Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: History of conventional wood framing.

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
"Conventional" as opposed to "Engineered" or specially-designed.
Conventional implies wood framing built by north american carpenters using
their "traditional" methods.  2x4 studs 16" on center, three studs at each
corner, stud walls with double top plate & single bottom plate, 4' lap at
plate splices,  plate splices over studs only, two 16 penny nails endnailed
thru plate to each stud, 1x4 let-in braces at each corner and say 25' apart,
etc.   Wood 2x rafter and joists per the tables in the building code and
toenailed to the top plate.  Vernacular construction.  No special
inspections.  No special plywood nailing patterns, no boundary nailing, no
collector ties or fancy seismic holdowns.  The only bolts involved are the
1/2" anchor bolts 6' on center holding the mudsill to the foundation.  No
glulams or steel beams.  No engineer or architect  involved usually, and
carpenters can do whatever the owner doesn't notice and the inspector okays.

I guess we should not assume so much when we use the term "conventional".

Gary M. Wheeler, AIA, Architect
American Architecture Service.  Try our Portal at

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Rodrigo Lema <rodrigolema(--nospam--at)>
    To: seaint <seaint(--nospam--at)>
    Date: Thursday, February 25, 1999 9:22 PM
    Subject: History of conventional wood framing.

   > I hope you understand that, living in a country where wood is not used
>as a structural material (at least not frequentrly and certainly not in
>framing), I'm not failiar with certain terms.
>   I'd like to know what is conventional, I mean conventional as opposed to
>    Thanks in advance.
>    Rodrigo Lema.