Dear all,
I was asked to have a look at a friend’s house to give them my opinion on whether it would be o.k. to take out a wall to open up their kitchen into the sitting room.
It is a semi detached bungalow with finished basement. The living area with wall removed would be Approx 20 ft wide x 20 ft long. I think the house is over twenty years old.
In a previous renovation they removed 15ft of the wall from the gable end and built a beam over, approx 1ft deep.
I looked in the attic space and there are ten trusses, 2ft apart, spanning approx 36ft front to back. I assumed the trusses would be simply supported on the exterior walls and the spine wall would be completely independent of the trusses and ceiling. I told them to go ahead, remove the wall and not to worry. Then I went home and woke up in a cold sweat. What if the roof trusses settled over time? What is the likelihood of the spine wall becoming a prop for the ceiling and roof trusses?
In that case, I imagine that when the spine wall is taken out the roof trusses would settle down further and the ceiling will start cracking.
I panicked and recommended on second thoughts that they do not remove the spine wall. I just don't understand what load is being carried. Is the spine wall a prop? Is the spine wall taking wind load and providing wind bracing? If the wall is removed and a beam is put in to replace it, will the truss load be altered, either by increased contact or reduced contact? Will load redistribution cause settlement and movement resulting in cracking in any event? If a new beam was inserted over the spine wall, then a new nib would have to be constructed to support the beam at the party wall end, assuming that it's not possible to support a new beam in a party wall. Will the nib need to be supported below in the basement and possibly need a foundation?
I have no idea how roof trusses settle over time and whether they do in fact settle onto spine walls. There is a stipple ceiling and I didn't know what tell tail signs to look for settlement. I can only imagine that over time the trusses do get used to being propped and then removing it would be to induce further settlement. I'm presuming that the trusses are designed to settle in the first place, so would it be standard to keep a gap at the top of the wall and the trusses? But what about the beam that was inserted when the part wall was removed. Would that be likely to have a gap or be tight up against the trusses. I have no idea of what happens or what is even likely. Worse case scenario; What would the degree of cracking be if the wall was removed? I feel like a dream killer. I am torn thinking taking out this 5ft section of wall would end up being more trouble than its worth and potentially causing cracking in the ceiling and expensive and troublesome remedial work. I would also be extremely interested in the kind of costs potentially involved. Or am I over reacting?
Yours torn and troubled,
Beko.
I was asked to have a look at a friend’s house to give them my opinion on whether it would be o.k. to take out a wall to open up their kitchen into the sitting room.
It is a semi detached bungalow with finished basement. The living area with wall removed would be Approx 20 ft wide x 20 ft long. I think the house is over twenty years old.
In a previous renovation they removed 15ft of the wall from the gable end and built a beam over, approx 1ft deep.
I looked in the attic space and there are ten trusses, 2ft apart, spanning approx 36ft front to back. I assumed the trusses would be simply supported on the exterior walls and the spine wall would be completely independent of the trusses and ceiling. I told them to go ahead, remove the wall and not to worry. Then I went home and woke up in a cold sweat. What if the roof trusses settled over time? What is the likelihood of the spine wall becoming a prop for the ceiling and roof trusses?
In that case, I imagine that when the spine wall is taken out the roof trusses would settle down further and the ceiling will start cracking.
I panicked and recommended on second thoughts that they do not remove the spine wall. I just don't understand what load is being carried. Is the spine wall a prop? Is the spine wall taking wind load and providing wind bracing? If the wall is removed and a beam is put in to replace it, will the truss load be altered, either by increased contact or reduced contact? Will load redistribution cause settlement and movement resulting in cracking in any event? If a new beam was inserted over the spine wall, then a new nib would have to be constructed to support the beam at the party wall end, assuming that it's not possible to support a new beam in a party wall. Will the nib need to be supported below in the basement and possibly need a foundation?
I have no idea how roof trusses settle over time and whether they do in fact settle onto spine walls. There is a stipple ceiling and I didn't know what tell tail signs to look for settlement. I can only imagine that over time the trusses do get used to being propped and then removing it would be to induce further settlement. I'm presuming that the trusses are designed to settle in the first place, so would it be standard to keep a gap at the top of the wall and the trusses? But what about the beam that was inserted when the part wall was removed. Would that be likely to have a gap or be tight up against the trusses. I have no idea of what happens or what is even likely. Worse case scenario; What would the degree of cracking be if the wall was removed? I feel like a dream killer. I am torn thinking taking out this 5ft section of wall would end up being more trouble than its worth and potentially causing cracking in the ceiling and expensive and troublesome remedial work. I would also be extremely interested in the kind of costs potentially involved. Or am I over reacting?
Yours torn and troubled,
Beko.
