7 ms·

As a European, I was confused to read that wood was considered structural enough that they needed this… Of course, there are new mass timber builds, but those

by bertil 3y ago

As a European, I was confused to read that wood was considered structural enough that they needed this… Of course, there are new mass timber builds, but those use wood that is heavily processed. I guess the lighter wood would need to be pressed more, to match the same resistance, but I suspect the costs are cheaper with wood grown faster.

VHRanger 3y ago
Old growth is on par with LVL/Glulam in terms of structural strength. But to be honest the rot resistance is more important. Most wood buildings fail because of rot issues, not because the wood wasn't strong enough.
- bertil 3y ago
  Would treating the wood (presumably with chemicals you might not want inside your house) be enough to avoid the rot? Traditional wood houses in Scandinavia have tar and seem well preserved: is that usually enough, or did they survive because it’s so cold to six months a year that bugs don’t even try?
  - bluGill 3y ago
    Houses survive because they tend to be dry enough that the wood doesn't rot. Let the roof fail and soon the rest of the house will rot away. Similar for let the siding on the outside fail and the house will soon rot away (not as fast as when the roof fails). Keep those in good shape though and the inside is dry enough that wood won't rot.
  - VHRanger 3y ago
    Yes, treating wood does work, but what use to treat depends on the application. For instance railroad ties were treated with creosote or tar. Similar for the underground part of telephone poles. There was a Copper-Chromium-Arsenic mix also that would kill bugs and mold but is extremely toxic, so isn't EPA approved anymore. I would not want creosote or tar-treated wood in a house I live in, though. It's all toxic. In the exterior-treated SPF (think what we use in America for a deck or exterior staircase) there's a durability limit to the rot resistance. And the wood is tough to restore. Better woods (not necessarily old growth, just white pine or high quality cedar) are easier to restore. They also look nice, so people are more inclined to take care of them. In the end, nothing lasts forever without maintenance.
  - jnellis 3y ago
    Sure temperature is big factor but water is always the enemy of wood, regardless of the treatment. You can slow it down with chemicals but bugs and microorganisms find a way if water is present. Humidity is water. Primers and paint do wonders against it. But the wood has to be dry first. Tar is pretty darn good at keeping out water but also good at trapping it in. Old growth and just 'old' wood is naturally termite resistant because wood gets harder as it ages and the bugs just don't like to chew on it, they will look elsewhere. You don't see many 60+ year old houses getting new termite infestations unless it was in areas of recent repair (fascia boards, brick moldings). But if it's wet, it's softer to chew. It's always comes down to water.
  - nf3 3y ago
    Some species of wood are naturally resistant to rot: black locust, chestnut, cedar, cypres, Douglas fir. Other methods of preventing rot exist such as charring the end of a post before sticking it in the ground, protecting end grain from contact with water, etc.
  - hattmall 3y ago
    Unless you have major water issues, like roof leaks or something where water is accumulating consistently up against wood. For example a deck that slopes toward the house or something, rot isn't really an issue. Termites can be an issue, but it's not super common.
  - not_the_fda 3y ago
    Yep its called a [Permanent Wood Foundation](https://www.nachi.org/permanent-wood-foundations.htm https://www.nachi.org/permanent-wood-foundations.htm) I had a house with it, had no problems with it.
- turtlebits 3y ago
  Water management is more important than rot resistance. Wood will easily last for 100 years if let it dry. (you'll never be able to keep any part of your house 100% dry).
  - MarkMarine 3y ago
    There are some old ideas about water management that are A LOT different than the modern techniques. I live in a 120 year old house framed with old growth redwood. As wood goes, it's rock solid, but also everything in it breathes. It's painted with linseed oil paints, the lathe and plaster walls breathe moisture, and frankly it's not sealed well anywhere, including my original double hung windows. If this was a modern house, it would be covered in 5 different layers of plastic with the intent on keeping any moisture out, then sheathed in OSB that basically sees water and just melts away. Like you said, there is no way to keep it all the way dry, but energy efficiency (and cheap materials and quick building techniques) have also driven a housing design that is so tight that if there is moisture intrusion, it's got no good way to vent out.
    - ok_dad 3y ago
      Do you have any good sources of info for your any my type of home; old and wood? I’m worried that some of the upgrades and paint done to this house is preventing as much “breathing” as it was designed for, and I don’t want my house to rot away. It’s really wet here!
      - VHRanger 3y ago
        Check out stuff by Joe Lstiburek (build science expert) and Brent Hull (linked in OP, historic restoration expert, has YouTube channel)
      - MarkMarine 3y ago
        https://linseedpaint.com https://linseedpaint.com - This is where I get my paint, lots of information about why latex paint (and generally wrapping in plastic) ruins the wood of a house. Past there, I really like a timber framer who does YouTube called Mr. Chickadee, guy was a Marine who decided to live a simple life. He hand makes everything, but don't let the old timey hat and pants fool you, he's spent a ton of time thinking about how the old methods work and why, and picking through multiple cultures that have had old wooden structures that last hundreds or even thousands of years for the techniques he's using.
JAlexoid 3y ago
As a European in US owning homes on both sides of the Atlantic - we are too fast to judge wood frame construction. After all the wood frame construction techniques came to the US from Europe. I can safely say that there's little difference between a good wood frame and masonry house, today. Modern concrete isn't as long lasting as Roman concrete from 2000 years ago. Modern concrete doesn't play well with water.
- sfn42 3y ago
  Modern concrete is what you need it to be. We know much more about concrete production today than the Romans did. We make compromises, it's not all about quality. If you're building a garage you're fine with it lasting 100+ years, you don't give a shit about 1000+ years. So you don't pay for the stuff that will last for ever. If you're a civil engineer designing a huge dam you go for the good concrete. You also test the concrete before pouring to make sure it's up to spec. Because your budget and priorities make that make sense.
  - mannyv 3y ago
    And yet, Frank Lloyd Wright made the wrong concrete choices at Falling Water. If he couldn't get it right then the average Joe won't get it right either.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - coryrc 3y ago
      His buildings are known for being high-maintenance. I've had houses with 70-year-old concrete foundations that are perfectly functional.
    - defrost 3y ago
      Classic architect|designer fubar .. this is why they're great at conceptual design and mostly much weaker than they'd admit at pragmatic functional structural engineering. Not all architects, to be clear, some really know their foundations but...
JCM9 3y ago
Provided it’s kept free of moisture wood is an amazing construction material and super strong relative to weight. Provided it’s harvested in a sustainable way it’s also quite “green” relative to other products considering it’s made primarily from CO2 sequestered from the atmosphere.
lostlogin 3y ago
> As a European, I was confused to read that wood was considered structural enough that they needed this… Another variable is how much the building moves. Being in an earthquake zone here in New Zealand makes me look at elaborate brick and stone buildings with a degree of nervousness.

by bertil 3y ago

VHRanger 3y ago

Old growth is on par with LVL/Glulam in terms of structural strength. But to be honest the rot resistance is more important. Most wood buildings fail because of rot issues, not because the wood wasn't strong enough.

bertil 3y ago
Would treating the wood (presumably with chemicals you might not want inside your house) be enough to avoid the rot? Traditional wood houses in Scandinavia have tar and seem well preserved: is that usually enough, or did they survive because it’s so cold to six months a year that bugs don’t even try?
- bluGill 3y ago
  Houses survive because they tend to be dry enough that the wood doesn't rot. Let the roof fail and soon the rest of the house will rot away. Similar for let the siding on the outside fail and the house will soon rot away (not as fast as when the roof fails). Keep those in good shape though and the inside is dry enough that wood won't rot.
- VHRanger 3y ago
  Yes, treating wood does work, but what use to treat depends on the application. For instance railroad ties were treated with creosote or tar. Similar for the underground part of telephone poles. There was a Copper-Chromium-Arsenic mix also that would kill bugs and mold but is extremely toxic, so isn't EPA approved anymore. I would not want creosote or tar-treated wood in a house I live in, though. It's all toxic. In the exterior-treated SPF (think what we use in America for a deck or exterior staircase) there's a durability limit to the rot resistance. And the wood is tough to restore. Better woods (not necessarily old growth, just white pine or high quality cedar) are easier to restore. They also look nice, so people are more inclined to take care of them. In the end, nothing lasts forever without maintenance.
- jnellis 3y ago
  Sure temperature is big factor but water is always the enemy of wood, regardless of the treatment. You can slow it down with chemicals but bugs and microorganisms find a way if water is present. Humidity is water. Primers and paint do wonders against it. But the wood has to be dry first. Tar is pretty darn good at keeping out water but also good at trapping it in. Old growth and just 'old' wood is naturally termite resistant because wood gets harder as it ages and the bugs just don't like to chew on it, they will look elsewhere. You don't see many 60+ year old houses getting new termite infestations unless it was in areas of recent repair (fascia boards, brick moldings). But if it's wet, it's softer to chew. It's always comes down to water.
- nf3 3y ago
  Some species of wood are naturally resistant to rot: black locust, chestnut, cedar, cypres, Douglas fir. Other methods of preventing rot exist such as charring the end of a post before sticking it in the ground, protecting end grain from contact with water, etc.
- hattmall 3y ago
  Unless you have major water issues, like roof leaks or something where water is accumulating consistently up against wood. For example a deck that slopes toward the house or something, rot isn't really an issue. Termites can be an issue, but it's not super common.
- not_the_fda 3y ago
  Yep its called a [Permanent Wood Foundation](https://www.nachi.org/permanent-wood-foundations.htm https://www.nachi.org/permanent-wood-foundations.htm) I had a house with it, had no problems with it.
turtlebits 3y ago
Water management is more important than rot resistance. Wood will easily last for 100 years if let it dry. (you'll never be able to keep any part of your house 100% dry).
- MarkMarine 3y ago
  There are some old ideas about water management that are A LOT different than the modern techniques. I live in a 120 year old house framed with old growth redwood. As wood goes, it's rock solid, but also everything in it breathes. It's painted with linseed oil paints, the lathe and plaster walls breathe moisture, and frankly it's not sealed well anywhere, including my original double hung windows. If this was a modern house, it would be covered in 5 different layers of plastic with the intent on keeping any moisture out, then sheathed in OSB that basically sees water and just melts away. Like you said, there is no way to keep it all the way dry, but energy efficiency (and cheap materials and quick building techniques) have also driven a housing design that is so tight that if there is moisture intrusion, it's got no good way to vent out.
  - ok_dad 3y ago
    Do you have any good sources of info for your any my type of home; old and wood? I’m worried that some of the upgrades and paint done to this house is preventing as much “breathing” as it was designed for, and I don’t want my house to rot away. It’s really wet here!
    - VHRanger 3y ago
      Check out stuff by Joe Lstiburek (build science expert) and Brent Hull (linked in OP, historic restoration expert, has YouTube channel)
    - MarkMarine 3y ago
      https://linseedpaint.com https://linseedpaint.com - This is where I get my paint, lots of information about why latex paint (and generally wrapping in plastic) ruins the wood of a house. Past there, I really like a timber framer who does YouTube called Mr. Chickadee, guy was a Marine who decided to live a simple life. He hand makes everything, but don't let the old timey hat and pants fool you, he's spent a ton of time thinking about how the old methods work and why, and picking through multiple cultures that have had old wooden structures that last hundreds or even thousands of years for the techniques he's using.

JAlexoid 3y ago

As a European in US owning homes on both sides of the Atlantic - we are too fast to judge wood frame construction. After all the wood frame construction techniques came to the US from Europe. I can safely say that there's little difference between a good wood frame and masonry house, today. Modern concrete isn't as long lasting as Roman concrete from 2000 years ago. Modern concrete doesn't play well with water.

sfn42 3y ago
Modern concrete is what you need it to be. We know much more about concrete production today than the Romans did. We make compromises, it's not all about quality. If you're building a garage you're fine with it lasting 100+ years, you don't give a shit about 1000+ years. So you don't pay for the stuff that will last for ever. If you're a civil engineer designing a huge dam you go for the good concrete. You also test the concrete before pouring to make sure it's up to spec. Because your budget and priorities make that make sense.
- mannyv 3y ago
  And yet, Frank Lloyd Wright made the wrong concrete choices at Falling Water. If he couldn't get it right then the average Joe won't get it right either.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - coryrc 3y ago
    His buildings are known for being high-maintenance. I've had houses with 70-year-old concrete foundations that are perfectly functional.
  - defrost 3y ago
    Classic architect|designer fubar .. this is why they're great at conceptual design and mostly much weaker than they'd admit at pragmatic functional structural engineering. Not all architects, to be clear, some really know their foundations but...

JCM9 3y ago

Provided it’s kept free of moisture wood is an amazing construction material and super strong relative to weight. Provided it’s harvested in a sustainable way it’s also quite “green” relative to other products considering it’s made primarily from CO2 sequestered from the atmosphere.

lostlogin 3y ago

> As a European, I was confused to read that wood was considered structural enough that they needed this… Another variable is how much the building moves. Being in an earthquake zone here in New Zealand makes me look at elaborate brick and stone buildings with a degree of nervousness.