Timber framed houses versus?
18 September 2010, 12:01 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: just simple old me
Posts: 2,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Timber framed houses versus?
Saw a bit on news this morning about timber framed houses being worse in fires etc specially when in process of being built.
Can anyone just cos im curious explain in laymans terms how a timber framed house is built and how it differs from how a house was built before it was like this, just curious about them thats all.
Many thanks
Can anyone just cos im curious explain in laymans terms how a timber framed house is built and how it differs from how a house was built before it was like this, just curious about them thats all.
Many thanks
18 September 2010, 01:19 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I build using timber frame. They are basically pre formed panels made in a factory then just nail gun together on site.
There has been a bit in the press of late about them being a fire risk. Unfortunately when erecting prior to putting the brick skin on it is a huge risk. If kids put a match to it it will go up like a box of matches. Once built I suppose in theory they are more of a risk due to having more wood than a conventional brick and block house. However in practice if there is a fire it would be just as bad in conventional. Any fire that is serious enough to breach into the cavity is going to be bad.
Once the frame is erected we put up a brick 'skin' that is only for asthetics and not of any structural significance unlike conventional brick and block buildings.
Plus side to a timber frame is it goes up so quickly so while the bricklayers put the skin on we can be working inside. If using brick and block you have to build and work from the ground up.
Not easy to tell externally if a building is timber framed. Easiest way is in the loft as there is no blocks just timber in the eaves.
Other possible way is to knock the walls. In timber frame the plasterboard is fixed on the timber but conventional houses normally dot and dab to the bricks. Thus you will get a more hollow noise in timber frame.This isn't a fool proof guarantee as some brick and block will fix plasterboard to a stud frame.
I always find it ironic that we call brick and block conventional but the first houses built were of timber frame.
Chop
There has been a bit in the press of late about them being a fire risk. Unfortunately when erecting prior to putting the brick skin on it is a huge risk. If kids put a match to it it will go up like a box of matches. Once built I suppose in theory they are more of a risk due to having more wood than a conventional brick and block house. However in practice if there is a fire it would be just as bad in conventional. Any fire that is serious enough to breach into the cavity is going to be bad.
Once the frame is erected we put up a brick 'skin' that is only for asthetics and not of any structural significance unlike conventional brick and block buildings.
Plus side to a timber frame is it goes up so quickly so while the bricklayers put the skin on we can be working inside. If using brick and block you have to build and work from the ground up.
Not easy to tell externally if a building is timber framed. Easiest way is in the loft as there is no blocks just timber in the eaves.
Other possible way is to knock the walls. In timber frame the plasterboard is fixed on the timber but conventional houses normally dot and dab to the bricks. Thus you will get a more hollow noise in timber frame.This isn't a fool proof guarantee as some brick and block will fix plasterboard to a stud frame.
I always find it ironic that we call brick and block conventional but the first houses built were of timber frame.
Chop
18 September 2010, 04:24 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: just simple old me
Posts: 2,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
house i live in now was built in 2003 and im sure a bloke at work said he looked at them when they was being built and they was timber framed but i dont know-i do know that unlike my old house that was built mid 60's that in this house it has no supporting walls as i can find, every wall even downstairs is hollow, which is a bit of a pain as the walls feel so ,well hollow, they dont even seem to have any bits of wood behind the walls upstairs like in old house every couple off feet or so and no eggshell behind the plasterboard neither.
18 September 2010, 04:39 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats another sign of timber frame, no solid walls. However I would be very very surprised if there wern't timber studs at 400mm centres. Just a case of finding them.
To be fair modern houses are thrown up and they can have that hollow feel without solid walls. Well fitted insulation can make a big difference.
The build quality I have seen from some of the big house builders really is shocking.
To be fair modern houses are thrown up and they can have that hollow feel without solid walls. Well fitted insulation can make a big difference.
The build quality I have seen from some of the big house builders really is shocking.
18 September 2010, 05:28 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Si hoc legere scis numium eruditionis habes
Posts: 1,383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-10645700
Timber framed buildings 'fire risk' despite safety test
By Ed Davey BBC News, London
Peckham fire This block of flats in Peckham was destroyed after a timber framed building caught fire
A controversial safety report, coupled with lobbying by the timber industry, has led to the spread of a construction method not widely seen in the UK since the Great Fire of London.
BBC London has discovered potentially dangerous timber framed buildings are proliferating - but nobody knows how many there are.
The Great Fire of London in 1666 heralded in a new era of building regulations in Britain that lasted until the modern age.
Mindful of how flames had destroyed a third of the largely wooden city, building with timber frames was banned in the years after Sir Christopher Wren's 1667 Building Act.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
If a secondary fire causes considerable damage you are duty bound to report that”
End Quote Sam Webb Architect
* Kurt Barling blog: Safe as houses?
Until recently, that is, because in 1999 the fire safety testers, BRE, carried out a test on a six-storey timber framed building in the controlled conditions of an aircraft hangar.
Their report said the fire was effectively contained, and the findings were then promoted by the UK Timber Frame Association [UKTFA].
It said at the time: "If you want to know how multi-storey timber frame buildings cope with fire there is one piece of research you must read."
The 1999 report was used to justify relaxing old regulations on timber frame in housing blocks.
It led to the widespread use of buildings with timber frames for large council housing projects.
But what neither organisation mentioned was that, in the early hours of the morning after the test, the fire re-ignited.
Firefighters rushed back to the hangar, by which time the top four floors were completely burned out.
Brickwork cracked and the heat was so severe the fire officer evacuated his men for fear the building was about to collapse.
'Real detective'
The second fire was finally reported in 2003 - by which time timber framed buildings, which are cheaper to make, were already sprouting over London for the first time since 1666.
Sam Webb is an architect who has warned about the danger of timber framed buildings.
Asked whether the 1999 report was misleading, he said: "I would have thought so knowing what I know now.
"If you have a fire test in which a secondary fire causes considerable damage you are duty bound to report that.
Great Fire of London Following the Great Fire of London, large timber framed buildings were banned
"You had to be a real detective to work out that the second [2003] report was talking about the same fire as the first one."
A London Assembly investigation into timber framed buildings was launched in 2009 after several major fires in London.
Last year two nearly-completed timber framed tower blocks in south London burned to the ground.
The first fire, in Peckham, was so severe it destroyed inhabited neighbouring buildings.
Meanwhile in 2007 a timber framed tower block in Croydon, south London, burned to the ground in identical circumstances to those in BRE's hangar test.
The fire brigade had put out a small fire and departed. Families who moved back in had a narrow escape when it re-ignited and dozens were left homeless.
Describing the dangers, Mr Webb said: "When timber framed buildings catch fire the actual structure burns.
"That's the last thing you want in a multi-storey building and it often leads to total collapse."
But BBC London has learned that local authorities have no idea how many timber framed buildings are under construction or already built in the city.
After a Freedom of Information request only three London councils out of 32 - Bromley, Redbridge and Barking and Dagenham - confirmed they keep a record of numbers.
'Quicker and cheaper'
In light of the BBC's findings, Brian Coleman, chairman of the London Fire Authority, said: "I have always been a stern critic of high rise timber framed buildings having seen in my own area the results of a blaze.
"Sadly, these days developers looking to build things quicker and cheaper have resorted to timber.
"Supporters of timber frame buildings say once they're built they're completely safe. But we know people drill holes in walls which damages the building fabric and allows the timber to become exposed."
Asked if he knew how many timber framed blocks there were in London, Mr Coleman said: "I've no idea, that's the problem.
"I personally wouldn't allow any high rise timber buildings - there needs to be a review of regulations.
"What we do about buildings already constructed I'm not sure."
Chairman of the London Fire Authority warns of the dangers of timber framed buildings.
Geoff Arnold, chairman of the UKTFA, which promoted the 1999 fire test, said: "The BRE test was an assessment of the six-storey building in terms of its ability to withstand the 60 minute compartment fire test - in this regard it was successful."
Of the second fire, he said: "It was not referred to in the report as it had little relevance to the outcome of the impact of fire in the very specific test.
"Timber frame is used around the world and is generally accepted as the future of construction."
A BRE spokeswoman said: "BRE has issued all information it was able to issue resulting from these projects.
"Other information that came out was given to project sponsors.
"BRE cannot publish this information independently."
Timber framed buildings 'fire risk' despite safety test
By Ed Davey BBC News, London
Peckham fire This block of flats in Peckham was destroyed after a timber framed building caught fire
A controversial safety report, coupled with lobbying by the timber industry, has led to the spread of a construction method not widely seen in the UK since the Great Fire of London.
BBC London has discovered potentially dangerous timber framed buildings are proliferating - but nobody knows how many there are.
The Great Fire of London in 1666 heralded in a new era of building regulations in Britain that lasted until the modern age.
Mindful of how flames had destroyed a third of the largely wooden city, building with timber frames was banned in the years after Sir Christopher Wren's 1667 Building Act.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
If a secondary fire causes considerable damage you are duty bound to report that”
End Quote Sam Webb Architect
* Kurt Barling blog: Safe as houses?
Until recently, that is, because in 1999 the fire safety testers, BRE, carried out a test on a six-storey timber framed building in the controlled conditions of an aircraft hangar.
Their report said the fire was effectively contained, and the findings were then promoted by the UK Timber Frame Association [UKTFA].
It said at the time: "If you want to know how multi-storey timber frame buildings cope with fire there is one piece of research you must read."
The 1999 report was used to justify relaxing old regulations on timber frame in housing blocks.
It led to the widespread use of buildings with timber frames for large council housing projects.
But what neither organisation mentioned was that, in the early hours of the morning after the test, the fire re-ignited.
Firefighters rushed back to the hangar, by which time the top four floors were completely burned out.
Brickwork cracked and the heat was so severe the fire officer evacuated his men for fear the building was about to collapse.
'Real detective'
The second fire was finally reported in 2003 - by which time timber framed buildings, which are cheaper to make, were already sprouting over London for the first time since 1666.
Sam Webb is an architect who has warned about the danger of timber framed buildings.
Asked whether the 1999 report was misleading, he said: "I would have thought so knowing what I know now.
"If you have a fire test in which a secondary fire causes considerable damage you are duty bound to report that.
Great Fire of London Following the Great Fire of London, large timber framed buildings were banned
"You had to be a real detective to work out that the second [2003] report was talking about the same fire as the first one."
A London Assembly investigation into timber framed buildings was launched in 2009 after several major fires in London.
Last year two nearly-completed timber framed tower blocks in south London burned to the ground.
The first fire, in Peckham, was so severe it destroyed inhabited neighbouring buildings.
Meanwhile in 2007 a timber framed tower block in Croydon, south London, burned to the ground in identical circumstances to those in BRE's hangar test.
The fire brigade had put out a small fire and departed. Families who moved back in had a narrow escape when it re-ignited and dozens were left homeless.
Describing the dangers, Mr Webb said: "When timber framed buildings catch fire the actual structure burns.
"That's the last thing you want in a multi-storey building and it often leads to total collapse."
But BBC London has learned that local authorities have no idea how many timber framed buildings are under construction or already built in the city.
After a Freedom of Information request only three London councils out of 32 - Bromley, Redbridge and Barking and Dagenham - confirmed they keep a record of numbers.
'Quicker and cheaper'
In light of the BBC's findings, Brian Coleman, chairman of the London Fire Authority, said: "I have always been a stern critic of high rise timber framed buildings having seen in my own area the results of a blaze.
"Sadly, these days developers looking to build things quicker and cheaper have resorted to timber.
"Supporters of timber frame buildings say once they're built they're completely safe. But we know people drill holes in walls which damages the building fabric and allows the timber to become exposed."
Asked if he knew how many timber framed blocks there were in London, Mr Coleman said: "I've no idea, that's the problem.
"I personally wouldn't allow any high rise timber buildings - there needs to be a review of regulations.
"What we do about buildings already constructed I'm not sure."
Chairman of the London Fire Authority warns of the dangers of timber framed buildings.
Geoff Arnold, chairman of the UKTFA, which promoted the 1999 fire test, said: "The BRE test was an assessment of the six-storey building in terms of its ability to withstand the 60 minute compartment fire test - in this regard it was successful."
Of the second fire, he said: "It was not referred to in the report as it had little relevance to the outcome of the impact of fire in the very specific test.
"Timber frame is used around the world and is generally accepted as the future of construction."
A BRE spokeswoman said: "BRE has issued all information it was able to issue resulting from these projects.
"Other information that came out was given to project sponsors.
"BRE cannot publish this information independently."
Trending Topics
18 September 2010, 05:50 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That fire in London has started a big debate about timber frames and is changing the way the industry works.
What is happening more often now is the windows and doors are fitted straight into the timber frame to actually make the building secure. Then get the brick skin up as soon as possible.
I tend to put windows in then make doors out of ply as the doors get knocked about during the rest of the construction process.
What is happening more often now is the windows and doors are fitted straight into the timber frame to actually make the building secure. Then get the brick skin up as soon as possible.
I tend to put windows in then make doors out of ply as the doors get knocked about during the rest of the construction process.
18 September 2010, 05:52 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
19 September 2010, 10:35 AM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Si hoc legere scis numium eruditionis habes
Posts: 1,383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until recently, that is, because in 1999 the fire safety testers, BRE, carried out a test on a six-storey timber framed building in the controlled conditions of an aircraft hangar.
Their report said the fire was effectively contained, and the findings were then promoted by the UK Timber Frame Association [UKTFA].
It said at the time: "If you want to know how multi-storey timber frame buildings cope with fire there is one piece of research you must read."
The 1999 report was used to justify relaxing old regulations on timber frame in housing blocks.
It led to the widespread use of buildings with timber frames for large council housing projects.
But what neither organisation mentioned was that, in the early hours of the morning after the test, the fire re-ignited.
Firefighters rushed back to the hangar, by which time the top four floors were completely burned out.
Brickwork cracked and the heat was so severe the fire officer evacuated his men for fear the building was about to collapse.
'Real detective'
.
Pretty frightening stuff
Their report said the fire was effectively contained, and the findings were then promoted by the UK Timber Frame Association [UKTFA].
It said at the time: "If you want to know how multi-storey timber frame buildings cope with fire there is one piece of research you must read."
The 1999 report was used to justify relaxing old regulations on timber frame in housing blocks.
It led to the widespread use of buildings with timber frames for large council housing projects.
But what neither organisation mentioned was that, in the early hours of the morning after the test, the fire re-ignited.
Firefighters rushed back to the hangar, by which time the top four floors were completely burned out.
Brickwork cracked and the heat was so severe the fire officer evacuated his men for fear the building was about to collapse.
'Real detective'
.
Pretty frightening stuff
19 September 2010, 11:04 AM
#11
Scooby Senior
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Slowly rebuilding the kit of bits into a car...
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The plaster work will provide fire protection for up to an hour, and you will have a fire alarm system anyway ?
dunx
P.S. Typed on the third floor
dunx
P.S. Typed on the third floor
20 September 2010, 11:05 AM
#14
Thing is British-style brick built houses are part timber anyway: timber joists, timber supported roof and often timber floors (upstairs at least), with many rooms being built with studded wood framed partitioning between rooms (again, mainly upstairs). So the fire issues after completion to either is equal IMO, both will be wrecked if a large fire takes hold, as a brick built house often relies on wooden joists to brace the walls (although some will use RSJs, but the trend is to use wood to reduce cost).
Of course, timber houses get a poor reputation, mainly from the yanks, because they build them in stupid places. Note the devastaion caused by hurricanes, forest fires, and floods where areas are wiped out. Timber houses always suffer the most in these extremes. Whereas concrete reinforced structures often remain undamaged (structurally, at least).
So really, if you want a strong house it should be built like many on the continent; Steel reinforced concrete for supports, floors and roof. But I guess many of us don't like living in something thats built like a multi-story car park/office block. And how often do we get hurricanes or forest fires anyway?
Ok, we get floods, but there is a simple solution to that...get teh OS map, find the flood planes and don't buy a house built on it!
Of course, timber houses get a poor reputation, mainly from the yanks, because they build them in stupid places. Note the devastaion caused by hurricanes, forest fires, and floods where areas are wiped out. Timber houses always suffer the most in these extremes. Whereas concrete reinforced structures often remain undamaged (structurally, at least).
So really, if you want a strong house it should be built like many on the continent; Steel reinforced concrete for supports, floors and roof. But I guess many of us don't like living in something thats built like a multi-story car park/office block. And how often do we get hurricanes or forest fires anyway?
Ok, we get floods, but there is a simple solution to that...get teh OS map, find the flood planes and don't buy a house built on it!
Last edited by ALi-B; 20 September 2010 at 11:10 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
28
28 December 2015 11:07 PM
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
12
18 November 2015 07:03 AM
