Not in a single dwelling. There is no requirement for sound insulation WITHIN a property to teh best of mu knowledge.
However its occasiuobnally a good thing. So run cables BEFORE you put psaterboard up.
Studwork which, if removed, causes the house to move alarmingly.
Surely nothing should be transferring major loads through a stud wall ? How strong is such a wall anyway ?
There's nothing wrong with carrying loads on a suitable stud wall and it's probably stronger than the equivalent blockwork.
Massively... A bog standard 4x2" C16 CLS timber stud under compression will carry 600kg all by itself long term.
IIRC there is between a WC compartment and a habitable room.
Owain
Yes - but how do you keep that load within the vertical timber ? Even a little off vertical and it could collapse.
In a brick wall you will have corners or buttresses for stability and weight transfer down the bricks spreading the load but surely in a stud all the load goes straight down the timber it is applied to.
Well, when I was embroiled in Building Regs Hell about 6-9 months ago - you might have followed some of the saga here(!), when I was advised about some new lack of regs compliance each time the BCO visited over an unrelated matter - the BCO at one point asked whether I had put sound insulation in my internal stud partitions, and when I said 'no' (pillock!), required me to remove all the plasterboards to rectify the situation.
I'm not saying BCO was definitely correct; I think I was probably a bit punch-drunk by that stage. I'd certainly be interested in knowing for sure before I do it again!
David
When discussing inclusion of rockwool under the floor on my loft conversion, the BCO mentioned that although the plans only called up said insulation as a fire precaution if the plasterboard to the existing
1st floor ceiling was less than 12mm, that I would probably need to include it anyway to meet the accustic requirements that were now included in part
One of the reasons for getting it plumb ;-) Having said that, a small angle off will not result in a significant lateral forces on the studwork joints. You can include cross bracing should you need to, but often this is not required. (typically walls meet at the corners which helps).
In many cases you will have a masonry wall to at least one side of the stud wall anyway.
This is mainly what the header and sole plates are for.
Dunno. They are holding up my whole house. I did calclulate that it weighed getting on for 400 tons...You can certainly carry a load of about 10-15 tons end on on a single post of 6x4. Proveided its e.g. nailed to plywood to stop it buckling.
Some smart arse will come and tell me its only 12.6 tons for industrial grade softwood I bet...
Not a lot in it really. Becsause the 'equivalent' blockwork is equivalent in terms of being 'as strong' :-)
Design, dfear boy. Trusses and barces and stressed skins..
Yep. So what. End on they are mnassively strong.
That 600kg is bolocks. Its more like 6000kg or even more.
As I said before, buckling is an issue, but thats fixable by plating with ply. Thats how you do a structural stud wall. The loads are spread by horizomntal members across the top of the verticals. The ply is then nailed over the top. This utterly prevents buckling in teh plane of the wall, and reduces it very sharply in the plane transverse to the wall. But that is generally teh wide wood cross section, so you get more stiffness that way anyway.
My house is all studd with 12x12 oak cornerposts, sole plates and eaves plates, infilled with 7x4 softwood timber uprights on 7x4 dummy roof and sole plates, and plated with 15mm marine ply. Its pretty damned strong.
I did not just pluck that number out of the air, thank you very much! That is 6kN as indicated by doing a few test loads in superbeam on a
2.3m long 4x2" stud made from C16 timber. If you have more acting together then the combined strength grows, and more than just proportionately...Note also that if you are talking short term loads then you can go way beyond that...
Last four structural stud walls I built (approved by BCO), two were exterior with ply and render over, but two were internal with nothing more than plasterboard over.
It will also be way tougher than blockwork when it comes to resisting vibration or lateral force damage. (although I guess you don't many earthquakes in your neck of the woods anyway)
A concept with which the builder of my kitchen partition was unfamiliar ...
Owain
Then we are not talking about te same thing. I am talking about the compressive strength of a beam, load applied along its axis, not a beam used as a beam, i.e. suspended at each end and weighted in the midle etc.
Failure load is directly proprtional to cross sectional area, once you control the Euler buckling modes.
Depends on the load. If the load is below Euler buckling, and the wall itself cannot move sideways and do the parallelogram thing, then ply is irrelevant.
Or you can use diagonal braceing to echieve a similar effect.
Oh yes. It also resonates like a drum when the massive oak outside doors slam shut.
>
Well I can't find it WRT a 2 storey detached single occupancy house. Sometimes I think the BCOs get confused about these rules themselves and end up quoting inappropriate regs.
We are talking about the same thing because I was using its post/stud modeling capability, not its joist and beam abilities ;-)
(Your 6x4" post (acting together with others), could as you suggested, hack over 100kN loading if made from a strong oak BTW)
Not forgetting the compressability of the material used as well... Some Oaks being much tougher in this respect than pine for example.
Well I am talkiong about final failure, not squishing a bit. Like the time we used a 6ft long 4x2 roof truss to lift an engine, except it got stuck and lifted the whole car, and bent the '5 ton breaking strain' pulley block..and the beam. About 6" of sag in that.
It sprang back. I'd say we had two tons on that beam center, it barely marked it where the rope went round it.
The beam was suppoirted on two vertical bits of 4x2 as well. They never even creaked.
Slight cross purpose then ;-)
In which case you can go way beyond the figure I quoted, which was about the limit of what will survive long term in a building, and have the compression remain within allowable tolerances specified by building regs.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.