174 year old house joist question

[scosta]

Just inspected an 1834 home, the joists are 2x8 with a 3" notch, as you can see by the pictures, there is a lot of space between the notch and the wall.
They fitted drywall between the joists, and the walls are also now drywall. The one area that wasn't finished had a small area that I could barely see a joist fitted tight to the beam, but couldn't see anything else.

What do you think? How should I write this up?

Thanks, Steve

One more thing, there are bedrooms above with wood planking floors.

[dbronsted]

Hello,
Ive been framing for a long time..just got certified..just getting to old (haha) to frame etc..anyway this is just an opinion..if it were gonna go some where it would have a century ago..its been there though God only knows what and if there is no significant deflection Id say its good for a nuther 100 years.
Dana

[Brian A. MacNeish]

Originally Posted by dbronsted

Hello,
Ive been framing for a long time..just got certified..just getting to old (haha) to frame etc..anyway this is just an opinion..if it were gonna go some where it would have a century ago..its been there though God only knows what and if there is no significant deflection Id say its good for a nuther 100 years.
Dana

right on, Dana.

[kelliott]

Is it safe?
Is it functioning as intended?
Is it correct?

On the one hand, I tend to agree with Dana, that it's been there this long, it should be OK. However, SINCE it's been there 174 yrs, is the wood deteriorating? Drying out? Getting more brittle? Subject to more load than originally intended? Has it been altered since it was built? Age does things to all building materials. Question is, what's changing about these joists?
So you have to decide: Is it safe?
Is it functioning as intended?
It it functioning correctly? If you get three yes answers, ignore it. If not, I'd make recommendations about beefing things up- joist hangers, perhaps?
Sister joists?

[Larry D. Kage]

Originally Posted by scosta

Just inspected an 1834 home, the joists are 2x8 with a 3" notch, as you can see by the pictures, there is a lot of space between the notch and the wall.
They fitted drywall between the joists, and the walls are also now drywall. The one area that wasn't finished had a small area that I could barely see a joist fitted tight to the beam, but couldn't see anything else.

What do you think? How should I write this up?

Thanks, Steve

One more thing, there are bedrooms above with wood planking floors.

Framing does not meet current specifications for size and notching. Additional framing may be necessary. Consult with qualified framing contractor.

[Barry Adair]

Notching of floor and ceiling joists is typical and was required in balloon framing.

My concerns are when this was originally built the notches would have been tight/flush with their corresponding members, ledgers or beams.

This house appears to have had some considerable movement at some point in it's history.

Was there any bowing of the exterior walls?

Unless you are willing to take on full responsibility. I'd consult a structural engineer to sign off on this one.

One water bed would be all it would take to possibly bring this one down upon you.

[gbeaumont]

Originally Posted by badair

Notching of floor and ceiling joists is typical and was required in balloon framing.

My concerns are when this was originally built the notches would have been tight/flush with their corresponding members, ledgers or beams.

This house appears to have had some considerable movement at some point in it's history.

Was there any bowing of the exterior walls?

Unless you are willing to take on full responsibility. I'd consult a structural engineer to sign off on this one.

One water bed would be all it would take to possibly bring this one down upon you.

I agree totaly with the above, many of these older Ballooned framed homes have needed to be retro-fitted with additional ties to hold them together (ever seen a big metal cross with a large nut on the side of an older building) they are there to prevent the side wall framing from moving and allowing the joist tennons to seperate from the beams.

Regards

Gerry

[pdickerson]

Yep, its been there for 174 years, and it will continue to stand right up until the day that crappy looking framing fails and it falls down. Defer it to an engineer, and don't feel guilty about it.

[bschumacher]

That kind of framing is typical in 80+ y.o. homes in Chicago they notch both the joist and the beams to interlock with each other almost like lincoln logs. Even though I agree with the others that if it has stood for this long it should continue to stand up the inspector in me says refer it to a structural engineer NOT A FRAMING CONTRACTOR since there are so many variables in modern living compared to how the structure was originally designed (for instance the 2x8 is structurely only a 2x5). Even though it is not a correct practice these days with all the notches cut into both the beams and joists it is quite interesting that the concept of both pieces in the notched areas where designed to push against one another when they began to deflect.

[Brian A. MacNeish]

Originally Posted by bschumacher

That kind of framing is typical in 80+ y.o. homes in Chicago they notch both the joist and the beams to interlock with each other almost like lincoln logs. Even though I agree with the others that if it has stood for this long it should continue to stand up the inspector in me says refer it to a structural engineer NOT A FRAMING CONTRACTOR since there are so many variables in modern living compared to how the structure was originally designed (for instance the 2x8 is structurely only a 2x5). Even though it is not a correct practice these days with all the notches cut into both the beams and joists it is quite interesting that the concept of both pieces in the notched areas where designed to push against one another when they began to deflect.

The first house I owned is now 200-210 years old- a post and beam Cape Cod style that I drove by 2 weeks ago- it got a new roof and paint job and looks fine. I could not build that house today without a structural engineer's stamped drawings as the hand hewn roof rafters are 48 inches on center and the main floor joists are simply 8-9" logs adzed to provide a flat surface on 1 side only to accept the 2 inch floor boards.

My point is: in older homes that do not meet today's codes, do we call for an engineer's review when there may really not be any problems except the previously stated. I have called that issue and then told clients in the report "No heavy items such a water bed should be placed upstairs"

If the vendors or buyers get a report, how long is it going to be valid for. Should it be re-done each time the home re-sells as it is now that much older?

Or.....Have we opened up a situation where we know the engineer will most likely cover his behind and state the repair work needs to be done (in which case he oversees it and makes more $$$) ........this is the easiest, safest thing for them but the house may have stood for another 100 years with no further problems.

[Richard A. Hetzel]

One factor that may often be overlooked is that the species of wood used for the framing may be a hardwood having significantly greater strength than the softwoods commonly used for modern framing. I once encountered a house where there were 2x6 floor joists 24" on centers spanning something like 21 feet. This ought to have been a collapse waiting to happen, but incredibly, there was only minimum deflection after many decades of use. The only explanation possible was that the wood was greater in strength than typical present-day framing lumber, and a check of the design values for various species showed that there were several woods which would have easily been sufficient for those conditions. Something similar may be the case in the pictured structure. In any case, old houses are not new houses, and shouldn't be expected to be like new ones. Often the best policy is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", because "fixing it" can open up a case of canned worms, when there was nothing really wrong in the first place.

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

This is an Inspection from earlier this week. Portrion of the home on the left is reported to be circa 1720.

It had similar displacement with repairs being made 100+ years ago. There were steel forged hangers thru the stone walls supporting the joist ends.

[Barry Adair]

This had four sets of 1 1/4" rod with crossed turnbuckles X from wall to wall at the interior and angle iron supports at exterior for the movement that occured at three arched windows.

[Barry Adair]

Originally Posted by jhagarty

This is an Inspection from earlier this week. Portrion of the home on the left is reported to be circa 1720.

It had similar displacement with repairs being made 100+ years ago. There were steel forged hangers thru the stone walls supporting the joist ends.

Any photos of the hangers and installation method?

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

Originally Posted by badair

Any photos of the hangers and installation method?

I did not take photos of the hangers as I have seen these before. They were flat iron thru the exterior walls with a bend supporting the interior joist at the exterior wall.

Iron was 2-3 inches wide and approximately 3/8 - 5/8 inches thick. The reported (earlier) owner of the home was a Blacksmith for the local Forge.