I've got this idea about how to get over a problem with my upstairs
floor, and I'm sort of hopeful that it might not be as stupid as I
think it probably is.

I have a downstairs space, about 8m x 4.5m. The floor above it is
constructed from 4"x2" timbers (17" centres) hung from the walls and a
central oak beam. The oak beam (dating from about 1650) spans the 8.5m
and is supported at half way. The ceiling is just the upstairs
floorboards.

This arrangement is unsatisfactory for several reasons, the most
annoying of which is the way the 4x2s are hung off the oak beam - it
really is atrocious to look at! I had resigned myself to ripping the
whole lot out and putting in a new floor. I don't want to box in the
beam.

Then it occurred to me that I could just put another floor on top of
the existing one. I could mirror all the joists and glue and screw
both floors together. This would allow me to improve the aesthetics of
the beam/joist join. Then I would get a less bouncy floor, have room
to run services and save lots of money and time. If the wife objects
to the floorboard look of the ceiling, I stick something onto it even
if it's only paper.

Can anyone spot the fatal flaw?

T

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
wrote:

I've got this idea about how to get over a problem with my upstairs
floor, and I'm sort of hopeful that it might not be as stupid as I
think it probably is.

I have a downstairs space, about 8m x 4.5m. The floor above it is
constructed from 4"x2" timbers (17" centres) hung from the walls and a
central oak beam. The oak beam (dating from about 1650) spans the 8.5m
and is supported at half way. The ceiling is just the upstairs
floorboards.

This arrangement is unsatisfactory for several reasons, the most
annoying of which is the way the 4x2s are hung off the oak beam - it
really is atrocious to look at! I had resigned myself to ripping the
whole lot out and putting in a new floor. I don't want to box in the
beam.

Then it occurred to me that I could just put another floor on top of
the existing one. I could mirror all the joists and glue and screw
both floors together. This would allow me to improve the aesthetics of
the beam/joist join. Then I would get a less bouncy floor, have room
to run services and save lots of money and time. If the wife objects
to the floorboard look of the ceiling, I stick something onto it even
if it's only paper.

Can anyone spot the fatal flaw?

T

I don't understand!

Surely the beam/joist junctions are only visible from *below*? So how will
building something on *top* improve the appearance of that?

Adding more joists is unlikely to increase the overall bending stiffness.
Even if glued and screwed, it's still not the same as a single taller joist.
And, adding more weight may actually *increase* the springiness.

By how much would the floor be raised? Have you got sufficient headroom to
permit this? What about the floors of adjacent rooms, still at the original
level? [You will need a step onto the new floor. Is that a problem?]
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!

Roger Mills wrote:
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
wrote:

I've got this idea about how to get over a problem with my upstairs
floor, and I'm sort of hopeful that it might not be as stupid as I
think it probably is.

I have a downstairs space, about 8m x 4.5m. The floor above it is
constructed from 4"x2" timbers (17" centres) hung from the walls and a
central oak beam. The oak beam (dating from about 1650) spans the 8.5m
and is supported at half way. The ceiling is just the upstairs
floorboards.

This arrangement is unsatisfactory for several reasons, the most
annoying of which is the way the 4x2s are hung off the oak beam - it
really is atrocious to look at! I had resigned myself to ripping the
whole lot out and putting in a new floor. I don't want to box in the
beam.

Then it occurred to me that I could just put another floor on top of
the existing one. I could mirror all the joists and glue and screw
both floors together. This would allow me to improve the aesthetics of
the beam/joist join. Then I would get a less bouncy floor, have room
to run services and save lots of money and time. If the wife objects
to the floorboard look of the ceiling, I stick something onto it even
if it's only paper.

Can anyone spot the fatal flaw?

T

I don't understand!

Surely the beam/joist junctions are only visible from *below*? So how will
building something on *top* improve the appearance of that?


Mmm. My thoughts exactly.

Adding more joists is unlikely to increase the overall bending stiffness.
Even if glued and screwed, it's still not the same as a single taller joist.
And, adding more weight may actually *increase* the springiness.


If they are done on top of and firtmly fixed to, existing, they will
indeed increase stiffness.


By how much would the floor be raised? Have you got sufficient headroom to
permit this? What about the floors of adjacent rooms, still at the original
level? [You will need a step onto the new floor. Is that a problem?]

I am thinking that the OP should rip teh old out, get some 7x4 oak, and
notch them over the spine beam.

Then nail batten a cvouile of inches from the base of thse and board
over - that leasve cavities for wioring, and te oak vabses will be expose..

then - what I did here - not bad - was to lay insulation board over and
then plate the top storey floor with chip. Would have used real wood if
hadn't been going for carpet throughout.

On 20 Dec, 11:46, "Roger Mills" wrote:


I don't understand!

Surely the beam/joist junctions are only visible from *below*? So how will
building something on *top* improve the appearance of that?


I would have to support the existing joists from above - probably with
hangers, rather than from below by a length of 4x2 nailed onto the
side of the beam.

Adding more joists is unlikely to increase the overall bending stiffness.
Even if glued and screwed, it's still not the same as a single taller joist.
And, adding more weight may actually *increase* the springiness.


I thought doubling the height tripled the stiffness. I'd be happy with
1.5 times the stiffness. The floor isn't really that bouncy. I would
put the new joists in the walls, and supplement the beam with 4x 4x2s
on top of it. ( actually, I could probably squeeze in 4 x 6x2s as the
top of the beam is below the top of the joists.)

By how much would the floor be raised? Have you got sufficient headroom to
permit this? What about the floors of adjacent rooms, still at the original
level? [You will need a step onto the new floor. Is that a problem?]
--

The floor would be raised by about 4.5". I've got plenty of headroom,
in fact I've got a much older ceiling about 16" above my current
ceiling. Between this part of the house and the rest, there is at
present two steps - one 8" and one 4". So, should I go ahead with
this, there will still be two steps - one 3.5" and one 4".

I know that it's all a bit unorthodox, but this whole place is
unorthodox.

Regards

T

wrote:
On 20 Dec, 11:46, "Roger Mills" wrote:

I don't understand!

Surely the beam/joist junctions are only visible from *below*? So how will
building something on *top* improve the appearance of that?


I would have to support the existing joists from above - probably with
hangers, rather than from below by a length of 4x2 nailed onto the
side of the beam.


Ah. So thats the 'ugliness'. Th 4x2 nailed to the beam..

Adding more joists is unlikely to increase the overall bending stiffness.
Even if glued and screwed, it's still not the same as a single taller joist.
And, adding more weight may actually *increase* the springiness.


I thought doubling the height tripled the stiffness. I'd be happy with
1.5 times the stiffness. The floor isn't really that bouncy. I would
put the new joists in the walls, and supplement the beam with 4x 4x2s
on top of it. ( actually, I could probably squeeze in 4 x 6x2s as the
top of the beam is below the top of the joists.)


Sounds Ok tho I can;'t quite picture it.

By how much would the floor be raised? Have you got sufficient headroom to
permit this? What about the floors of adjacent rooms, still at the original
level? [You will need a step onto the new floor. Is that a problem?]
--

The floor would be raised by about 4.5". I've got plenty of headroom,
in fact I've got a much older ceiling about 16" above my current
ceiling. Between this part of the house and the rest, there is at
present two steps - one 8" and one 4". So, should I go ahead with
this, there will still be two steps - one 3.5" and one 4".

I know that it's all a bit unorthodox, but this whole place is
unorthodox.

All the more fun.

I'd just buold a new floor completely to modern standard well above the
existing one, and prettify what's underneath,



Regards

T

On 20 Dec, 12:25, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


Adding more joists is unlikely to increase the overall bending stiffness.
Even if glued and screwed, it's still not the same as a single taller joist.
And, adding more weight may actually *increase* the springiness.

If they are done on top of and firtmly fixed to, existing, they will
indeed increase stiffness.


I had hoped as much.

By how much would the floor be raised? Have you got sufficient headroom to
permit this? What about the floors of adjacent rooms, still at the original
level? [You will need a step onto the new floor. Is that a problem?]

I am thinking that the OP should rip teh old out, get some 7x4 oak, and
notch them over the spine beam.

Then nail batten a cvouile of inches from the base of thse and board
over - that leasve cavities for wioring, and te oak vabses will be expose..


That's what I should do, and it would look fantastic.

Regards

T

On 20 Dec, 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I would have to support the existing joists from above - probably with
hangers, rather than from below by a length of 4x2 nailed onto the
side of the beam.

Ah. So thats the 'ugliness'. Th 4x2 nailed to the beam..


It's hideous, and gets worse every time I look at it.


I thought doubling the height tripled the stiffness. I'd be happy with
1.5 times the stiffness. The floor isn't really that bouncy. I would
put the new joists in the walls, and supplement the beam with 4x 4x2s
on top of it. ( actually, I could probably squeeze in 4 x 6x2s as the
top of the beam is below the top of the joists.)

Sounds Ok tho I can;'t quite picture it.


It's too horrible even to imagine! Basically the old beam is approx.
8"x8". The 4x2s support nailed to it are about 3" from the top of the
beam, so the joists that sit on the support project above the level of
the beam. I told you it was nasty. My guess is that this was done in
the 1930s when the then residents had different priorities from today.


I know that it's all a bit unorthodox, but this whole place is
unorthodox.

All the more fun.

I'm afraid the fun aspect of this renovation is dwindling; just as is
my wallet and my wife's patience!


I'd just buold a new floor completely to modern standard well above the
existing one, and prettify what's underneath,



That's probably an even better idea. It will be hard to get it past
the wife, as although we have plenty of ceiling height (far more
upstairs than down), the windows are quite low. If I went up more than
about 5" in total, she'd definitely notice and complain!

Regards

T

wrote:
On 20 Dec, 12:25, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Adding more joists is unlikely to increase the overall bending stiffness.
Even if glued and screwed, it's still not the same as a single taller joist.
And, adding more weight may actually *increase* the springiness.
If they are done on top of and firtmly fixed to, existing, they will
indeed increase stiffness.


I had hoped as much.

By how much would the floor be raised? Have you got sufficient headroom to
permit this? What about the floors of adjacent rooms, still at the original
level? [You will need a step onto the new floor. Is that a problem?]
I am thinking that the OP should rip teh old out, get some 7x4 oak, and
notch them over the spine beam.

Then nail batten a cvouile of inches from the base of thse and board
over - that leasve cavities for wioring, and te oak vabses will be expose..


That's what I should do, and it would look fantastic.

Regards

T
God. sorry about the typing there. At least you managed to cotton on..

wrote:
On 20 Dec, 13:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I would have to support the existing joists from above - probably with
hangers, rather than from below by a length of 4x2 nailed onto the
side of the beam.
Ah. So thats the 'ugliness'. Th 4x2 nailed to the beam..


It's hideous, and gets worse every time I look at it.

I thought doubling the height tripled the stiffness. I'd be happy with
1.5 times the stiffness. The floor isn't really that bouncy. I would
put the new joists in the walls, and supplement the beam with 4x 4x2s
on top of it. ( actually, I could probably squeeze in 4 x 6x2s as the
top of the beam is below the top of the joists.)
Sounds Ok tho I can;'t quite picture it.


It's too horrible even to imagine! Basically the old beam is approx.
8"x8". The 4x2s support nailed to it are about 3" from the top of the
beam, so the joists that sit on the support project above the level of
the beam. I told you it was nasty. My guess is that this was done in
the 1930s when the then residents had different priorities from today.

I know that it's all a bit unorthodox, but this whole place is
unorthodox.
All the more fun.

I'm afraid the fun aspect of this renovation is dwindling; just as is
my wallet and my wife's patience!

I'd just buold a new floor completely to modern standard well above the
existing one, and prettify what's underneath,



That's probably an even better idea. It will be hard to get it past
the wife, as although we have plenty of ceiling height (far more
upstairs than down), the windows are quite low. If I went up more than
about 5" in total, she'd definitely notice and complain!


Well how about 7x3s notched 3" over the main beam..that gives you 4"
above and 3" below..leavening space to both put in a plasterboard
ceiling underneath, and screw some 6x2 oak underneath to make it look
pretty.

Plenty of room for cables you get a nice flat floor above, and
underneath its all either flat plain plaster, or plaster with fake (non
structural ort not VERY structural) oak beams. The alternative is 10x6
oaks and battens and a bitch of a pastering job.

Really I'd take the lot down and build a new ceiling/floor with a void.

It goes quite fast..and its not THAT expensive either.






Regards

T

On 20 Dec, 11:22, wrote:
I've got this idea about how to get over a problem with my upstairs
floor, and I'm sort of hopeful that it might not be as stupid as I
think it probably is.

I have a downstairs space, about 8m x 4.5m. The floor above it is
constructed from 4"x2" timbers (17" centres) hung from the walls and a
central oak beam. The oak beam (dating from about 1650) spans the 8.5m
and is supported at half way. The ceiling is just the upstairs
floorboards.

This arrangement is unsatisfactory for several reasons, the most
annoying of which is the way the 4x2s are hung off the oak beam - it
really is atrocious to look at! I had resigned myself to ripping the
whole lot out and putting in a new floor. I don't want to box in the
beam.

Then it occurred to me that I could just put another floor on top of
the existing one. I could mirror all the joists and glue and screw
both floors together. This would allow me to improve the aesthetics of
the beam/joist join. Then I would get a less bouncy floor, have room
to run services and save lots of money and time. If the wife objects
to the floorboard look of the ceiling, I stick something onto it even
if it's only paper.

Can anyone spot the fatal flaw?

T

Dear T
Reading your post rather frightened and slightly saddened me. This is
a 1650s building and even if it is not listed should be respected as
such.
As I now understand it you have two problems
1) the desirability (possibly need) to increase stiffenss
2) more importantly to eliminate your annoyance at the 4" by 2"
connections (battens supporting what I suspect are joists pulling out
of a perfectly good mortice and tenon joint due to the original walls
having pulled apart and pulled the joist out of the joint

If this is correct you need to consider each separately

Lets deal with stiffness first

options....
determine if it is the main beam that is not stiff enough or the 4 x
2s or both or the connections

If the main beam you can put a T beam steel INSIDE the beam by cutting
down with a special machine ( chain morticer) and bolting the steel to
it
or
put a plate on top with ring connectors
or
put a steel H beam or the like on top and make it redundant

If the beam is ok (which being oak and big and with mid span support
is most probably
then the joists are spanning 2.25 m which is OK (just about depending
on how strong they are and how much decay there is in the old oak ( I
am assuming joists are originial) sapwood etc etc
If they need strenthening then that is a bit tricky but can be done
but I would not consider it worth it and would insead put on a sheet
of ply and make a T beam composite of the lot and then eml and plaster
the ply with rough lime plaster (which is what was probably there
orignianlly.

It is not likely that it is the joist that are not stiff enough which
leaves us with the connections

so... the problem is "extend" the joist so the "new" material (timber)
goes into the old bearing in the main girder beam.
Suggest this is done with Stainless steel T section from above set
within the timbers. I envisage a 80 mm or thereabouts deep steel set
10 mm into the top of the joist bolted to the joist and resting in
the old bearing
Modus operandi to do this quickly?
support joists 2' back from beam
lift floorboard 2'either side of beam
cut carefully using a specialist tool (hire it) beam morticer 90 mm
into the joist from above along the centre of the joist for about 300
mm (or whatever the engineer suggests)
cut 10 mm off top of joist to drop in the steel
75 mm from the end drill a hole thru both timber and steel for a bolt
recess it for washers and nuts
use a plug cutter to cut out plugs to cover nuts with
locate Tee section in original bearing on main beam having had a
sufficiently size plate put on the bottom to act as bearing or glue a
steel plate to bottom of bearing on main beam to take T bar
using Thorsman's or similar ss strapping strap one joist to its
opposite number
relay floorboards

Chris