On Jan 2, 5:45*pm, "hr(bob) "
wrote:
On Jan 2, 7:34*pm, wrote:





Seems that every new house I see being built today are using trusses for
the roof. *I dont understand the reasoning to that. *Trusses are great
for large commercial buildings and barns, because they eliminate the
need for posts, but why are they being used on smaller homes, which have
walls under them and eliminate the need for using a truss?

Three reasons come to mind to NOT use them.
1. More lumber is needed to make a truss
2. It costs more than just using lumber
3. There is no usable attic in those homes.

In stick built homes, the attic could be turned into a nice living
space. *You can not do that with a truss roof. *So, the attic is useless
other than a place to store stuff in between all the braces.

It just seems senseless to use them on a small home. *Besides
eliminating a useful attic, the cost to build would be significantly
increased. *Not just the cost to manufacture the trusses, but also the
cost to install them, because a crane is needed to get them on top of
the house, and a crew of men to install them. *Framing a roof with plain
dimentional lumber is so much easier, as well as cheaper and one gets a
useful attic to boot..... One person can frame a roof by themselves and
no crane is needed. *WTF?

I have yet to find any GOOD reason to use them on a house!

They permit the use of wide, unsupported areas on the main floor,
which is necessary for the open concept homes that are currently in
vogue

Yep, The addition I put on my very small house is 18'x30' with the
trusses spanning the 30' dimension (needed to match the existing
roof).

Yes, trusses are cheaper both in the lumber used, time to build and
time to erect. They do not need a "crew to erect other than the
carpenters alrady on scene plus the truck driver to operate the trucks
crane (part of the delivery cost.

Harry K