# Forum Home Renovation Demolition  Don't think it's a loadbearing wall - can anyone confirm?

## booboocha

Hi all, 
We want to cut out a rectangular servery-style hole in the wall between our kitchen and living room. The house is A-frame and I am fairly sure the wall in question is not loadbearing. Is there anyone out there who knows what they are looking at and can give their opinion? This pic gives you an idea of the roof structure. The wall we want to put a hole in is the one on the right.  This is the wall in question. (I have since replastered and painted it, but here you can see some of the wall structure. I had just removed horrible old knotty pine wainscoting.) We want to cut an opening about 2/3 of the wall width and about 2 feet high, starting just above where the green part of the wall starts in this pic. This is the wall on the other side of the opening (not touching this one). As you can see it is definitely load-bearing, with the reinforced structure directly under the central roof beam. This makes me think the other wall isn't.  
If there are any other issues you think I need to be aware of, other structures I need to check, other pic.s you'd like me to post, please let me know. 
Thanks very much in advance.

----------


## paddyjoy

I'm not a structural engineer or a builder so this is a completely unqualified opinion. 
Based on the pictures I would agree with your observations, you have a non-coupled roof with an engineered ridge beam. The ridge beam is taking half of the roof weight and that wall on the left contains a post (double stud) supporting the ridge. The wall on the right would be non load bearing. 
If you are unsure though best to pay an engineer to check it out!

----------


## barney118

> I'm not a structural engineer or a builder so this is a completely unqualified opinion. 
> Based on the pictures I would agree with your observations, you have a non-coupled roof with an engineered ridge beam. The ridge beam is taking half of the roof weight and that wall on the left contains a post (double stud) supporting the ridge. The wall on the right would be non load bearing. 
> If you are unsure though best to pay an engineer to check it out!

  +1 the one on the left is holding the ridge, provided the rafter on the right is continuous I can't see an issue.  
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------


## OBBob

Presumably you can also avoid the bracing it that wall?

----------


## booboocha

Thanks for replying so quickly all. 
 OBBob, not sure about the bracing. We could avoid it if we have to, but it does kind of go on a diagonal through the hole we'd like to cut. I don't know anything about bracing - is it a big problem to cut it?

----------


## OBBob

I'm not a builder or structural engineer ... but I do know that if you cut that it will no longer have any bracing performance. Presumably it was put there for a reason and you'd need to replace the bracing in some other form if possible (unless someone can advise you on it not being necessary in the scheme of things). You might have options such as covering that wall in bracing board ... but unfortunately I think you said you'd already plastered. 
I'd avoid it or seek some more qualified advice for your future peace or mind. It's so annoying when you find bracing where you planned to put and opening ... I know first hand!

----------


## phild01

Maybe some discussion on bracing would be useful for this and future/past posts. 
What I have found is the application of bracing is an in-exact procedure to a more exact science.
Generally the structure is analysed for wind direction and wind speed and certain values need to be met for each orientation.
So a structure is designed more around desire and  all walls are applied with a brace.  All of this is then added up to ensure that the required values are at least met or exceeded.  So removing a brace may not necessarily mean that overall bracing is inadequate.
If removing bracing it really is important to know the adequacy it once provided.  It may or may not matter.
I am only just saying and not the expert in house bracing calculations and happy to be corrected.

----------


## OBBob

^^ Yes, agree!  :Smilie:  That is what I meant by "unless someone can advise you on it not being necessary in the scheme of things". In fact if you order prefab wall frames, they often just come with that kind of brace as standard. There are a few issues though ... you need to find someone who can do the assessment for you and for this you need to know the details of all the other bracing in the building, which often isn't available unless you built the house.

----------


## booboocha

Hmm, it's never simple, is it? We do have the advantage of having seen the insides of half the walls in the house when replacing the wainscoting, and every wall we saw had that bracing. Which could mean they just did it as standard and it's not necessary, or it could mean they are all there for a reason. Sounds like it might be time to call someone in. Structural engineer or builder? Any idea what ball park amount we'd be looking at for that kind of consultation?

----------


## OBBob

I'm not entirely sure ... but I suspect a structural engineer could do a whole house assessment to determine if it can be completely removed, whereas a builder is more likely to be able to advise an alternative method of bracing to replace what there. Happy to be corrected. 
 I feel your pain as I recently had a similar conundrum ... unfortunately I didn't have the time to get the expert advice and thus decided to forego my plans of removing / replacing the bracing.

----------


## paddyjoy

> So a structure is designed more around desire and  all walls are applied with a brace.

  I also wondered if this is the case, bracing is so cheap is it just easier to apply a brace to every wall rather than paying an engineer to do the exact calculations, especially in areas that are non cyclonic? 
In terms of cost of an engineer, couple of hundred for site visit and verbal advice. If you want a signed certificate saying it is OK to take the wall out expect to pay around 300-350. Depends obviously on your location.

----------


## METRIX

The wall in question should not be load bearing, the small wall has a   triple stud which is holding up the ridge which in turn is holding up the   rafters, so avoid touching this one unless you know what your doing. 
For  your wall in question, I would cut an appropriately sized lintel  into  the existing studs where you want to open it up, put double studs  either  side of the lintel, then remove the studs under the new lintel,  and  tidy up the lower part of the wall to support your new servery. 
In regardss to the bracing, there should be no issue removing the angle  bracing, and work around the new opening with ply bracing, 
To install ply bracing there is a few variations ranging from 3.0kN/m to  8.7kN/m, the different requirements require a different approach, in  relation to the thickness of the ply, and the F rating of the ply, to  the spacing the fasteneres must be fixed. 
For example a minimum standard for 3.0kN/m bracing using F8 plywood this  must be 7mm thick, if you use F11 it can be 4.5mm thick, F14 can be 4mm  thick, F27 can be 3mm, the different sizes really come down to the  situation being used, and if a thicker timber will interfear with  something. 
You must use structural nails (not regular clouts) and the spacing of  the nails can range from 50mm to 150mm apart depending on what rating  you want to achieve. 
Search Google and you should find a few bracing guides. 
Also it's wise to seek some professional advice for the removal of any internal walls and not rely on a forum to give you the go ahead, there is a lot of factors that simply cannot be seen with just one or two photos, and can only be determined with a site visit.

----------


## Bloss

:What he said:  It looks like the cathedral roof will be carrying loads from the ridge to outside walls, but one can never be sure. As Metrix says although removing that steel strap bracing is not a big concern in the short term it will be providing bracing along that plane so whatever you do needs to replace it with an equivalent bracing mechanism (such as the ply).

----------


## FrodoOne

> As Metrix says although removing that steel strap bracing is not a big concern in the short term it will be providing bracing along that plane so whatever you do needs to replace it with an equivalent bracing mechanism (such as the ply).

   My only comment, as an armature renovator, is that, while at least part of the bracing should be replaced with ply (above and below the new opening), this new ply bracing will need to be fitted between the studs and noggins BEHIND the surface lining plaster, since the intention, presumably, is to have a painted plaster-board wall in the finish - on BOTH sides of this internal wall. 
 Hence, it will be necessary firstly to provide recessed "framing" attached to the studs, noggins, base-plate and/or top-plate for any new ply bracing.  This framing timber would need to be nailed or screwed to the existing wall framing elements, _before_ installing _recessed_ ply-wood bracing onto this framing and _not_ nailing the ply directly onto the studs etc., as is normally done.

----------


## METRIX

> My only comment, as an armature renovator, is that, while at least part of the bracing should be replaced with ply (above and below the new opening), this new ply bracing will need to be fitted between the studs and noggins BEHIND the surface lining plaster, since the intention, presumably, is to have a painted plaster-board wall in the finish - on BOTH sides of this internal wall. 
>  Hence, it will be necessary firstly to provide recessed "framing" attached to the studs, noggins, base-plate and/or top-plate for any new ply bracing.  This framing timber would need to be nailed or screwed to the existing wall framing elements, _before_ installing _recessed_ ply-wood bracing onto this framing and _not_ nailing the ply directly onto the studs etc., as is normally done.

  ???? 
No need to recess anything. 
1: Remove the plasterboard from the side you will be putting the new lintel in from.
2: Cut the new opening, insert lintel,double stud where necessary
3: Brace the wall with ply
4: Replace the plasterboard
5: Fix up any skirtings etc that grow or shrink with the new ply behind the gyprock.

----------


## phild01

Maybe the extra for ply brace shifting the architraves around, but a bit convoluted and wouldn't provide the same bracing level as a continuous braceboard sheet.

----------


## FrodoOne

> ???? 
> No need to recess anything. 
> 1: Remove the plasterboard from the side you will be putting the new lintel in from.
> 2: Cut the new opening, insert lintel,double stud where necessary
> 3: Brace the wall with ply
> 4: Replace the plasterboard
> 5: Fix up any skirtings etc that grow or shrink with the new ply behind the gyprock.

     Sorry.  I don't see what you mean by the above, unless you mean to apply the ply bracing to the *entire* wall.
If you do apply bracing to that entire wall it will be that much thicker than the adjacent wall, which may then need to be "modified" to become the same thickness. 
  I was thinking that the only bracing necessary would be above and below the new opening, leaving the existing bracing strip intact (and re-fastened) where it was not cut, with the ply bracing acting as a _substitute_ bracing on the "amended" section only.  Is anything more than that really necessary? 
 I can see the process you describe working only if you ply brace the entire wall and fix plaster-board over the entire (braced) wall, which seems to be at least a four fold increase in the original job concept!

----------


## shauck

> I was thinking that the only bracing necessary would be above and below the new opening, leaving the existing bracing strip intact (and re-fastened) where it was not cut, with the ply bracing acting as a _substitute_ bracing on the "amended" section only.  Is anything more than that really necessary?

  Once you cut the existing bracing, it no longer works at all. It must be continuous from bottom plate to top plate and connected to each stud it crosses to form a triangulation. You would remove all of it and replace with ply to equal the job of original bracing which may be only a partial amount of wall and then pack out the rest of the studs on the rest of the wall with strips of ply or you could just ply brace the whole wall.

----------


## METRIX

> Sorry.  I don't see what you mean by the above, unless you mean to apply the ply bracing to the *entire* wall.
> If you do apply bracing to that entire wall it will be that much thicker than the adjacent wall, which may then need to be "modified" to become the same thickness. 
>   I was thinking that the only bracing necessary would be above and below the new opening, leaving the existing bracing strip intact (and re-fastened) where it was not cut, with the ply bracing acting as a _substitute_ bracing on the "amended" section only.  Is anything more than that really necessary? 
>  I can see the process you describe working only if you ply brace the entire wall and fix plaster-board over the entire (braced) wall, which seems to be at least a four fold increase in the original job concept!

  Yes, brace the entire wall, as Shauk said if you don’t brace the entire wall then brace what's required, and place strips on the remaining studs to bring the wall level, We would just brace the entire wall, as bracing is cheap, once you cut the metal brace it's useless, as it needs to start at the top plate and finish at the bottom plate, cutting it and replacing the bits at top and bottom would be useless and you might as well not have it at all. 
Not sure what you mean by a fourfold increase in the original job, but this is the way it has to be done if you want to brace the wall with ply, nobody except a DIY would spend the time to reduce the stud thickness by the thickness of the plywood to allow the wall to return to its original size, this would almost be inpossible to do. 
The wall thickness will grow by 4 - 7mm which is nothing, and you adjust the skirtings to accommodate the changes, for the roof join, this one is easy as there is no cornice to have to worry about, so the wall can grow a little without major issues. 
Cutting holes into braced walls is not a simple matter of cutting a hole an plastering around it, there is a lot more that needs to be done to ensure the wall still performs its original intended purpose.

----------


## FrodoOne

> nobody except a DIY would spend the time to reduce the stud thickness by the thickness of the plywood to allow the wall to return to its original size, this would almost be inpossible to do.

  OK points taken.  
However, apart from any other considerations, I _never_ suggested reducing the stud thickness.  What I suggested was 'provide recessed "framing" attached to the studs' (i.e. on the insides of the existing studs.)

----------


## phild01

:Arrow Up: As I saw it!   

> Maybe the extra for ply brace shifting the architraves around, but a bit convoluted and wouldn't provide the same bracing level as a continuous braceboard sheet.

  I think if the wall seems to be offering significant bracing then lining with a ply bracing and then sheeting could be best.

----------


## DuckCommander

> OK points taken.  
> However, apart from any other considerations, I _never_ suggested reducing the stud thickness.  What I suggested was 'provide recessed "framing" attached to the studs' (i.e. on the insides of the existing studs.)

  Ply on recessed framing within existing stud frames does not work structurally.

----------


## METRIX

> OK points taken.  
> However, apart from any other considerations, I _never_ suggested reducing the stud thickness.  What I suggested was 'provide recessed "framing" attached to the studs' (i.e. on the insides of the existing studs.)

  Ok, I understand what you mean, No this wont work, for bracing to be effective it needs to be continuous and have no breaks, metal bracing passes through the face of the studs including top plate and bottom plates, tying them all together, ply bracing needs to be the same, and must be applied to the face of the studs. 
Your suggestion would create isolated bracing and won't tie any of the studs to each other, and will be ineffective as bracing.

----------


## shauck

P.S. Ply bracing also has to be attached to top and bottom plate, not just studs. any joins horizontally will require noggings.

----------

