About to start a small addition on a beautiful old victorian. Thinking about the easiest way to replicate the exisitng eave detail with modern materials.
The current eave has true 2x rafter tails and exposed T&G sheathing which you see from below.
I am thinking of framing the new roof in standard KD lumber with sistered on rafter tails of something like true 2x clear wood, maybe even rot resistant like cedar. Then applying T&G pine for the fisrt 16″ of the roof sheathing and plywood up from there.
I was even thinking maybe the tails would be 3/4″ thinner than the rafters allowing the plywood sheathing to go right over the T&G,(also making it thicker so the roofing nails don’t show thru.)
The thing that has me a bit baffled is the gable end overhang. So far my best idea is just to apply the T&G to the underside of the ply roof sheathing.
Anyone have any other ideas?
Replies
My house has that detail... a 2' open eave, exposed rafter tails, and beadboard t&g used for roof sheathing outside of the wall line. Looks great from below, and works fine where the rafter tails hang out.
On the gable ends it's not so great. The barge rafters have sagged in a couple of places at their bottoms ends, because all that's supporting them are a couple of outlookers per piece and then the short pieces of beadboard. Since the beadboard is not cantilevered it does nothing to support the barge. The house has been standing 80+ years and in that time, gravity has been too much for the outlookers. If the original builders had run the beadboard back past the building line to the first rafter inside (using 4' pieces instead of 2's), there would have been cantilever to support everything. When I reroof, I'm going to need to jack up the barge rafters from the ground in order to raise them to their original elevations--that way I will be able to get plywood on flat. Then I'm going to need to rebuild the outlookers at the new (original) elevation.
Bottom line, I like your idea of cantilevering the plywood out. Like you say, cut the rafter tails at the wall line and scab on false rafter tails. The tails need to sister alongside the rafters for at least a few feet, maybe even 2:1. Rip 3/4" off the tail material and install the beadboard, then ply over it.
Thanks for the response. Getting close to having a plan.
I was wondering how that end rafter(barge??) was supported. Creates a nice look though, kinda of floating in space!
Thanks again.
Your photo of the house does not appear to show any outlookers supporting the barge on the gable end. That probably means that they cantilevered the beadboard sheathing out. If you get up in the attic you can tell... beadboard coming in to the first rafter, plain 1x6 skip sheathing continuing in from there.
Photo of my place attached. The outlookers are 4x4s about 4' long--they extend into the attic to the first rafter in, where they are blocked. Lots of Victorians have knee-brace details to support the barges, and that looks good also. For yours I think you have to go with what's on the original house... which is probably also less work and less material.
David,
I'm not sure putting brackets (aka knee braces) on the gables of a Victorian would be a good suggestion. Functionally, it would be great; but it wouldn't be consistent with the original style of the architecture.
Roof brackets is a hallmark of Craftsman architecture, which more or less followed the Victorian era.
You probably already know this, but the picture of the house you attached is a textbook example of Craftsman architecture; I would guess the house was built around 1915 to 1920.
Read or reread the last line of my post.
This?
Lots of Victorians have knee-brace details to support the barges, and that looks good also. For yours I think you have to go with what's on the original house...
"Victorian" is really an era, not a single style. Italianate and Stick Style would often have brackets supporting the eaves and rakes. Queen Annes would less often have brackets. Greek Revival is technically a Victorian-era style, and would never have had brackets. FWIW.
For yours I think you have to go with what's on the original house...
That.
Lots of Victorians have knee-brace details to support the barges, and that looks good also...
This was the remark that was the basis of my comment.
When you followed up with a picture of a Craftsman house, I wanted to clarify things. Lots of people reading the threads here are beginners. I'm not trying to find fault with your comments on a personal level or anything like that -- I'm just trying to keep the information clear and accurate.
Although you recommended sticking to the original detailing on this specific house (which is always a good idea), I thought the more general comment needed to be adressed.
Edited 12/20/2004 12:27 pm ET by ragnar
That's an interesting looking house. How was the siding done? Not sure I have seen that detail before. Matt
Cedar shingles... alternating 2-1/2" and 5-1/2" courses... called 'ribbon coursing' here.
David (or anyone else):
You say "The outlookers are 4x4s about 4' long--they extend into the attic to the first rafter in, where they are blocked."
I see that these 4x4s also extend out beyond the rake fascia an inch or so. Is there any special technique for getting this look without creating an easy water infiltration point? I'm assuming the fascia is cut to fit around the 4x4... Matt
As you pointed out, the top of the 4x4 is exposed, and is a place where water can easily collect. To address this, I've seen some modern construction techniques where the end cut of the 4x4 is hidden behind the barge board. The barge is then face-nailed (or screwed) into the end grain of the 4x4 directly behind it. A decorative piece can then be adhered and finish-nailed to simulate the conventional look.
However, after working on dozens of Craftsman houses from the 1910s, I continue to be amazed at how well these brackets hold up. With a nearly 100-year service record, it's hard to argue the need for alternative construction methods. I think that if you use a good piece of tight-grained, clear fir, you will get similar results. I suspect that most of the modern problems with such trim elements are a result of cheap materials.
Here's a photo to help illustrate the "decorative" bracket tips I was describing.
The craftsman-style detail of a lookout or bracket end projecting past the barge rafter it supports, is definitely an invitiation for unwanted water.
It is a lookout if it cantilevers out from somewhere in the structure. Brackets are face-applied, and are a knee-brace with diagonal underneath.
Well-maintained paint jobs, and sealants, can minimize the problem, as can flashing. Locating the house in a dry sunny climate won't hurt. Build this way in Seattle, and it's a rotter for sure.
A recent article in either FH or JLC discussed the restoration of a Greene and Greene house, probably in California, in which brackets like this were badly decayed. New bracket ends and copper flashing details were done in the restoration.
You see this detail on vernacular homes in the mountains of Switzerland, and the projecting ends of the lookouts are all done up with copper caps. Cool.
I was actually thinking that regular 4x4 post caps could be used. If aluminum, they could be painted, and if they were a few stories up, would hardly be recognized for what they are. Matt
Well-maintained paint jobs, and sealants, can minimize the problem, as can flashing. Locating the house in a dry sunny climate won't hurt. Build this way in Seattle, and it's a rotter for sure.
Hey Gene, I work in Seattle and like I said, I can't believe how well these brackets have held up on the Craftsman houses here. Doesn't 100 years of service meet acceptability criterion for anyone? ;)
If it ain't broke, don't fix it?
On my place the outlookers are 4x4s that extend to the face of the barge rafter, each with a little 'cap' that's 3/4" x 3" x 3" attached to the end... those caps are what extend past the face of the barge. All clear VG fir... they're 80 years old and 80 miles north of Seattle and in great condition.
So, you are saying that the neither the barge rafter (we call em fly rafters) or the rake fascia (if there is any) is knotched at all? The outlooker, in effect, is the only thing that is notched?
Thanks,Matt
I think it's the barge that's notched... a birdsmouth cut to sit flat on the outlooker. I have never looked closely. A notch in the outlooker would not be the right idea.
David,
sagging overhangs like you showed on your house----or details like the original poster showed----are extremely common among my customer base.
the repair is unbelievably simple, fast---and will not require jacking from the ground.
all you need is typically----a dozen or so duplex nails( ya know those 2 headed ones for temporary stair treads?), some deck screws, a couple of 2x8's 6 or 8 feet long and 3 bar clamps.
the bottom of the rake will most likely not have sagged because it will be well supported by the beadboard extending along the bottom edge of the roof. position the 2x8's perpendicular to the rake----one about 40% up from the bottom corner---the other one a couple feet from the top. you want the 2x8 to span from the barge board inboard about3 or 4 rafters. drive 2 or 3 duplex nails in through the 2x8 and into each rafter location( 6or 8 duplex nails in each 2x8). This 2x8 will establish the plane of the roof and reveal exactly how far down the eave has sagged-----you will not be able to nail the barge rafter at this point because of the sag.
Protect the underside of the barge rafter with a piece of scrap wood and clamp on the bar clamp from the under side of the barge rafter to the top plane of the 2x8. If working alone---just leap frog back and forth between the 2 clamps------ gradually tightening the 2 clamps will slowly lift the barge rafter back into the correct plane. If the sag was more than an inch or so you will eventually " bottom out" the screws in each clamp.----that's when the 3rd clamp is used to get a new "bite" on the situation---you can then remove and re-adjust the bottomed out clamp without losing any progress.
It will take you less than 10 minutes per rake to PERFECTLY bring each rake into it's original position.
To permanently HOLD the rake in the correct position is simple. At this point I will renail the beadboard and shoot in some deckscrews at strategic locations------and if the whole roof surface is being skinned with plywood or osb---perfect-----simply put a little thpught into how and where you stager the panels and the rake will stay put. Or you can selectively remove pieces of beadboard and install new decking to run inboard 3 or 4 rafters----you would need to do that in at least 3 different locations.
1 caution-----in my neighborhood these type of houses have more often than not been remuddled with aluminum or vinyl siding------If the rake board is wrapped in aluminum you won't be able to clamp on to the bottom edge of the rake board.
That is NO PROBLEM because ( again working from the top) you can remove a couple pieces of beadboard---screw a scab on the INSIDE of the rake board inside the soffit and work your clamping action on THAT scab.
What WILL be a problem---in the case of aluminum siding or vinyl-----is that the rake sag actually reduced the overhang by an inch or so. When you pull the overhang back into plane------the vinyl or aluminum soffit will now be too short and will want to drop out of the j channel. You will either have to cut and install NEW ( and longer) soffit panels---or possibly compromise on how close you bring the eave BACK to its original plane.
also---if possible do NOT let the homeowner or the neighbor see you actually making these repairs----you don't want them to know how easy it actually was. Visually this is a TREMENDOUS improvement---and for you, consequently quite profitable.
Best wishes,
Stephen
Stephen,
Thanks for the suggestions. I've done a lot of this stuff, and when the time comes (reroof next season) I'm going to jack up the barge where it's sagging and nail new plywood over the skip. I think I follow your description but it'll be in the way of the plywood if done from above.
Stephen,
Neat idea on pulling those barge boards back into plane.
I had a couple of questions. First, since you seem to work on the barge boards sequentially as opposed to simultaneously, do you ever have any problems with them pulling away from each other at the apex?
Second, what happens to the horizontal members of the brackets when you raise the barge boards? Do they seem to follow along, or do they often require individual adjustment?
Thanks again for the tip -- it sounds like a great approach!
Ragnar,
what I have found----suprisingly----is that the Apex never seems to have sagged--- down all that much----but if it was a concern----I would temporarily screw a cleat on the inside of the fly rafters' apex to hold 'em together.
what does often happen is---------
around here you will often have 2 overhangs----one on the main roof and one on the porch. The porch overhang will continue up the side of the house untill it terminates right at the apex of the main roof underhang.( The porch roof will typically be much steeper than the main roof in this case)
So the fly rafter, made out of 5/4 stock is somewhere in the area of 27-28 feet long and is made up out of 2 pieces kind of " scarfed" together. That scarf joint---not the apex miter will want to open up. Often I will put a bar clamp on that joint to hold it together when lifting. If the house has been remuddled and this area is wrapped in aluminum and vinyl soffit and such----you can scab a gusset on the inside face of the fly rafter where it is hidden by the soffit panels. I have often used long screws from the top of the scarf and the bottom of the scarf to hold it together.----I just bought a small pocket hole jig---so the next one of these I do I am gonna experiment with pocket screws on the inside face of the rafter.
BTW----David Meiland was worried about the clamps and the 2x8's being in the way of the plywood. I have never found that to be the case. I plan the location of the clamps and 2x8's around the plywood courses------you can usually get 2 courses of plywood on before you need to remove the first brace---------also---since you won't need plywood clips when putting plywood over skip sheathing------if you REALLY needed to----you could temporarily skip a piece of plywood untill you had the next course above installed, and put the missing piece in later.
Now-----the question about wether the brackets come UP with the overhang??????
Typically we will have about 16 inch overhangs with NO brackets---so it isn't an issue. On these houses, often the brackets were added sometime AFTER the sag----so they can be dispensed with after the eaves are lifted properly----but then you have siding to patch etc.----sometimes the brackets are left in place if the sag wasn't to bad in the first place and the resulting gap is filled in with a tapered shim or dutchman-------- the dutchman---once it is painted is hard to spot from the ground( these are typically 2 and 3 story houses)
Best wishes, Stephen
Toolin,
Your idea of scabbing on false rafter tails is a good one. Lots of the foursquare houses from the 1900-1905 time period used that same technique when they had scrolled rafters showing in the eaves.
Like you said, you could set the "tails" 3/4" low (relative to the "real" rafters) to allow for the thickness of the beadboard. Alternatively, you could install the tails in the same plane as the rafters, and install some furring strips on the rafters to make up the difference.
The lumberyards in my area also stock a beaded plywood that looks very much like the real T&G product. This last approach might be the easiest of all.
Rather than sister in rafter tails, could you not just notch the rafter to form the tail. A bit tricky, but less wood and probably less labor.
I must be getting confused now... what would the notches in the tails be for?
ragnar, sorry. To lay your beadboard in so you can lay the decking over it. You said you thought you might sister-in rafter tails and lay them 3/4 of an inch lower than the rafters to accomadate teh beadboard and lay ply over it. I said why sister-in if you could cut your rafters with tails and knotch the tails.
Still not clear?
OK- I understand now. However, I think the reason he wanted to use sistered rafter tails to begin with was that the existing tails are a full 2" wide (as opposed to an 1-1/2"). It might be too expensive to use 2" net rafters on the entire roof section.
By the way, no one has commented on using beaded ply as opposed to the "real" T&G format....
Edited 12/21/2004 3:22 pm ET by ragnar
GOT IT! Great point. Beside, knotching a twenty foot rafter as I was suggesting could be a trick. Not to mention, certainly beyond my skillsaw skills without a jig , and a tablesaw . . . ? And of he could be using I-joists requiring sistered tails.
My 110yo house has the same overhang design and even the funky belt course.
I think your idea of running the sheathing all the way out on the eaves, and applying the faux beadboard to the bottom is a good idea.
That is probably what I will do as long as I can deal with the thickness build up matching the exisitng gable end. I hate to have to rebuild the whole gable eave but it my need it. Won't know I guess till I get up there with a ladder.
Thanks to all with the thoughts and ideas. Love this forum. Excellent ideas and lots of opinions.
Toolin,
I know you didn't ask for input on this, but as long as I'm shooting my mouth off.....
From the computer graphic in post #1, it looks like the addition is going to consist of an expanision of the mudroom/entry vestibule. Instead of having the roof over the new area be in a common plane with the main roof, how about leaving several (vertical) feet of siding, about where that blue detail band is located? That would help break up the monotony of a large roof.
The new addition I'm proposing would look something like an enclosed porch; you could even hip the ends of the roof, and it would look like it was always there. It wouldn't have to be as steep as the main roof -- something on the order of 5/12 would look good. I'll see if I can find a picture in case my words aren't clear.
-----------
Well, can't find any pictures -- at least not for now.
Edited 12/20/2004 11:04 pm ET by ragnar
I think you mean something like this, see the picture below.
Actually that was my first proposal to the customer. I like it better architecturally as well. But the practical issues. This addition houses a 1st floor bath, the only one in the house. The owners are elderly with bad knees. This roof line required that the addition be one step down from the rest of the house. Oh well.
Thanks for the opinion!
Toolin,
That's close to what I meant. Here's a picture that's closer to what I was trying to describe. You can see that the porch roof is a shallower angle than the main roof (although this one is too shallow for my taste) and that it is hipped. Also, in your case there'd be a lot more siding between the top of the porch roof and the eave of the main roof.
Would the shorter roof section allow you to eliminate the step-down into the new area?
Edited 12/22/2004 1:09 am ET by ragnar