This might be a short lived thread but…<!—-><!—-> <!—->
I was reading in this month’s issue (#174) and came across a drawing on p.54 that immediately caused me question.<!—-> <!—->
I’m always interested in what I call “uncompromisingly cost effective” building. As a woodworker and entrepreneur, I aspire to build my house some day “by the sweat of my own brow” and thus am always interested in articles that pertain to such.<!—-> <!—->
Like Lstiburek (the article author), I too have always figured projects on standard material dimension not just what I want. It makes tons of sense and is much faster. But… <!—-> <!—->
Whilst studying the drawings on pp.53, 54 I noticed that the headers were lacking jacks. The caption on p.54 “Header hangers eliminate jack studs” immediately made me wonder if this practice was really all that strong. <!—-> <!—->
Wouldn’t the weakest point in the system be the shear strength of the fastener in the hanger? If you look at the drawing on p.54 all the weight of that 5′ section of roof would be dependant on the fasteners in the header hangers in the first floor window bay. The first and second floor windows are lined up, the 5′ section of roof is supported by the fasteners in the header hangers in the second floor window and the 5′ section of floor/ceiling on the first floor is supported by the header hanger fasteners in the first floor window bay.<!—-><!—->
I see the actual picture on p.51 does have jack studs in the window cavities but the argument in the drawing on p.54 is for header hangers vs. jack studs. <!—-><!—->
Any thoughts? <!—-><!—->
Best regards <!—-><!—->
Replies
I usually do engineering to deterine which construction details are necessary.
I've been in residential construction for a number of years and have never seen those header hangers used except to repair a mistake. Even then, normally just a regular nail plate or 2 are used. I know the construction industry is slow to adopt new materials/practices, but believe me that if it was a way to save money at least the national builders would be using them. My guess would be that a hanger would cost more $ and, no guess here, would be more labor intensive to install. Also, what about openings that require more than one jack? Do they make these hangers that bear more load?
Why not just stick to tried and true methods instead of trying to reinvent the wheel? Granted there is any number of things that need to be improved in residential building practices, but IMO this is not one of them.
I think Listiurbek's (sp? sorry) point is getting as much insulation in there as possible - 'glas better than wood. That said, I'm a big fan of his cold climate building book, but I don't use those hangars either. Does anyone?jeff
I also think of the header hangers as something to correct a mistake or to retrofit a window or door without tearing up as much wall surface.
They can cause probelms with nailing up casing too.
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!
They can cause probelms with nailing up casing too.
Beat me to it...........how the heck are you gonna fasten 6" casing when the nearest stud is 2" in from the outside edge?It's Never Too Late To Become
What You Might Have Been
[email protected]
You ain't building very "green" if you're using 6" casing! Or, are you spending all that money you are saving on framing and energy costs on your interior finish (LOL)?
"They (hangers for jacks) can cause problems with nailing up casing too."
Yeah, and big 'owies' on the rebound too. ;)http://costofwar.com/
Like appaldog said - The point in using these things is to get more insulation in.
To use them you have to figure the reaction of the header based on what it carries to make sure you don't exceed the capacity of the hanger.
I think using them in conjunction with insulated headers would be a great idea...
My biggest concern would be the bulge in the drywall right at the mitre in the trim.
That is the problem I had in mind with mitred corner casing. And theeree is metal right where the 16ga pin needs to go sometimes rolling it right back at you.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I just finished a house that, on a couple of long shear walls with a lot of windows, was spec'd for those metal Simpson corner brackets (don't recall the I.D. #) on all the top corners. We were using some special order wide mouldings and had to predrill for all the miters, and hand nail them.
Not a real big deal, but just another little time-eating detail that I'd not considered in the original bid (woe is me!)
It might be avoided (the trim-nailing-at-the-corner problem) by placing the headers tight against that single top plate, and then placing a single-piece 2x header across the window RO head. One way or the other, unless you have designed walls to use headers at total pack-up height, you will have top cripples.
Simpson shows an allowable load (up reaction at each header) of 1595# for the 2x6 size hanger, which would make the hanger viable for opening widths of up to 4 feet on the first floor of a 2-story house, in most all parts of the country, excepting those with very high snow loadings. I call very heavy snow loads 70 psf and higher at the ground. On the upper floor, things aren't as restrictive.
Which makes me ask, how many builders, designers, and framers out there are downsizing their headers when moving up to the top floor?
I ran these number for a house with a 28-foot width (note I am on a 4-foot module).
I'm on a completely custom modeI almost always used packed to plate headering.I downsize headers only when neccessary due to wall height
For instance, last night, I was designing an addition to a beach house. The upper floor had to match existing plate height both for aesthetic reasons and due to size/volumn restrictions, so the plate went only to 7'2". I set window tops at 6'5" and used 3' windows so I could have 2x6 headers. The first floor headers are 2x10s
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
OK - so now we are down to only on exterior walls, maybe only on the smaller openings (except for 2x6 walls), not for homes with wide trim, additional labor may be necessary for casings installation, and only if you can tollerate bumps in your interior/exterior finsihes... But they will reduce the surface area of thermal transfer through the wall by what - .02%... I think BH put his finger on it... It's a good idea. May not have much to do with reality though...
I see this kind of thing so many times here and in the field on inexpirenced owner builder homes; standard method is unknown so based on good ideas, odd-ball method is used. Probably still an option for the complete DIYs who are on the 5 year plan...
Not trying to bash this guy, he just asked a question.
In most houses, are most of the windows narrow enough to use header hangers? Yes.
Do most houses use wide casing? No. Most use 2 1/4 in. casing or drywall returns.
Is it neccessary to nail narrow casing to the wall at the miter? No, and in fact, doing so often opens up the miter. Gluing and floating the miter, and nailing the casing head only to the window jamb is in fact excellent practice that results in miter joints staying tight for the long term.
Are header hangers then a viable option for most windows in most houses? Yes.
Andy Engel
Senior editor, Fine Woodworking magazine
An updated profile is a happy profile.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
None of this matters in geological time.
Thank you Andy for shedding more light and less heat on the subject!
My pleasure.Andy Engel
Senior editor, Fine Woodworking magazine
An updated profile is a happy profile.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
None of this matters in geological time.
Most is one thing Andy, but are they a viable option for Fine Homes?The kind the Taunton periodical is supposedly concerned with - That do use wide casing stock, wide windows, and solid construction techniques.No! in most cases not.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
"...are they a viable option for Fine Homes?"
I don't see why not. Wide trim in itself doesn't make for a "fine" home.
Isn't reducing energy loss also part of a "fine" home?
How about saving lumber, AKA "green" building? That might be something that some would consider "fine" homebuilding.
What's "fine" to you isn't necessarilly fine to everyone else - It's a subjective concept.
Fight crime - shoot back.
Well maybe but I wont be changing the way I frame windows anytime soon. This reminds me of the production door setting article by Gary Katz a few years back. Effective techniques that work and save money but in the end quality is diminished. Nailing a trimmer/ jack to the king stud will keep both from twisting. Nailing off the outside of casing makes for a secure jamb. Can and should be done without opening the miter.
Tom
Gotta disagree with you a little on the trim Andy. If the hanger pushes out the wall at the top, it will distort the angle of the mitre, inclduing the side legs. You may say it's only a little, to some it's too much. As far as gluing and floating trim, I prefer mine to be nailed, solid though you did say float the head, which is somewhat more acceptable. I also don't agree that nailing tends to open up the mitres.
As far as using the hangers vs. the jacks, I feel more comfortable with the jacks in place. Then again, I'm on my way to being an old fart anyway...
Don
I wrote Joe through his website and commented on the negatives re these hangers. I gave him three.
One, the thickness build of about 1/8" either bulges wall finish, or requires extra labor to hog out drywall on inside face when hanging. We have done it by dusting the hanger face with blue chalk, slapping up a board to get an "impression," and taking it down so we can dig out some paper and rock where the mark is.
Two, the presence of a big steel plate right below the corner fouls the trim carpenter, when wanting to nail up casing.
Three, the mass of through-wall steel probably transmits as much heat through the wall as might be negated by the use of a jackstud.
His reply was that a better way might be to use the notched stud and header arrangement shown in the pic, attached, for all exterior openings, and the small clip shown in the other pic, for interior openings.
As for interior trim woes, Joe said that for house design that uses less wood, we should be thinking about no casings, instead using drywall returns.
And by the way, I have seen some elegantly executed designs shown right in Fine Homebuilding that had casing-free windows.
>> Do most houses use wide casing? No. Most use 2 1/4 in. casing or drywall returns. <<
That's not been my experience. Maybe just a regional thing but what I say is that homebuyers today want an economically but well constructed home with some extra moldings and a nice paint job. Upgraded is more expensive finishes - granite - etc. Sad, but that is what today's market demands. As far as just using drywall returns - even the cheapest houses around here get casing - maybe 10 years ago there were some rock bottom priced homes being built with no casing... I'm doing some entry level homes right now and what I do is drywall returns with casing applied right to the drywall, stools and aprons applied. 90 % people would not know the difference, and of the 10% they would only notice after a close inspection.
Around here, for any house close to 200k you get 3 1/4" casing, and 200k is probably below average for the area.
BTW - let's hear it from someone who has actually built homes using these brackets throughout on exterior openings!!! OK - how about someone who has built one house using these brackets throughout!!! It sounds to me like the only thing concrete thing we have thus far is one trim carp who reported what a PIA they were...
Edited 9/20/2005 8:06 am ET by Matt
The first time I saw drywall returns in lieu of casings, was on Del Webb's new Sun City development in Huntley, Illinois. All the models were quite upscale, and were selling like hotcakes.
Window sills were all 3/4" marble slabs. There are ways to execute good design without wrapping openings in wood. I don't think anyone would step inside one of the Del Webb models and say, "Wait! This looks cheap! Where are all the window moldings?"
I used header hangers in a house I am competing now, but not to eliminate jacks. They are there because there was no way, given the architect's spec for corner windows, to get jacks in there. We put the headers up tight to the top, and crippled down to the window heads, so we won't have to deal with the plates at trim time.
I have seen some very high end housing built around here with 2x6 exterior walls on 2-foot centers. I have framed some additions and garages with 2x4 on 24s. Sixteen inch centers aren't so dear to my heart anymore.
I guess the answer to these concerns comes down to what you value. In my mind, energy efficiency is far more important to a fine home than the level of trim, or to a point, the convenience of the carpenters. You do have to keep an eye on the point of diminishing returns.
Energy efficiency has a far longer societal payback than either trim or convenience. So, yes, I think all of us have a duty to future generations to make houses energy efficient, even at the cost of say, half an hour extra time per opening. Call me a radical, but I think that's the moral high ground.
And by the way, I still think that there are ways to avoid nailing into the wall around the miter that are at least as effective. And if your trim is so wide as to problematic in this regard, unless it's MDF, I'll also go out on a limb and suggest that any miter is doomed to fail anyway due to seasonal movement. Andy Engel
Senior editor, Fine Woodworking magazine
An updated profile is a happy profile.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
None of this matters in geological time.
"I guess the answer to these concerns comes down to what you value. In my mind, energy efficiency is far more important to a fine home than the level of trim, or to a point, the convenience of the carpenters."Energy Efficiency is important but how far are you going to go as far as the Structural Integrity of houses. Are we going to keep eliminating more and more lumber on houses because of insulation reasons or will we concentrate on building a house that will not fall apart?So every header whether we're talking 3' 4' 5' 6' 7' 8' 9' will have one king stud on it with these hangers. I'd hate to see the wall how much it moves after you slam the doors with no jacks underneath them.I would rather have a house with more lumber in it that can withstand a hurricane then more insulation.So which is it that we're looking for, structural integrity of a house or energy efficiency or can we do both without effecting the structural integrity of the house/Joe Carola
Joe, I'm looking at both the structural integrity of the house and its energy efficiency. But beyond a certain point, adding more wood to a house is merely keeping loggers employed. I'm not saying that eliminating jack studs is appropriate in every case, just that they aren't neccessary in every case.
As to integrity, I'll trust an engineer's design over a carpenter's tradition. And please, don't take that personally. I've spent more than half of my adult life as a carpenter, and none of it as an engineer.
Andy Engel
Senior editor, Fine Woodworking magazine
An updated profile is a happy profile.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
None of this matters in geological time.
"I would rather have a house with more lumber in it that can withstand a hurricane then more insulation."
Having a bunch of lumber in a house has nothing to do with it's ability to withstand wind forces.
Q: What's the quickest way to get into a blonde's pants?
A: Pick them up off the floor.
"I would rather have a house with more lumber in it that can withstand a hurricane then more insulation."that's because of where you're from. you eastern seaboard guys and west coasters worry mostly about seismic concerns, hurricanes, etc. when it comes to structural stability in the house because the climate is moderate. even where i worked in KY you could easily (and lots of people did) live in a completely UNinsulated house 'cuz it's nice most all the time. for all the houses built north of Kansas City and anywhere near the middle of the continent, what we worry about isn't catastrophic failure, it's moisture penetration, mostly from cold-weather condensation inside the wall. the house is not going to blow down or shake down or anything else, it's likely to get water in the walls and fall apart. we're the audience that lstiurbek is preaching to. look at the outside of an old house on a frosty morning when you can see the framing pattern printed in frost on the siding and then imagine heat loss in several weeks of -30 in a central continental climate. whew. there you go. sorry for the new-guy rant. btw, i still don't know anyone here who uses header hangers either, but the arguement for them makes better sense. we're just as set in our ways as anybody else.
"...how many builders, designers, and framers out there are downsizing their headers when moving up to the top floor?"
Around here, the rule of thumb is: "Two 2X12s will carry anything".
Double 2X12s are used on virtually EVERYTHING - From non bearing walls where they're major overkill to 18' garage doors where they're grossly undersized.
No sense putting any actual THOUGHT into anything, is there???
Licking is lovely - It doesn't matter where you do it. [Lisa Snowdon, model]
Boss, another disadvantage of oversized headers is that there's more wood to shrink, and consequently more drywall cracks and open miters.
AndyAndy Engel
Senior editor, Fine Woodworking magazine
An updated profile is a happy profile.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
None of this matters in geological time.
"another disadvantage of oversized headers is that there's more wood to shrink, and consequently more drywall cracks and open miters."
You're preachin' to the choir, Andy.
I only mentioned it because it annoys me that no one seems to put any thought into what's actually NEEDED.
Bumpersticker: I'm not tailgating. I'm drafting
This is awesome! Great feedback!
But...
My question was that ultimately all of this boils down to the shear strength of the fastener in the hanger, right?
Thanks so much to everyone who's contributed!
Yep, that's right. Just like with the joist hangers that are probably holding up some portion of the floor your sitting on right now. Good construction does ultimately depend on concientious detailing.Andy Engel
Senior editor, Fine Woodworking magazine
An updated profile is a happy profile.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
None of this matters in geological time.
"My question was that ultimately all of this boils down to the shear strength of the fastener in the hanger, right?"
I do not think so. The weak link is probably the wood itself. Given a decent fastener, I bet the wood tears apart before the fastener shears. In the case of a nail, it would probably pull out instead of shearing.
Without taking a position either way; the technique described could still be valid even if those Simpson bits are not up to the load. Not much work to cut some heavier angle, and drill some holes in it. Recently hung a header that way with some serious lags holding it up. Even the heavy Simpson angle looked too weak to me. Was not over a window, but method would work for a window.
One more thing; this is not the low-hanging-fruit in energy savings. Heatloss from thermal bridging is negligible compared to convective losses in a typical new structure. This is not to say it is a bad design, just that construction practices have a long way to go before this is the 'weakest link' in the thermal envelope.
I thought of this a while back and then recently saw published somewhere: putting a continuous header all the way around the building. Anyone done that? I was also playing with a half baked idea of using a wood I-joists for continuous headers and putting foam insulation on inside against the web. Seems like a continuous header would transfer roof or second floor loads evenly through the walls and would bridge openings without needing to beef up the sides of the openings. Any thoughts?
A continuous header seems to me to be a ridiculous waste of materails with virtually no benefit. It also raises structural issues - You need continouus studs from top of wall to bottom to make them rigid. I-joists were never intended to be headers and should not be used that way. Other than that, it's a great idea. (-:
Asking 'who ought to be the boss' is like asking 'who ought to be the tenor in the quartet?' Obviously, the man who can sing tenor. [Henry Ford]
Well, I had to ask! Now I know. Seemed like a great idea at the time! (I think that's what Hendrix said when asked why he set his guitar on fire.)
I sort of did that in my house by doubling up the rim over the larger openings. A single 2x10 rim is adequate, with hangers, as a header over most smaller openings. My framer took a little convincing, but I was signing the checks and the inspector was fully on board.
AndyAndy Engel
Senior editor, Fine Woodworking magazine
An updated profile is a happy profile.
Other people can talk about how to expand the destiny of mankind. I just want to talk about how to fix a motorcycle. I think that what I have to say has more lasting value. --Robert M. Pirsig
None of this matters in geological time.
I think using these types of hangers vs traditional you could potentially have a great ammount of shear strength in something like this provided it was installed almost 100% straight up and down. I think if it were to start twisting it would lose a great deal of it's strength.
Good answer Andy,to other reply `Why reinvent the wheel?'Cause we'd all be driving on stone wheels.Too much `Don't chage it,it's fine' in construction.I'm all for new methods.My customers like the options.Anyone can build a house for a customer,I sell the process, including options.Some people like new tech,some like old ways(not many for me).
See my flaming post in the feedback column.
We have heavy snow loads, seismic and wind shear considerations. No way header hangers and no trimmers would fly around here. Piffin might use 1x6 trim but even more common 4x width would not work either. That rules out a lot of "fine" looking details that I like to build. Like I like to say , "This is a nice place". 2.25" case and base may be for everyone else but they can have it. There is no defending those header hangers. They add too much work and weaken the structure profoundly. They are good for Simpsons' bottom line though
Wow!<!----><!----><!---->
I had no idea this topic was such a proverbial hornets nest.<!----><!---->
Your "flaming" post in the feedback column had a lot of plausible points. Thanks for the information. I haven't ever built a house but I'm a sub and have seen plenty of framing practices and none of them include these hangars. That was the purpose of this thread. I wanted to see if we were missing the boat around here. <!----><!---->
As to the other posts concerning the notion of "Fine" and homebuilding: I too noticed the 'caliber' of home pictured next to our model on pp.50&51 (FH#174). <!----><!---->
Wood trim, big trim, skinny trim or no trim, style isn't the issue. The issue is the structural integrity of the home. You can walk in and 'feel' a cheap/flimsy house- regardless the style. <!----><!---->
I think cost effective building can still be "fine" with an eye to style and a head toward moderation. Look at Frank Lloyd Wright he was seething in style and his homes were built with cost effective, minimalist materials. Style is indefinitely arguable but no one can argue that Wright built plain cheap homes.<!----><!---->
Green building is more about giving an ear to your impact on your environment. It's realistically and responsibly balancing what you need with what you want and letting your integrity win.<!----><!---->
I had some email dialog with Joe Lsiturbeck about "green" window and door framing in exterior walls, and a scheme like the one shown in the attachment was developed.
A 3-foot wide by 4-foot high window frame is shown, with the features called out, as Joe and I discussed them. I sketched it in 2x6 framing.
Instead of a header hanger, a notched king stud is used, and the header loading is borne partially by the notched king, and partially by the side opening trimmers shown. The nailing of the trimmers to the kings develops plenty of shear to enable the trimmers, while not posting down to the plate below, to lend some header support.
The pic shows a window opening (36w x 48h). A door opening will have trimmers ("jacks") that go all the way down to the bottom plate.
The wall height is not labeled on the pic, but it is 97-3/8", only 1/4" taller than the 97-1/8" gotten with precut studs and conventional double-plated walls. Should work OK for drywall. I arrived at the wall height by setting the ROH at 82-1/2" off rough floor, and using a standard width material as the upright header.
The single header is either LSL or LVL at a standard width of 11-7/8". The use of sawn lumber 2x12s brings the wall height down to 96-3/4", which is getting a little tight for standard sheetrock.
In making up components for openings like this, framers will suffer through two operations they will at first find tedious: notching the kings, and ripping any top cripples needed.
Framers will also object to the use of a stud length that requires cutting. A production builder like Pulte, Centex, Toll Brothers, etc., could readily buy them at the length needed, however.
The use of the side trimmers at the openings addresses the objections of those that say this "green" framing doesn't allow nailing for casings.
Your comments are appreciated.
Edited 9/23/2005 1:22 pm ET by Stinger
I can see where that would work, but, around here, it would definately need to be signed off by a structural engineer.
Re your statement >> Framers will also object to the use of a stud length that requires cutting. A production builder like Pulte, Centex, Toll Brothers, etc., could readily buy them at the length needed, however. <<
Around here Centex has it's walls panelized in a factory and brought to site on a truck. When touring one of their houses I noticed that the interior (non load bearing) walls had single top plates and studs that were 1.5" longer to acomidate for the single top plate. These houses had trussed roofs. Not sure, but maybe all Centex houses are trussed roofs?
Your method would definately work for a situation like that where the builder has 100% control (I'm assuming) of the way the walls are framed.
Just as an aside, what horrrified me though was that in these Centex houses they didn't appear to be entirely on board with the concept of lapping of the double top plates at the corners of the house. I don't know if the cap plates were applied in the field or the factory.
I can definately see that your method would be more expensive though, since if you had that much control over the framing process you could easily be using 2x6 or maybe even 2x4s for headers on the exterior openings.