And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
And though you can't tell, I betcha a nickel there are pins as well to prevent lateral movement. Nice work, solid, will be there for a hundred years. Notice the placement of the verticals, braces, and upper subfloor support. Everything is in compression. The more weight you put on it the more secure it gets.
Cute but structurally weak. A straight butt joint with a plate on either side directly over the post would bear much more load with much less labor and opportunity for mistakes.
Cheap and easy is the very reason engineers are worth their cost. This joint is, as I said, cute, visually pleasing, but overdone and structurally inferior. Ask an engineer worth their salt to analyze and explain the shear and moment for you then talk about how much I don't know.
As a professional/retired builder/timber framer, I have to say your comment is unfounded and factually false. This is known as a half splayed scarf joint and if pegged is structrally superior to a butt joint with metal plates, and will also last longer due to the fact as the wood ages the joint actually tightens and has almost no tendency for splitting at crucial pressure points. I've done several of these joints over the years with saw and large timber chisels that were completed and fit in the same amount of time it would have taken to fit/drill/bolt metal brackets. It is also much less expensive!
Look at the adjacent bent, it is supported by a vertical wood column. I'm an architect and an engineer and I design this sort of thing all the time. The current project is a beautiful 40'x80' pole barn, all timber framed, on an island off the coast of southwest Florida, and yes it will sustain a 180mph wind load, as all my projects do.
I won't argue the strength- cause I don't know enough- but this sort of joinery has been around a long long time, and dates from an age when iron plates would be very ,very expensive- expensive as in made from hand sifted iron sand in a clay furnace. The whole of Japan was a culture of wood and paper.
These [beam lengthening] scarf joints are beautifully done and very strong. Funny how some today have little or no appreciation for Stavkirk and other timber framed structures that have stood for centuries. Case in point: The 2-story w/ attic meeting house at the Shaker Village of Pleasant Hill, KY...it has a free 44 ft span on both floors made entirely of timber framing done by "amateurs" in the 1820's...with no sag at the mid-line. The University of Kentucky engineering department analyzed the structure, modeling said it wouldn't work. But it stands today. The self-taught "amateur" flipped the structure (helped they used oak). Modern engineering is terrific, maybe a little too terrific in certain modes and often overbuilt for safety margins, but old school has a lot of merit when centuries have proven the techniques.
I dislike when someone uses a few examples of an old structure as the pinnacle of design and strength. How many of those old structures fell down? The 300 year old example may just be the freak outlier. The Forth Rail bridge was opened in 1889, 300 year old metal structures are basically not around yet, we need more time to get them to that age. Scarf joints allow you to splice two shorter spans of timber to create a longer beam. They were quite common in ship keels. Timber framing consumes larger amounts of lumber for a given footprint, and while they are beautiful structures, there are many old houses that were built and are still standing, that were made with more modern building methods. I am also skeptical when someone says this university engineering department proved something couldn't work. I've heard about universities proving that bumblebees can't fly.
"Timber framing consumes larger amounts of lumber for a given footprint" Patently false. The amount of timber used in a timber frame is considerably less than a conventional stick built home, and therefore costs much less. If you know what you're doing, you can also erect a timber frame in less time.
Burned down, because of non-existent fire codes, or got knocked down because someone later decided "MOAR!BIGGER!FASTER!"...? Probably almost all of them.
There are buildings in Europe that have stood for 750 years. Horiyuji, in Japan, is over 1400 years old.
Quicker is appealing, and cheaper, and doing things with piecework negates any need for skill.
But quicker is rarely, if ever, "better", if we're talking stronger, sturdier, or longer-lasting.
Once upon a time, literally everyone could build a house, which was why everyone lived in mud huts. Once it required better skills, the number of people who could rise to the requirement tapered off drastically, but the products didn't fall over every year either.
That's true of everything in human history. The trend is easier, but less skillful. Everyone has a movie camera in their phone, but that hasn't led to the discovery of 8 Billion Cecil B. DeMilles, any more than $2 boxes of crayons have produced millions of Michelangelos or Rembrandts.
I'm amazed by some of the outright ignorance in some of the comments here. I also yearn for the days of old when housewrights could design and build a serviceable yet beautiful structure with nothing more than a good eye, some hand tools and a few strong backs.
X2...the result of urbanization and $400K (to start) builders grade no charm tract home developers. I'd take a Sears & Roebuck or Montgomery Ward complete home package from the 40's over any of those structures, at least the old ones had charm, front porches and rear garages. Post-frame construction is incredibly more efficient and a better building envelope. Completed a Post & Beam/SIP wrapped build for family...super snug and done sooner than later and for less money per sq ft. Tiny waste, the off-cut pile was kept for burning in the supplement wood stove. Stick built, while able to be done well by skilled carpenters, is passe'.
Heckuva lot of temples and shrines in Japan built with joinery like this, no metal fasteners at all. They would typically last hundreds of years, until lost by fire, then rebuilt. Built without drawings - just the direction of a master builder.
And though you can't tell, I betcha a nickel there are pins as well to prevent lateral movement. Nice work, solid, will be there for a hundred years. Notice the placement of the verticals, braces, and upper subfloor support. Everything is in compression. The more weight you put on it the more secure it gets.
ReplyDeleteLooks like a pin almost dead center in the photo.
DeleteCute but structurally weak. A straight butt joint with a plate on either side directly over the post would bear much more load with much less labor and opportunity for mistakes.
ReplyDeleteI see you know nothing about timber construction.
DeleteHe knows nothing about joinery either.
DeleteShow off……
ReplyDeleteKlaus
Awesome! Matt, you must have skipped the wood working chapter. Not everyone goes for cheap and easy, thank God.
ReplyDeleteCheap and easy is the very reason engineers are worth their cost. This joint is, as I said, cute, visually pleasing, but overdone and structurally inferior. Ask an engineer worth their salt to analyze and explain the shear and moment for you then talk about how much I don't know.
ReplyDeleteAs a professional/retired builder/timber framer, I have to say your comment is unfounded and factually false.
DeleteThis is known as a half splayed scarf joint and if pegged is structrally superior to a butt joint with metal plates, and will also last longer due to the fact as the wood ages the joint actually tightens and has almost no tendency for splitting at crucial pressure points.
I've done several of these joints over the years with saw and large timber chisels that were completed and fit in the same amount of time it would have taken to fit/drill/bolt metal brackets. It is also much less expensive!
The Amish in Pennsylvania will help put up a barn or a home addition with no nails or bolts.
ReplyDeleteCheap and easy engineers is why this country doesn't build things that last anymore.
ReplyDeleteAnd supporting the end of a beam span on a knee brace is why structures fail.
ReplyDeleteLook at the adjacent bent, it is supported by a vertical wood column. I'm an architect and an engineer and I design this sort of thing all the time. The current project is a beautiful 40'x80' pole barn, all timber framed, on an island off the coast of southwest Florida, and yes it will sustain a 180mph wind load, as all my projects do.
DeleteImpressive craftsmanship. I like it.
ReplyDeleteI won't argue the strength- cause I don't know enough- but this sort of joinery has been around a long long time, and dates from an age when iron plates would be very ,very expensive- expensive as in made from hand sifted iron sand in a clay furnace. The whole of Japan was a culture of wood and paper.
ReplyDeleteThese [beam lengthening] scarf joints are beautifully done and very strong. Funny how some today have little or no appreciation for Stavkirk and other timber framed structures that have stood for centuries. Case in point: The 2-story w/ attic meeting house at the Shaker Village of Pleasant Hill, KY...it has a free 44 ft span on both floors made entirely of timber framing done by "amateurs" in the 1820's...with no sag at the mid-line. The University of Kentucky engineering department analyzed the structure, modeling said it wouldn't work. But it stands today. The self-taught "amateur" flipped the structure (helped they used oak). Modern engineering is terrific, maybe a little too terrific in certain modes and often overbuilt for safety margins, but old school has a lot of merit when centuries have proven the techniques.
ReplyDeletePs. And they built this one after an earthquake damaged the original smaller Meeting House...in 10 months...using hand tools.
DeleteGoogle Mr Chickadee for some great YouTube joinery.
ReplyDeleteThis is not union work.
ReplyDeleteAnd before one decries the weakness of the joinery, they should point to a structure that's over 300 years old using bolts and plates.
All-wood joinery examples that old are ridiculously easy to find.
Those examples are all over central Pennsylvania.
DeleteI dislike when someone uses a few examples of an old structure as the pinnacle of design and strength. How many of those old structures fell down? The 300 year old example may just be the freak outlier.
ReplyDeleteThe Forth Rail bridge was opened in 1889, 300 year old metal structures are basically not around yet, we need more time to get them to that age.
Scarf joints allow you to splice two shorter spans of timber to create a longer beam. They were quite common in ship keels.
Timber framing consumes larger amounts of lumber for a given footprint, and while they are beautiful structures, there are many old houses that were built and are still standing, that were made with more modern building methods.
I am also skeptical when someone says this university engineering department proved something couldn't work. I've heard about universities proving that bumblebees can't fly.
"Timber framing consumes larger amounts of lumber for a given footprint"
DeletePatently false. The amount of timber used in a timber frame is considerably less than a conventional stick built home, and therefore costs much less.
If you know what you're doing, you can also erect a timber frame in less time.
"Fell down"? Few.
DeleteBurned down, because of non-existent fire codes, or got knocked down because someone later decided "MOAR!BIGGER!FASTER!"...? Probably almost all of them.
There are buildings in Europe that have stood for 750 years.
Horiyuji, in Japan, is over 1400 years old.
Quicker is appealing, and cheaper, and doing things with piecework negates any need for skill.
But quicker is rarely, if ever, "better", if we're talking stronger, sturdier, or longer-lasting.
Once upon a time, literally everyone could build a house, which was why everyone lived in mud huts.
Once it required better skills, the number of people who could rise to the requirement tapered off drastically, but the products didn't fall over every year either.
That's true of everything in human history.
The trend is easier, but less skillful.
Everyone has a movie camera in their phone, but that hasn't led to the discovery of 8 Billion Cecil B. DeMilles, any more than $2 boxes of crayons have produced millions of Michelangelos or Rembrandts.
Stop being the fox who couldn't reach the grapes.
I'm amazed by some of the outright ignorance in some of the comments here.
ReplyDeleteI also yearn for the days of old when housewrights could design and build a serviceable yet beautiful structure with nothing more than a good eye, some hand tools and a few strong backs.
X2...the result of urbanization and $400K (to start) builders grade no charm tract home developers. I'd take a Sears & Roebuck or Montgomery Ward complete home package from the 40's over any of those structures, at least the old ones had charm, front porches and rear garages. Post-frame construction is incredibly more efficient and a better building envelope. Completed a Post & Beam/SIP wrapped build for family...super snug and done sooner than later and for less money per sq ft. Tiny waste, the off-cut pile was kept for burning in the supplement wood stove. Stick built, while able to be done well by skilled carpenters, is passe'.
DeleteHeckuva lot of temples and shrines in Japan built with joinery like this, no metal fasteners at all. They would typically last hundreds of years, until lost by fire, then rebuilt. Built without drawings - just the direction of a master builder.
ReplyDelete