y ago
In the appendix links at the bottom, there's a comment that a large percentage of houses in Japan are still built with post & beam. I've been prompted with a slew of recent "Japanese carpentry videos" that seem to sync with this. I'm curious why it's still prevalent in Japan? Most new Japanese houses are not built in the old machiya style.
ltbarcly3 4y ago
This is a very good article about balloon framing and how houses are built. However, balloon framing is NOT an example of worse-is-better. Post-and-beam, the technique that balloon and platform framing have replaced, is just worse-is-worse. It requires more effort, more expensive materials, more skilled labor, and is less sophisticated in how it uses materials and so for the same amount of materials produces a weaker and less stable, less efficient structure. Worse-is-better is about how a faster to market, good enough solution that people can use is better than the 'better' solution that comes later. The solution that is simple will be used again and again, the elegant solution that is more efficient or more general but harder to apply will be neglected since users have high skill with the simpler tool and will prefer it as a result. Balloon framing (and then platform framing) is simpler AND more elegant AND far cheaper AND produces a superior result, so it's simply not a case of worse-is-better.
wardedVibe 4y ago
A discussion of this and the 2x4 from an architect that I found interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6mUFrXexAk&t=657s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6mUFrXexAk&t=657s
insaneirish 4y ago
This is a funny article. Others have mentioned that it's a little murky if the author is critical specifically of balloon framing or of stick built construction in general. The irony is that balloon framing is more feasible today than ever. Balloon framing downsides: 1. Really long dimensional lumber 2. Fire risk of continuous cavities 3. Ledger/joist connection to balloon studs The solutions?: 1. Engineered lumber. Dead straight and incredibly strong LSL (laminated strand lumber) and LVL (laminated veneer lumber) come in basically whatever length you reasonably need them. 2. Fire blocking is well understood. Insulation materials like mineral wool can further drive fire risk inside a stud cavity to near zero. 3. An innumerable number of well engineered and reasonably priced structural fasteners and metal connectors with well understood properties make it straight forward to build a second story floor off of balloon framed studs. 2022 is a great time to be balloon framing. In fact, you'll see it in large great rooms for floor to vaulted ceiling walls. Some framers who like to preassemble as much as possible on the ground and then lift the wall for efficiency and safety will balloon frame as well.
- mbjorkegren 4y ago
  Cool! Do you have any links for this? So far I found this video series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_jmNLNnqSM&list=PLSab5V2CnIbB7nC04rnUOiIf5WFwvkAfB&index=3&ab_channel=AwesomeFramers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_jmNLNnqSM&list=PLSab5V2CnI...
  - insaneirish 4y ago
    That's exactly the link I would have sent you. :-) Tim is an excellent teacher and the perfect example of this technique.
komali2 4y ago
> Something as simple as installing a lightswitch all of a sudden becomes a major piece of coordination if your building is made of concrete. It seems most buildings in Taiwan are simply made of concrete. IDK too much about construction but when I watch them build it's like, frames of metal into which they pour wet concrete. It's crazy how fast buildings get put up this way, they tore down an entire building down the street from me, started construction about maybe 3 weeks ago tops, and today there is a fully formed building with fixtures, windows, the works, sitting there. Quite pretty, actually. But this quote is for me one of the huge downsides. It's a NIGHTMARE to hang anything on my walls, first off. If I try to put a pin in for a poster, it bends. A nail could end up taking out chunks of the wall if I'm not careful, if I can even penetrate. And, once the fixtures are in, that's it. To run more wire, you've got to get out the (I think?) jackhammer. It seems every day all I hear is the sound of concrete being banged away at with some kind of power tool. If it's happening in my building, it's reverberating through the whole structures. It's horrible lol. There's upsides though! Normal sounds stop HARD at the boundaries of an apartment. If you're outside someone's apartment door, maybe you'll hear something, but we don't hear shit from the neighbors, and I've checked, they can't even hear when I'm producing bass heavy music. I like that. Gotta make sure to get some stuff up on the walls though to prevent echo.
- orthoxerox 4y ago
  > To run more wire, you've got to get out the (I think?) jackhammer. Don't they leave conduits and junction boxes in the walls when they run the initial wires?
  - komali2 4y ago
    Yes but if you need it somewhere the conduit doesn't run, you've gotta bang more conduit into the wall. Frankly I find it terrifying cause I don't think the contractors know anything about that structure of the building and who knows what they're doing to the structural integrity of a building in an earthquake zone. Like I said I'm ignorant of this stuff so maybe its not a big deal.
Zardoz84 4y ago
Interesting... In Europe, we simply build the houses using bricks, cement/concrete and beans of steel or concrete. We not waste wood, and the houses are more solid and not have problems with insects or moisture damaging the wood structure. I think that it's the usual since the 60's . However, I saw older structures using wood beans, mixed with stone, bricks, and/or adobe.
- bartread 4y ago
  In at least some parts of the UK brick clad wooden houses, which I would imagine are probably balloon framed, are somewhat common in new developments (East Anglia, for example). Insulated cavity walling with blockwork inner leaf and brickwork outer leaf (or sometimes rendered blockwork) remains incredibly popular though.
- symmetricsaurus 4y ago
  Europe is not uniform in this regard. For example in Sweden almost all houses are built out of wood.
- twic 4y ago
  As others say, this varies, but there is enough brick construction that at least the author is quite wrong to say this: > Today, balloon framing (mostly in the form of platform framing) remains the default construction method for single family homes all over the world
hoseja 4y ago
No, worse is worse but by finding novel ways to defect in the quality/quantity prisoner's dilemma it dominates while the world becomes more and more terrible.
blodkorv 4y ago
Is this the reason why american houses "feel" cheaper or less sturdy compared to houses in my home country of sweden. It was one of the stranges feelings i had when i visited usa that the houses felt like toy houses or something.

218 points by chiffre01 4y ago

I recently built a largish shed in my back yard and although it's obviously far simpler than an actual house, it has many of the same core elements (including balloon framing), and it really struck me that someone like me could go from idea to a reasonably well done shed with only a little past experience plus some Googling. The traditional mortise-and-tenons approach would have far exceeded my time budget and probably been too far beyond my skill level. The most eye opening bit of learning for me was also mentioned in the article: "The skin of the building, which previously only served as a barrier to keep the elements out, now also braces the wood stud walls, increasing their load bearing capacity." Prior to sheathing, the framing is downright rickety!

analog31 4y ago
Oddly enough airplanes are like this too, as I understand it -- the skin is integral to the structure.
- thereddaikon 4y ago
  Yes most if not all modern aircraft are monocoque.
- bewaretheirs 4y ago
  Not odd at all -- when weight is critical, you want to make the most out of every gram of material, ideally getting overall structure, aero skin, and pressure vessel in one. Rockets with balloon tanks (such as the original Atlas) even rely on pressure from the propellant tank contents to strengthen the structure.
  - adolph 4y ago
    Which is the reason for the corrugated sections—the space between tanks that needed extra structure. https://apollo11space.com/why-are-the-interstage-rings-of-the-saturn-v-corrugated/ https://apollo11space.com/why-are-the-interstage-rings-of-th...
- kens 4y ago
  Also automobiles; in the 1960s cars mostly moved from body-on-frame to unibody construction, where the skin is an integral part. The Lincoln Town Car was one of the rare body-on-frame cars, which is why it was often used for stretch limousines; it is much easier to extend the body.
  - twobitshifter 4y ago
    Interestingly electric cars are going back to body on frame. Canoo is a good example of this.
    - 0x457 4y ago
      Well, if you had a giant, heavy slab at the lowest possible point - silly not to use it as a frame. Some EVs are somewhere in-between - not strictly body on frame, but also no unibody.
    - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
      And they have to call it a "skateboard" to get around the biases of a generation of textbook engineers who grew up thinking that body on frame is dumb and old.
- adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
  With newer carbon fiber airplanes, there isn't much structure other than the skin.
simonsarris 4y ago
Funny, I just built a largish (12x16 two story) shed in my back yard, but decided to just learn timber framing because how hard could it really be? The final cost was $5,206.72 (all local pine including boards, no plywood or glue, cedar shingles), and I partly took off about 2 months of work (working on this during the day) to frame it. There are some photos here, though far more on twitter: https://simonsarris.substack.com/p/the-goose-palace https://simonsarris.substack.com/p/the-goose-palace If you can stick frame a shed its certainly not beyond you to timber frame one. You'll need to read a book or two and buy a few hundred $ of chisels. But no part of it is fundamentally difficult. Before this project I've used my circular saw more for cutting down brush than building. Some budget item detail if you want to build something like it: https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1592159452995944449 https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1592159452995944449 And more construction pictures: https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1584169368203956225 https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1584169368203956225
- rsync 4y ago
  "You'll need to read a book or two and buy a few hundred $ of chisels." There is a third way ... timber framing with steel column caps and timber connectors, etc. ... steel plates from Simpson that you connect with lag or through bolts.
  - simonsarris 4y ago
    Yeah, though this would greatly increase the expense over the chisels, I'd think. For my build you need one 1.5" and one 2" chisel (I have Sorby, ~$125 each), though a 2.5" slick is nice to have. And then some sharpening stones.
  - bewaretheirs 4y ago
    But see the recent discussion of the failure of a bridge in Norway which used wood beams connected by steel elements -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33907276 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33907276
    - 4y ago
avgDev 4y ago
I'm getting ready for a shed build in the spring! Love hearing other nerds doing this stuff. I just finished a horizontal cedar fence. Building physical stuff is much more fun than programming, a bit more wear and tear on the body though.
- dbrueck 4y ago
  It is really gratifying to look outside every day and see the finished project, that's for sure. Overall I really enjoyed it, but I found that my ability to estimate the time for each step was way off - everything took far longer than I planned. Probably lack of experience. > bit more wear and tear on the body though So true - it took me a loooooong time to recover from the day I poured the cement pad under the shed. Good luck on your shed in the spring!
djaychela 4y ago
I'm currently extending my house in the UK (where this construction is less common for full houses) and the upstairs dormer is built in much the same way. While I wouldn't have described it as rickety before sheathing, it's definitely much more solid once the walls have each side covered in well nailed-on OSB - it gains a lot of stability that's otherwise lacking to a degree as there's no diagonal bracing (other than some temporary elements which are removed as you add strength). I'm not a builder (I'm a musician for the most part), but what I've built is to a pro standard and millimetre-accurate. That wouldn't have been the case had it been post-and-beam!
twobitshifter 4y ago
For barns and barndominiums there’s a the third technique which is a pole barn with set poles and trusses. For the poles today some people use tripled up 2x6s or doubled with 3/4” plywood in between. It’s easier than mortise and tenon, but setting the trusses is where things can get tricky if it’s tall.
- rsync 4y ago
  Nonononnonono. That is, yes on pole structures which can be great. But remember, a pole building is, ipso facto, a temporary structure. The poles are always rotting. Even the 8x8 heartwood columns 30x coated in creosote ... after 30 years of service they had to be chopped and under-joined to prefab concrete columns. And so with that in mind, the idea that you would replace a 6x6 column (with 6x4 = 24 inches of surface exposure to ground and fungi) with a 6x6 exterior exposure and another 24 inches of interior* exposure (between each 2x6) is crazy. I know people are doing it. I know the wood is treated. It is in the ground and wet and if you dig it up in ten years you'll have 3 little 1x5 wedges surrounded by rich, fungus filled dirt. I don't know if a pole structure is the right choice for (you or your project) but do yourself a favor and use actual poles.
  - mikeyouse 4y ago
    Most barns / barndomminiums don't bury the wood - they pour concrete footings like any other normal structure and then use steel stand-off brackets proud of ground level to ensure there's no wood in contact with the earth. Then yeah, tripled up LVLs are common as well; https://permacolumn.com/products/sturdi-wall-brackets.html https://permacolumn.com/products/sturdi-wall-brackets.html
    - rsync 4y ago
      Maybe semantics but I don't really think of that as a pole structure anymore. When I think of a pole structure, I think of continuous poles that extend into the ground. Almost all of your sway strength is dependent on a continuous member going below ground level and most of the economies of a pole structure are realized by not building the footing all the way around. That said, if you are not bound by seismic it is perfectly reasonable and I agree with you - Brettstapel[1] columns, such as sistered 2x6, would be just fine. From your link - here is what I would think of as a pole structure: https://permacolumn.com/products/perma-column-system.html https://permacolumn.com/products/perma-column-system.html ... and we have used that product (Perma-Column) to retrofit one of our barns: 24 reps of jack up, chainsaw off, dig out hole, and insert from below ... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brettstapel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brettstapel
dimitrios1 4y ago
> Learning to cut mortise and tenons took years of training as a carpenter For the same reason you mentioned, namely Googling and YouTube videos, I don't believe this is the case either. When the pandemic first struck, I took an interest in carpentry. I found a guy named Paul Sellers who guided me through constructing not only my first project in a set of durable trestles that I still use most days today, but also my first workbench, which I built the frame using, of course, M&T joinery. Each joint while not exactly the most beautiful work is still functional and holds true. It takes some time, patience, the willingness to be steady and not rush -- traits I think we all possess or can learn to posses. I have also since undertook some more modern carpentry jobs using construction lumber and built garage shelving, a playground for my kids, a back deck, and replaced some rotting facia boards on my home. The takeaway for me was, while I was pleased with being able to produce useful things for my family to enjoy, the act of using a powered circular saw, wrestling with an air hose to run a dangerous nail gun, and fussing about with construction adhesive and caulk was definitely no where near as enjoyable (or therapeutic) as the process of chiseling out those mortices, or sawing wood by hand. And I am proud of all the projects I have done, but the thing I am the most proud in a weird way was the work I was able to be more intimate with. So better here may mean more efficient and economical, which I 100% agree with. But it also comes at a loss in my view. I dream of building a house one day, of modest size. When that time comes, I am almost certain I will attempt to do it the traditional way. (fyi If anyone is interested in learning balloon framing, I cannot recommend Larry Haun's house framing series enough)
- mikeg8 4y ago
  Nice comment. You hit the wood dowel on the head ;) regarding the chisel work being more intimate. I think it comes down to commodity vs craft - and if the goal is to simply produce a house or to produce a house where the process and craftsmanship was good for your soul.
  - dimitrios1 4y ago
    Thanks. The loss of craftsmanship is something I think about and lament on frequently. It's not just about making things. Of course modern methods are more "efficient" in the strictest capitalistic sense. But there is more to the puzzle than that. I fear we aren't considering what we have lost in return, not limited to relationship between master and apprentice, knowledge transfer in the most natural way, and the connection to your work, to name a few. And with the ongoing improvements to AI via things like ChatGPT, and the learning tools and tricks and opportunities they open up, and more of the old craftsman and tradesmen and women of old passing on to the next life, we may soon start to also see the decline of knowledge soon, as we will relegate more and more of that to our models.
swayvil 4y ago
I skinned my freestyle shed with metal roofing stuff. Heck yes it adds to the strength.
hunter2_ 4y ago
> Prior to sheathing, the framing is downright rickety! Some IKEA furniture, such as their cheap bookshelves, are an amazing example of this. Basically it's a rectangle that wants to lean into being a parallelogram, and it readily does, until you tack up the backing piece which is like 1mm cardboard with dozens of nails. Cardboard that would bend, twist, rip, etc. in many directions, but works perfectly at keeping that parallelogram rectangular! Same idea with sheathing/framing.
- otikik 4y ago
  It will be even more solid if you add some carpentry glue and an extra beam. It takes the same time to build and makes them more solid too. https://youtu.be/u_caV1-mj_o https://youtu.be/u_caV1-mj_o
- xattt 4y ago
  Specific examples are the classic BILLY bookcase and the IVAR shelving system. The latter is absolutely unusable without the crossbrace piece.
- Bluestrike2 4y ago
  Traditionally, furniture makers have used different types of backs to increase the rigidity of the carcass, depending on how the carcass was constructed. If it's just an open box, for example, it'll require a more significant back compared to if it has multiple dividers spanning the interior. This excerpt[0] describes a few common types with relevant illustrations. Ikea--and other flat pack furniture--takes this approach to an extreme. Their backs are the absolute bare minimum to keep the carcass sides square under their own weight. Apply a bit of pressure to the corner of one of their bookcases, for example, and you can easily move it out of square. Cheap knockdown joinery that's meant to be easy to assemble make the problem worse. The bookcase won't have a very long lifespan, but that's acceptable for most of their customers. They're cheap and easy to replace for a reason. Other Ikea cabinets, with internal dividers, are a bit stronger because they're no longer relying on just the back to increase rigidity. As for homebuilding, exterior sheathing plays a critical role in racking strength, resisting wind loads, etc. by effectively tying the stud wall assembly together. But as with the Ikea bookcases, for builders looking to save every penny that can be found, there are options. Stuff like Thermo-Ply--basically, aluminum-faced cardboard--is used in lieu of plywood or OSB. It might not immediately disintegrate if it's properly covered with a quality house wrap as a water-resistant barrier, but how common is that with most production builders? And that's completely ignoring serious weather events like hurricanes, which will turn all that cardboard into mush. You can even take it a step further and rely on metal strapping and tension ties instead of structural sheathing.[1] That kind of house should at least use panels of foam insulation on the exterior, but given that it's generally a radical cost-saving measure, you'd be lucky if you even get that. Here's a terrifying video[2] walking through a new spec home that just relies on a cheap and ineffective house wrap. The unlucky buyers are going to have lots of fun with water damage, mold, bug infestation, and more. To say nothing of the house's other problems. 0. https://blog.lostartpress.com/2021/03/09/types-of-cabinet-backs/ https://blog.lostartpress.com/2021/03/09/types-of-cabinet-ba... 1. https://www.continuousinsulation.org/sites/default/files/H309RU.pdf https://www.continuousinsulation.org/sites/default/files/H30... 2. https://youtu.be/zRy1AZYrUE8?t=75 https://youtu.be/zRy1AZYrUE8?t=75
jccooper 4y ago
Framers use a variety of temporary braces and download to make the building work before the sheathing. (In stick framed buildings pre plywood, those diagonals are permanent, and let into the studs.) It's one of the things newbies can miss, and makes a big difference.
baremetal 4y ago
You can 'X' brace the wall and its rigidity is greatly improved. I recently used this technique when building a temporary support wall to cut a 10'x7' hole in the side of a commercial building and had to temporarily brace several of the roof trusses

rr888 4y ago

> sprinkler systems have reduced the risk fire poses Not so fast. My 5+1 has loads of sprinklers and its a nightmare. Every few years the sprinklers start leaking, or someone drills a hole or breaks a spinkler pipe. It causes catastrophic damage. Its one of the main reasons my next place will be concrete.

ltbarcly3 4y ago
Sprinklers slow fire spread in buildings that are properly constructed. If fire can spread inside the walls and above ceilings a sprinkler is not going to do much.
- rr888 4y ago
  We have sprinklers in the space above the ceiling too, which I presume is building code. The walls a sealed.
  - ltbarcly3 4y ago
    I meant in regards to the article mentioning the need for fire blocking and other additional work to prevent spread of fires in walls.
jdhn 4y ago
There's been some very interesting advances made with ICF (insulated concrete forms). If you live in a natural disaster prone area and are building from scratch, I'd check them out.
rch 4y ago
Take a look at Insulating Concrete Forms (ICFs). They can incorporate diverted waste styrofoam, bulk mycelium, or maybe even biocomposite lattices.
jeffbee 4y ago
This is why insurance costs more for sprinkler buildings.

ajuc 4y ago

I wonder why people don't use this in Europe. It's mostly airbrick or brick detached houses and concrete apartment blocks.

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
One reason I've heard is the much higher cost (and lower availability) of appropriate lumber. The forests were mostly cut down hundreds of years ago, while in north America, that process is still underway (though thankfully slowing a bit).
- eugenekolo 4y ago
  I'm not sure forests being cut down is the problem these days. Wood is one of the most renewable and sustainable materials out there. Old growth has been cut down, or become out of most people's price range at this point in NA, but farmed fast growing pine is cheap and sustainable. Perhaps NA has more land to support such farms though.
  - wiredfool 4y ago
    It's not in Europe. Wood is expensive here. A 2x4 stick here (Ireland) is ~ 12 eur at the local home center. And yes, we have tree plantations, but they're mostly sitka spruce, and there aren't _that_ many of them compared to potential demand for wood.
- flavius29663 4y ago
  The US cut down its forests too! Since the early 20th century, it started to replant more trees than it cut, and now has an ever increasing area of forests, much more than in 1930s for example.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
    Total area is up .. from the 1930s. However, some of the most wooded areas (e.g. the Pacific NW) are currently at about 20% of what they were when europeans arrived.

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago

I find the terminology here odd. I've always been told that it's * timber frame construction vs * stud frame construction and that stud framing is divided into ballon framing (now rarely used, because of fire hazards, as noted by the article) and platform framing. I've never come across "balloon framing" as the generic term for "build a house with lots of small wooden vertical pieces, plus sheathing".

jessaustin 4y ago
It's a matter of perspective. TFA is a history, and has a historical perspective. That is, it uses the original meaning of "balloon frame". You've been talking to carpenters, who don't care much about the history but do need a name for the weird stuff they occasionally have to remodel. "Balloon-type" balloon framing is still practiced even for new houses, because it allows a lot of exterior work to be done on the ground instead of three stories up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_jmNLNnqSM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_jmNLNnqSM
shortstuffsushi 4y ago
In my experience, "balloon framing" meant that a two story house was framed with two story studs. That is, 14-16 foot studs, sometimes sistered if the local wood wasn't long enough.
dmtroyer 4y ago
I had the same understanding and it was very distracting reading this article.

londons_explore 4y ago

It's notable how building construction is very regional. For example, balloon framing is very rare in most of Europe - where people generally prefer brick, stone, blocks or even cast concrete. Something that won't rot away or creak in the wind.

gonzo41 4y ago
Wealthy Europeans 'generally' build for the next generation. Also they have winter to deal with.
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  True, also to note brick construction traditionally can be dirt cheap if you adjust for materials and processes that are readily available locally. Nowadays there’s the option to go with hollow concrete blocks which makes building way faster and cheaper as well.
- crazygringo 4y ago
  Ballon framing filled with insulation and covered with insulating sheathing is far more energy-efficient than old walls made of brick, stone, or concrete in the winter. That's why in the freezing northeast of the USA, it's all balloon framing -- while in sunny Florida they can build with cinder blocks instead.
- prottog 4y ago
  > Also they have winter to deal with. Europe doesn't really have winter compared to North America, unless you're making a quip about their energy crisis ;-). Compare someplace continental and ridiculously far north like Rovaniemi, Finland to, say, Fargo, ND; the latter has colder winters, despite being 20 degrees of latitude further south. And yet everyone in Fargo builds with stick frames. A well-built and well-maintained wood house can last multiple generations and keep warm in the meantime. Though, granted it's probably more expensive to maintain than equivalent masonry.
  - ilyt 4y ago

maerF0x0 4y ago

And prefab has had it's own evolution. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNv13fY_3jY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNv13fY_3jY

londons_explore 4y ago

It isn't easy to build a thermally efficient building with balloon framing. That's because you have solid wood between the inner and outer skin in hundreds of places. And wood has a thermal conductivity of 0.2 W/mK, which is pretty bad compared to say PIR foam insulation at 0.02 W/mK. Anywhere with high energy prices, hot/cold climates, or environmentally conscious buyers, thats a no-go!

csours 4y ago
Interesting solution: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtviZ2GHWCI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtviZ2GHWCI If you don't want to click it's T-Studs - 2x3s with diagonals dowels with a 1.5 inch air gap
- londons_explore 4y ago
  Frustrating to find that they're more expensive than regular studs - they ought to be cheaper because they need less wood to make, less mass to transport, etc. The actual manufacturing steps I'm sure are all automated, and not exactly complex, so the added manufacturing steps should be far outweighed by the reduced raw material and logistics cost. I'm going to guess the increased price is some combination of 'we have a patent on it' and 'we charge more because there are no competitors, because we have a patent on it'.
crazygringo 4y ago
Huh? Yes it is -- that's what insulation sheathing is for, a layer in between the wood and the exterior. They're the gigantic pink foam panels you see covering buildings under construction. Balloon framing is extremely thermally efficient, which is why it's used in places like the northeast US which have freezing winters!
- mikeg8 4y ago
  Eh, kind of. Builders in the northeast didn’t choose balloon framing because it’s thermally efficient - they just didn’t have alternatives in the same cost range. Many homes in that region were build with masonry claddings as well to increase thermal mass and R value of the wall. The foam sheet insulation you speak of is relatively new to the industry, at least for middle class homes. Having a continuous layer of insulation outside the framing definitely makes stick framing more energy efficient than it would be with traditional fiberglass batt insulation in a wall cavity.

gbronner 4y ago

The author fails to connect the dots: 1) Nails were expensive. Timber framing does not require any nails -- it uses dowels which can be made cheaply with a drawknife. 2) Unlike @simonsarris' wood, most wood available to post and beam constructors was not particularly straight. Post and beam is very tolerant of faults in lumber. 3) With post and beam, you don't need to square all four sides of a beam. You can get away with squaring off one(the external one) plus the spots where any corner braces go. If you are hewing with a broad axe and an adze, this is a huge time saver. 4) In rural post and beam construction, the beams do not all need to be the same size. You can use whatever tree you have lying around, as long as it is big enough. This is an advantage, as you can use a local tree and save the extremely laborious trip to the sawmill So to summarize, you can have a bunch of low-skill farmers harvesting and preparing trees for beams. Then you need a high-skill carpenter to put the mortises in and assemble the whole thing.

bigmattystyles 4y ago
Shouldn't the author have also mentioned cheap drywall? To me that led to worse yet much faster and cheaper construction. It's also so easy to work with that even I learned how to do most things (slowly but well). My expensive bay-area wall feels like a carton box and I think it's because i grew up in a masoned house. (I know masoned buildings are not viable in CA due to earthquakes, but man does my house feel like it could just get blown away by a mild gust here)
- csours 4y ago
  They have talked about drywall in a previous post.
- maherbeg 4y ago
  They actually wrote a whole article on dry-wall and theorizing on what the next iteration of it could look like https://constructionphysics.substack.com/p/comparing-process-improvement-in https://constructionphysics.substack.com/p/comparing-process...
  - 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

mikeg8 4y ago

As a builder, I really don't get the point of this piece arguing that stick framing is "worse". The author makes very weak arguments for the "worse" category to make a connection to tech engineering/ software development. > Balloon frame has a few disadvantages. One major one is that the exterior wall studs all the way to the roof, which provides an unbroken path for fire to travel. Fire blocking is a very simple and well-known practice that avoids this pitfall completely. the failure to mention fire blocking makes me question the authors overall construction competence. It feels as if they are arguing that stick framing is worse than timber frame construction because it's "more difficult to engineer many more smaller connection points". which may have been the case in the early days of stick framing, but like in software development, builders have developed codes, standards, conventions etc. that make modern framing very much a straightforward process. As well as all the fasteners and metal hardware has been exhaustively engineered. > And beyond that, as a structural system, it lacks any sort of aesthetic elegance or simplicity. It’s made up of lots of flimsy-looking members. Yea, thats the point! Structural elements do not need to have any aesthetic appeal as they are hidden by finishes and cladding. Its a feature, not a bug. As long as it is structurally sound, that is all that matters. > It’s undesirable from an architectural perspective as well. Balloon framing has largely been used for simple residential structures (or worse, mobile homes) that have historically had little architectural involvement. The size and strength of dimensional lumber makes it difficult to use it to create large or architecturally impressive spaces... The architecturally influential residential buildings are more often built from more flexible materials such as concrete or steel. I disagree with this as I've seen some incredibly beautiful "architectural" homes that used wood framing but that's subjective and not my primary objection. Where i have more of an issue that now the author is comparing wood stud framing to concrete and steel which is an apples to oranges comparison. It's an inconsistency it what the main subject is being compared to that makes the overall thesis of this fall very flat for me. The "worse is better" paradigm may make sense for many software applications, but the connection here to residential construction and framing practices is such a strecth.

grosswait 4y ago
My impression was completely opposite of yours. The whole article is on the merits of this construction method and how and why it has become dominant.

swayvil 4y ago

I built a shed in my back yard a couple years ago. I got yelled at by the people on a certain carpentry forum for straying from the balloonframe orthodoxy. Nonetheless, my shed is solid as a brick and widely admired for its looks AND engineering. (PIX : https://imgur.com/a/4Yr21PR https://imgur.com/a/4Yr21PR ) Much of what is called proper modern shed engineering (IE the building code) is actually just how to meet the minimum legal requirements for the least amount of cash. So keep that in mind. My next shed is going to be a bag of air sprayed with foam.

turtlebits 4y ago
Looking at your shed, I would be concerned about the lack of sheathing to give it structural integrity from lateral loads/shear. I do see the two 2x4"s on the back wall, and I guess it's fairly light with the metal roofing as walls...
- swayvil 4y ago
  By lateral loads/shear do you mean pressure from the wind? Like, sideways pressure? That roofing on the walls is pretty tough stuff. Serves as a diagonal brace and more. I don't think it's gonna fold over.

legitster 4y ago

This... isn't quite right. Balloon framing as traditionally defined is all but non-existent anymore. The author is smooshing concepts together. Balloon framing was purely a method of convenience back when consumers were able to get their hands on 30-40 foot framing timber. As such, it was only popular during a limited window when sawmills were popping up across the West and virgin old-growth forests were being clear cut. The author is using "balloon framing" to describe the entire concept of modern framing. But if you start throwing around "balloon framing" to describe modern houses you will at best get weird looks from contractors and at worse draw the eye of fire inspectors.

jccooper 4y ago
The author was actually looking for "stick framing", of which balloon framing is a particular technique. (The term was originally derogatory, coming from the perspective of the timber framers.) The image comparing balloon and platform techniques should probably have suggested the existence of a broader term.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  This is what the author says: > Today in the US, most houses and apartments are built using light framed wood construction. > This system is a variant of a framing style known as balloon framed construction Also, to the guy sidethread, the distinction between balloon framing and platform framing is the subject of several paragraphs, with illustrations.
  - brudgers 4y ago
    Balloon framing has a specific legally binding definition as described in building codes. In the building codes it is a method of light wood framing (not the other way round). It can also be a method of light metal framing…in practice this is probably more common in the wild (in the US), because long light metal studs are straight and lightweight and hence more “wieldy.”
  - legitster 4y ago

ilyt 4y ago

This sounds more like optimizing for different features than "worse". Being easy to build with easy to access materials is advantage all on its own.

nine_k 4y ago

I don't see how is this comparable to "worse is better". It's just "simpler is better for simpler things", which is hardly controversial. Use two dimensions of wood, simple connectors like nails, simple hand tools, less precision work. Heck, you end up using less wood even if you heavily overprovision and thus tolerate local faults, compared to large-beam construction. It's an aerospace-grade win. What "worse is better" means in the software world is that an easy-to-do solution overtakes all, from simplest things where it belongs to the very top. This way PHP, which was a poorly-made thing even according to its creator, not just took over the space of simple dynamic websites, but also ended up powering world's largest services, such as Wikipedia and Facebook. (Now PHP looks hip; back when Wikipedia and FB experienced their meteoric growth, it sucked as hard as the legends have it, at everything about programming craft, but was a piece of cake to run and host.) For the author's analogy to hold, the Empire State Building would have to be built with balloon frame technology, and somehow stand.

ltbarcly3 4y ago
I agree with most of your points, the article gets it backwards in lots of ways. The worse solution generally comes first, it's worse because it was 'quick and dirty' and didn't try to elegantly and optimally solve the problem. The worse solution generally is actually worse in some significant ways, but these defects are small compared to the advantage of being a solution that is available much earlier and conceptually simple enough for users to successfully apply without lots of training and false starts. Balloon framing is so easy that you can watch a video and then go do it, it requires simpler tools, cheaper lumber, and much less precision. There's no working worse-is-better analogy here, which is why nobody uses post-and-beam framing for anything outside of niche luxury homes. It's not better in any way other than looking older.

throwawaaarrgh 4y ago

Luckily we are not allowed to build houses like software bros on HN are allowed to build billion dollar companies. A shitty tech stack going down doesn't often burn down other companies. But a city full of balloon frames leads to an entire city burning to the ground. If anything, the modern building code is a testament to why the way people on HN build software is at best irresponsible and at worst a threat to society.

haihaibye 4y ago
Gerald Weinberg put it better: "If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization."

baremetal 4y ago

It is interesting to note that post and beam construction is still fairly common in the US. Just not for residential buildings. It is used extensively for agricultural barns and commercial and light industrial buildings particularly in rural areas. Often buildings that have sheet metal exteriors are "post framed". Post framing is quite similar to post and beam. A "mortise and tenon" connection is implemented for securing the roof trusses to the posts. On site laminated 2x material is used or a notch is cut in post.

notJim 4y ago

> Prefabrication of larger components, outside of a few building types optimized for it, remains elusive I thought this was a weird one. Aren't roof trusses pretty often made off-site and delivered and craned into place? I also see trucks with framed-out walls driving around that just seem to need to be lifted and nailed into place. Is that not what those are?

ltbarcly3 4y ago
Yes, but trusses can only be used in houses where you use trusses? It means you do not have much or any usable attic space, and the roof shape has to be a very simple gable roof with the living space completely non-intersecting with the roof structure space.

gregschlom 4y ago

The thing about "X is worse-is-better" is that it applies to pretty much anything. Take "X", observe that it has pros and cons, and you can go on and claim worse (cons) is better (pros). Not a very useful analytical framework. Interesting article otherwise.

ratstew 4y ago

adolph 4y ago

This video is worth watching on the topic: The Genius of 2x4 Framing by Stewart Hicks It covers similar ground and has a thesis that “what allowed the hamburger to take over as the quintessential American cuisine and get exported everywhere are the same historical, cultural and economic confluences that contribute to the proliferation of the light wood frame for construction. . . . Light wood framing is the hamburger of the building industry” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S6mUFrXexAk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S6mUFrXexAk

LarsDu88 4y ago

Since this is hacker news, I feel like the direct analogue here is the dominance of Python and Javascript over other (higher activation energy) programming languages.

magicbuzz 4y ago

In the appendix links at the bottom, there's a comment that a large percentage of houses in Japan are still built with post & beam. I've been prompted with a slew of recent "Japanese carpentry videos" that seem to sync with this. I'm curious why it's still prevalent in Japan? Most new Japanese houses are not built in the old machiya style.

ltbarcly3 4y ago

This is a very good article about balloon framing and how houses are built. However, balloon framing is NOT an example of worse-is-better. Post-and-beam, the technique that balloon and platform framing have replaced, is just worse-is-worse. It requires more effort, more expensive materials, more skilled labor, and is less sophisticated in how it uses materials and so for the same amount of materials produces a weaker and less stable, less efficient structure. Worse-is-better is about how a faster to market, good enough solution that people can use is better than the 'better' solution that comes later. The solution that is simple will be used again and again, the elegant solution that is more efficient or more general but harder to apply will be neglected since users have high skill with the simpler tool and will prefer it as a result. Balloon framing (and then platform framing) is simpler AND more elegant AND far cheaper AND produces a superior result, so it's simply not a case of worse-is-better.

wardedVibe 4y ago

A discussion of this and the 2x4 from an architect that I found interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6mUFrXexAk&t=657s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6mUFrXexAk&t=657s

insaneirish 4y ago

This is a funny article. Others have mentioned that it's a little murky if the author is critical specifically of balloon framing or of stick built construction in general. The irony is that balloon framing is more feasible today than ever. Balloon framing downsides: 1. Really long dimensional lumber 2. Fire risk of continuous cavities 3. Ledger/joist connection to balloon studs The solutions?: 1. Engineered lumber. Dead straight and incredibly strong LSL (laminated strand lumber) and LVL (laminated veneer lumber) come in basically whatever length you reasonably need them. 2. Fire blocking is well understood. Insulation materials like mineral wool can further drive fire risk inside a stud cavity to near zero. 3. An innumerable number of well engineered and reasonably priced structural fasteners and metal connectors with well understood properties make it straight forward to build a second story floor off of balloon framed studs. 2022 is a great time to be balloon framing. In fact, you'll see it in large great rooms for floor to vaulted ceiling walls. Some framers who like to preassemble as much as possible on the ground and then lift the wall for efficiency and safety will balloon frame as well.

mbjorkegren 4y ago
Cool! Do you have any links for this? So far I found this video series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_jmNLNnqSM&list=PLSab5V2CnIbB7nC04rnUOiIf5WFwvkAfB&index=3&ab_channel=AwesomeFramers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_jmNLNnqSM&list=PLSab5V2CnI...
- insaneirish 4y ago
  That's exactly the link I would have sent you. :-) Tim is an excellent teacher and the perfect example of this technique.

komali2 4y ago

> Something as simple as installing a lightswitch all of a sudden becomes a major piece of coordination if your building is made of concrete. It seems most buildings in Taiwan are simply made of concrete. IDK too much about construction but when I watch them build it's like, frames of metal into which they pour wet concrete. It's crazy how fast buildings get put up this way, they tore down an entire building down the street from me, started construction about maybe 3 weeks ago tops, and today there is a fully formed building with fixtures, windows, the works, sitting there. Quite pretty, actually. But this quote is for me one of the huge downsides. It's a NIGHTMARE to hang anything on my walls, first off. If I try to put a pin in for a poster, it bends. A nail could end up taking out chunks of the wall if I'm not careful, if I can even penetrate. And, once the fixtures are in, that's it. To run more wire, you've got to get out the (I think?) jackhammer. It seems every day all I hear is the sound of concrete being banged away at with some kind of power tool. If it's happening in my building, it's reverberating through the whole structures. It's horrible lol. There's upsides though! Normal sounds stop HARD at the boundaries of an apartment. If you're outside someone's apartment door, maybe you'll hear something, but we don't hear shit from the neighbors, and I've checked, they can't even hear when I'm producing bass heavy music. I like that. Gotta make sure to get some stuff up on the walls though to prevent echo.

orthoxerox 4y ago
> To run more wire, you've got to get out the (I think?) jackhammer. Don't they leave conduits and junction boxes in the walls when they run the initial wires?
- komali2 4y ago
  Yes but if you need it somewhere the conduit doesn't run, you've gotta bang more conduit into the wall. Frankly I find it terrifying cause I don't think the contractors know anything about that structure of the building and who knows what they're doing to the structural integrity of a building in an earthquake zone. Like I said I'm ignorant of this stuff so maybe its not a big deal.

Zardoz84 4y ago

Interesting... In Europe, we simply build the houses using bricks, cement/concrete and beans of steel or concrete. We not waste wood, and the houses are more solid and not have problems with insects or moisture damaging the wood structure. I think that it's the usual since the 60's . However, I saw older structures using wood beans, mixed with stone, bricks, and/or adobe.

bartread 4y ago
In at least some parts of the UK brick clad wooden houses, which I would imagine are probably balloon framed, are somewhat common in new developments (East Anglia, for example). Insulated cavity walling with blockwork inner leaf and brickwork outer leaf (or sometimes rendered blockwork) remains incredibly popular though.
symmetricsaurus 4y ago
Europe is not uniform in this regard. For example in Sweden almost all houses are built out of wood.
twic 4y ago
As others say, this varies, but there is enough brick construction that at least the author is quite wrong to say this: > Today, balloon framing (mostly in the form of platform framing) remains the default construction method for single family homes all over the world

hoseja 4y ago

No, worse is worse but by finding novel ways to defect in the quality/quantity prisoner's dilemma it dominates while the world becomes more and more terrible.

blodkorv 4y ago

Is this the reason why american houses "feel" cheaper or less sturdy compared to houses in my home country of sweden. It was one of the stranges feelings i had when i visited usa that the houses felt like toy houses or something.