Foreman, $2.50 per day, 3 days $7.50
Two journeymen, $2 per day, 3 days 6.00
Two apprentices, $1.25 per day, 3 days 3.75
—————
Total $17.25
Raising and inserting braces, 1 day 5.75
—————
Total $23.00
Cost of completing same as other barns of same dimensions and style of
finish.
A Plank Frame Applied to a Skating Rink.
_From_ N. B., _Sussex, N. B._—We want to erect an auditorium, 50 × 200,
with 16-foot posts and 12-foot sheds at each side for offices, waiting
rooms, saloon, etc. We want galleries all around and a large band stand
at one end, suspended from the roof. The building is to be used for
a skating rink in winter and for public meetings during the summer.
Will the plank frame system described in _Carpentry and Building_ be
suitable for the frame?
_Answer._—The above inquiry was submitted to Mr. Shawver, who
contributed the recent articles on plank frame construction, and in
reply he says:
The plank frame is admirably adapted to such a building as that
described, and can be quite cheaply constructed. In Fig. 1 of the
sketches is shown one of the bents near the end on which the band stand
is located, indicating the manner in which it is suspended from the
roof by the rods A A, together with truss rod B. The galleries appear
at either side, above which and beneath the eaves are the windows. If
lighted by dormer windows, or if artificial light is employed, the shed
roofs may be of the same pitch and a continuation of the roof of the
main building, in which case the galleries may extend back beneath the
roof of the sheds, and they need not extend out further than the purlin
posts. The sketch, Fig. 2, shows an interior bent without the band
stand. The end bents will be constructed in a manner similar to that
shown in Figs. 1 and 2 of my article on plank frame barns. A 200-foot
building should have 17 bents placed 12½ feet apart.
[Illustration: Fig. 1.—Bent Near the Band Stand.]
[Illustration: Fig. 2.—An Interior Bent.]
Construction of Plank Frame Basement Barn.
[Illustration: Basement Plan.—Scale, 1-16 Inch to the Foot.]
_From_ S. H., _Minneapolis, Minn._—I would like to have the readers
experienced in plank frame barn construction comment upon the plans
of the basement barn which I send herewith and from which I intend
to build next summer. I would like very much to know the weak points
of the barn and the best way to remedy them. I think the drawings
showing the plans and details are so clear as to practically explain
themselves.
[Illustration: Elevation of Front Framing of Barn.—Scale, ⅛ Inch to the
Foot.
_Construction of Plank Frame Basement Barn.—Floor Plans.—Scale, 1-16
Inch to the Foot._]
[Illustration: Main Floor.—Scale, 1-16 Inch to the Foot.]
Criticism of Plank Frame Barn Construction.
_From_ JOHN L. SHAWVER, _Bellefontaine, Ohio_.—In response to the wish
of “S. H.,” Minneapolis, Minn., I offer a few suggestions in connection
with his proposed plank frame basement barn. It is well, indeed, that
he should insist on knowing what he is doing, for many have made
blunders because they attempted to build plank frames without having
first investigated the proper method of construction. Too many guess
at it. As pioneers in this work, we started, 25 years ago, on small
structures, and month by month studied and contrived until a system was
evolved that is adapted to barn structures of any reasonable size.
Each point has been carefully tested as we proceeded, and if not fully
satisfactory was discarded for something better. We now have over 7000
structures in some 44 States and provinces, some of them quite large,
and have received many gratifying testimonials as to their strength,
durability and cheapness.
The floor plans submitted by “S. H.” are very good in design and
arrangement, save that the hay chutes are made to appear directly over
one of the main girders. Of course, this he would discover and rectify.
Should it be difficult to obtain 8 × 8 stuff for posts and 8 × 10 for
girders, the former may very easily be constructed of two 2 × 8’s and
two 2 × 4’s, box pattern, thus saving something in materials and risk
from dry rot. The girders might be made of two 4 × 10’s, or four 2 ×
10’s, leaving an air space of 2 inches in the middle and saving the
necessity of making mortises.
The drawings indicate the use of two 2 × 12’s and one 2 × 8 for cross
sills, the 2 × 8 being flat. In my opinion, the 2 × 8 is needless. The
plates are all flatwise, while they must sustain much weight. We prefer
purlin plates set on edge at right angles with the combined pressure
of both sets of rafters. The main plates we make of three 2 × 6 inch,
or 2 × 8 inch, according to the size of the structure when on edge to
sustain the weight and two to sustain the outward pressure of the roof
and the contents of the building. In this case, the purlins should
incline 45 degrees.
The drawings of the correspondent indicate that the nailers are cut to
fit between the posts, in which case they must be mortised, gained or
toe nailed. The first two require unnecessary work, while the latter
is not strong enough. If the bents are constructed in three sections,
they will be tedious to raise in position. If completed before
raising, they will be weak at the purlin plate. The drawings indicate
also that staging would be required in setting the upper frame, and
that quite a large amount of the work is done as the frame is being
raised. In our experience we never use any staging, and we do most of
the work from the ground before beginning to set for the frame. Most
men can work more rapidly on the ground, with all materials handy,
than they can aloft, where materials must be drawn up with ropes. I
believe “S. H.” can save enough on labor alone to pay his expenses
to go to some point and see one of our plank frame constructions.
Besides, he will find wherein he can greatly improve upon his method
of construction. Those who are within convenient reach to do so can
visit the barn of Dr. W. I. Chamberlain, near Cleveland, Ohio, which
is easily accessible by railroad, while the doctor, who is one of the
editors of the _Ohio Farmer_, takes great delight in showing his barn
to visitors. This barn, which is 40 × 82 feet in size, required four
carpenters two and a half days to frame and two hours and fifteen
minutes to raise.
We do not usually give name and address of our patrons, because it
leads to much inconvenience to them. Should any of the readers write to
Dr. Chamberlain, I would suggest that they inclose a stamped envelope,
properly addressed, for reply.
Criticism of Plank Frame Barn Construction.
_From_ J. M. B., _Monroeton, Pa._—In the December issue of _Carpentry
and Building_, page 327, the correspondent “S. H.” of Minneapolis
wants to know the weak points of his barn frame, a sketch of which was
presented in connection with his communication. I think one weak point
is what he calls the plate in the gable, which is made of two 2 × 8
inch pieces, equal to a 4 × 8 inch, with a span of at least 30 feet
between purlin posts, which are only 2 × 6 inches. In my opinion, with
the hay mow filled with hay, the gable will bulge or spring out, as the
weight, 45 to 50 tons, will exert quite a pressure. As to the remedy I
am not so clear. He might use a flat truss or a beam large enough to
stand the pressure; one, say, 16 inches wide at the center and tapering
to 8 inches at each end. I will say, in conclusion, that I have had no
experience with plank frames.
Is the Barn Frame of Sufficient Strength?
_From_ C. G., _Vergennes, Vt._—I send herewith a rough sketch of bent
of barn which I intend to put up in the spring. It is 30 feet wide and
has 26-foot posts. What I wish to know is this: Is the truss strong
enough to carry the load that will be put upon it? I would like to have
the “wood butchers” take hold of it and tear it apart and tell me what
to put in its place.
_From_ JOHN L. SHAWVER, _Bellefontaine, Ohio_.—Permit me to offer
a substitute for the barn frame proposed by the correspondent “C.
G.” of Vergennes, Vt., in the March issue of the paper. His timber
trusses take up too much room, and at the same time the timbers are
too expensive for this day and age. We place a little more timber in
the joist bearer and prefer it in a different shape. He suggests 7 ×
8 inches, and this would be 30 feet in length. We would use three 2
× 10’s, and could use any lengths to make the 30 feet; consequently
our timbers could be purchased at much less cost. Instead of the 7 ×
8 inch truss timbers we would use two wire cables made of galvanized
wire, seven strands, and doubled. While we would use a little heavier
posts in the stables, the posts of the superstructure would contain
only about one-half as much material, but this, too, we would prefer of
different shape. In place of the 7 × 8 inch we would use two 2 × 8’s,
and instead of the beam we would prefer the arch and the angling purlin
posts, and thus have the interior entirely free from all timbers.
[Illustration: Is the Barn Frame of Sufficient Strength?]
After 20 years’ experience in building barns without the cross beams
it would require peculiar conditions to induce us to use them, for
they are continuously in the way, both when storing away hay or grain
and when getting these out again for the thresher or for the feeding
of stock. The upper portion of the frame submitted by “C. G.” does
not show any braces, and we are at a loss to know if there is to be
none, or if these were omitted because it is not that portion of the
structure that is under consideration. Let me say, however, that that
is one of the most prevalent mistakes in the construction of a barn.
There are too few braces, and the first baby tornado that happens to
pass that way will “lay it out in fine shape.” While we use plenty of
braces, they are usually only 2 × 6 inches, and so do not take timber
very rapidly. The geometrical triangle is the strongest figure one can
secure, and it is with that idea always in mind that we do our barn
work.
Bents for 12-Sided Plank Frame Barn.
_From_ J. D., _Ubly, Mich._—I send herewith a rough sketch, Fig. 1,
showing one of the bents of a 12-sided plank frame barn, and would like
to have the architectural readers of the paper state whether or not it
will be strong enough for the purpose, and, if not, wherein changes can
be made to advantage.
_Note._—With a view to obtaining the opinion
of an expert who has had long experience in the
construction of plank frame barns, we submitted the
inquiry of our correspondent above to John L. Shawver,
who furnishes the following in reply:
In the first place, the purlin posts in the sketch of the correspondent
are so sloping that while they brace well they are not in position to
sustain the most weight, and these with the roof supports are so long
that they have to be spliced. While this is easily done in the case of
posts, it is not so readily performed with supports, and, when so done,
it will not present as attractive an appearance as would otherwise be
the case.
[Illustration: Fig. 1.—Elevation of Bent Submitted by “J. D.”]
[Illustration: Fig. 2.—One Form of Plank Frame Suggested by Mr.
Shawver.]
In the second place, one of the weakest points about the barn is the
shape. It is true it would be a novelty in most communities, but, like
the round barns, is wasteful of material. It is out of the question
to place joists, rafters, flooring, sheathing, roofing, &c., on barns
of this shape without much waste of both materials and labor. Then,
too, it is next to impossible to provide for satisfactory lighting or
ventilation, both of which are essential features in every up to date
barn.
[Illustration: Fig. 3.—The Preferable Style of Framing.]
The frame construction indicated in Fig. 2 is stronger, and at the
same time gives more open space in the interior, this being secured by
running the purlin posts up to the first purlin plate, instead of to
the second, and supporting the second plate on the truss brace. This
saves in the lengths of the purlin posts, but requires the same length
of supports and longer sub-supports.
The form of construction indicated in Fig. 3 is, in my opinion,
preferable to either of the others, if it is found that the vertical
posts set in 10 feet will not in any way interfere with the purpose
of the structure. In this case all the timbers are either shortened
or placed in such shape that they may be spliced without in any
way weakening the structure. Whichever form may be used by the
correspondent, it is important in bents or arches of this size that
the purlin posts should be placed on the inner edge with 2 × 6, which
will add materially to the strength of the frame, and at the same time
prevent any tendency to spring sideways either in the raising or from
the pressure of the hay or grain within after the building is completed.