The original documentary is archived on VHS tape in the collection of the BFI. You can request to view it at the BFI Southbank mediateque in London. You are right that it is an important piece of UK history and should be digitised. You could get in touch with them about it and see what they say. They are unlikely to have a liscence to distribute it but it would be good for it not to be only on a fragile VHS otherwise it will one day be completely lost. It would be free to view it at the BFI. The documentary was produced by Granada television and there may be a copy in some form in the ITV archive. They would probably want you to pay to access any material they have. Written material from Granada is archived at the University of Manchester library and they may have a transcript and documents relating to the broadcast, but it is uncatalogued so you'd have to sort through boxes with no guarantee. Sadly there is lots of "lost" tv that is kept from the public so that companies can monetise their archives, or as you say to busy controversial shows. Lots of C4's After Dark, which dealth with controversial issues, is nowhere to be seen online, for example. It's not good for research or education!
@@RealLifeArchitecture Well, sorry it's not more accessible! The other white whale of UK construction documentaries is Patrick Keiller's "The Dilapidated Dwelling" which was shown on TV in 2000 and is often referenced in books and the press and looms large in the memories of architects, builders, and critics. However, I don't think it was ever shown again on TV and is not anywhere online as far as I know. It was screened as a one off thing in London a few years ago and introduced by Keiller and Owen Hatherley but I didn't get to see it. Glad that it does at least exist!
@@clarksonad If you have academic access, perhaps you could request that it be digitised and uploaded to Box of Broadcasts? I couldn't find it there currently, but apparently if you know it was broadcast and that there's a need for it, you can request it.
@@BrookeSimmons I haven't used BoB since university but that is a good idea. If you have access maybe you could make the request and report back? I think there is definitely a good case for preservation and access.
When I was a building inspector I loved timber frame as there was less to get wrong (depending who the contractor was) but definitely gave the client a much better product and completed in a much quicker time frame. I would have a timber frame house over brick and block any day.
Here in Norway just about all free standing homes are timberframe with wooden board cladding, and boy do we have some weather here. It takes a little maintenance, and it doesn't hurt to have some practical knowledge about your house, but they are solid as hell.
I've heard its because the UK is an almost permanent damp climate ,especially winter,unlike Nordic countries which at least have dry but snowy winters??
@@OurnameisLegion66 It all depends what part of Norway we are talking about, but I'm sure that the british climate is less than ideal. However; britain has loads of half timbered buildings that have been standing for hundreds of years, so I guess it's not that bad. Then again modern timber is pretty shoddy compared to what was utilized just 40 or 50 years ago, so who knows.
@@OurnameisLegion66 Nothing to do with climate. Virtually every house built in Scotland in the past 50 years has been timber framed, probably because Scottish building regulations have tended to be 20-30 years ahead of those in England and Wales, and insulating a timber framed house to the required standard is easier than it is in a "traditional" build. Builders in England have been allowed to keep putting up substandard houses, and the cheapest way to do it is brick and block.
The standard of tradesman in Norway is probably much higher, the UK has so many cowboy tradesmen who just bodge job after job and don't do anything properly. They also use really cheap wood that rots quickly, in Norway they probably use the more expensive wood that is more rot resistant.
Solid advice. I built a 30ft extension at the back of my house using timber frame rather than brick and block as the time saving and superior thermal performance impressed me. Building control made sure it was done properly. I would have no hesitation doing it again on my next project.
13:20 in your video describes what Barratts and others are doing on a lot of sites now in England, and you are correct its all about cost pressures. Having designed both masonry and timber frame houses there are advantages and disadvantages to both methods, I think a skilled workforce, experienced in a given method probably has more effect than what the wall is made out of given both meet relevant standards. Timber has a speed advantage but the cost savings (in England) are not realised all of the time and differetial movement has to be accounted for. We do not have large forests in the UK so price depends on Canadian and Scandinavian supplies and has been very expensive post Covid leading to one site I worked on switching back to masonry half way through the build-out to save money with a hundred or so plots to go. Thermal drift over time, or degradation or compaction of mineral wool insulation is an issue for both methods but the lack of wall ties where the insulation is placed means timber frame is more exposed to this and often (depending on design of wall build up) the timber studs are a thermal bridges reducing the overall U-value (although wood is a better insulator than Brick or Block). Lack of resilience against common defects is always an issue in modern methods of construction, Timber frame cannot take a leaking roof or window head or cill for long and relies on membranes to protect the structural part of the building. Although when well constructed and new the performance is great, over time I can see it being an issue. Timber structures are less resilient to fire damage as the structural members can burn. To be fair its not a deal breaker as a fire in any house will then result in major repairs being required but more damage can be done quicker to a timber framed building. They are also less resilient to flooding than masonry which is becoming more of an issue in England in the past decade or so. Sound on party walls is also a problem, without the mass of masonry or special detailing with MLV, resilient bars etc and is expensive in floor space and £'s Terraced or Semi detached properties do not perform as well as masonry as easily but can be made to work. Masonry has benefits in thermal mass dependant on block type used (not taken into consideration within the regulations which is a big oversight and leads to Part O which IMO is overly onerous and prescriptive and badly thought through causing confusion by overruling other parts of the regs like K and M for no benefit). Phase shift and amplitude attenuation in heat energy is used in DIN standards and more informative for real world performance than just U-value alone. Timber framed buildings tend to heat up and cool down quicker, I think of it like a pendulum with the time of year, day, night and heating cycles all effecting the temperature inside the home. A light pendulum (Timber frame) is more susceptible to cold spells and heat waves as it is easy to move quickly. A heavy pendulum (Masonry) acts as a break to the heating or cooling by storing the heat and releasing it back into the rooms or absorbing excess heat keeping the rooms cooler smoothing the fluctuations over a 24 hour period or more.
in a perfect world i agree, no difference, but....... a house made of brick will always be more forgiving in terms of long term resiliance when it is built by the same contractors who are a tad bit lazy, of have a tendancy to cut corners to save time/money, or lack full training, or pride in their work etc... etc.. unfortunantly there a a lotta of them about :) even more so with the newer generations contractors having grown up in a world tech world of instant gratification, lack of sleep etc
I don't think so. Or, I'm not convinced. Wall ties, cavity insulation, shite in the cavity etc will all cause problems. What specifically is it about timber frame that would cause the issue in your view? What would make it inherently more difficult to rectify in a timber frame than a block construction?
Timber frame is fine if you use the right quality wood, protect it with block walls and it is built by someone competent. But the problem in the UK is there are so many cowboy builders who just bodge jobs, they use the wrong wood that rots quickly and they put wood cladding on the houses instead of block walls. I've seen lots of timber framed buildings that are only about 15 years old and all the wood cladding is completely rotten and needing replaced because the builder used a cheap wood that rots quickly in this wet climate.
We put a two storey extension up the side of a 3 bed thirties semi with a loft conversion on top, we went a bit over the top with air tightness and insulation. Despite nearly doubling the floor area the heating bills have gone down quite a bit.
@@RealLifeArchitecture Sorry I was not clear, yes all built out of 6 by 2 treated studs filled with rock wool and then 50mm of EPS EWI and silicone render to finish. The build up from inside was Plaster skim on 15 mm pink plaster board, Vapour control membrane, 150mm rockwool, 12mm OSB, breather membrane, 50mm EPS insulation, 6mm magply fire protection, basecoat mesh and beading, finally silicone render. Cant remember what the U value worked out to but it was well below the minimum in force at the time. A lot of our radiators are looking for a new job!
Thank you, I have developed a fascination of timber framed buildings the last few years and wondered why they are looked down on so much in the UK, well England only it seems from watching this, when they seemed to offer a lot of benefits. I had already got round the it can’t be our weather conditions as Scandinavian countries and North America have it much harsher.
There's another comment to the effect that we are always damp whereas those countries get dryer winters (because the air is frozen) and dryer summers (less humid heat). Seems to make sense. Obviously this could be overcome but you're then relying on the skill and integrity of the architects, builders and building controllers. By building in brick you're more guaranteed a solid house in future years.
A nice, concise list of the necessary features, thank you. 30 years ago, I used to walk past a small plot of timber framed housing, encased in brickwork. It was in Aberystwyth, a damp(er) part of the UK. Over the weeks, before they were occupied and heated, you could see the wooden window cills rise and fall with the humidity.
My timber frame extension onto brick semi is going up right now. Walls up, roof about to start. Timber cladding on the back and brick slips on the side and front as the council didn't want anything other than brick appearence from the street (even though not a conservation area) which i guess is just an extension of the widespread traditional is best attitude. It has gone up ever so quickly, and the insulation advantage is extreme.
I have to be honest. I'm American, I'm a carpenter, i owned a construction company for 25 years. We bought a 200 year old stone home in france almost 3 years ago for a vacation/ retirement home. Within 6 months we decided to permanently live in france, france isn't perfect, but the us is just failing. I can live in france for what i was paying for health insurance in the us. Anyways, after doing some remodeling and watching a new 6 unit apartment being built, I feel like I've been building with popsicle sticks. Floors, walls, ceilings, it's all concrete, and blocks. The only wood in my house is the 2nd floor and roof framing. There are literally homes in my village that are 500 years old. I'm a carpenter by trade, but i love my stone home.
A good explanation for why US houses are mostly timber is that there are a lot more trees per capita but also because houses are larger the cost factor for using masonry goes up massively compared to timber frames and cladding.
Concrete is fine for large apartment blocks, it is good for sound insulation and in fires. There are stone homes throughout Scotland too, but more often than not a newly refurbished one will have timber interior to accomodate insulation, where the external stone acts in the same way as rendered block. I'm not actually sure why you would need concrete on a solid wall building, and I suspect that it would affect the overall breathability of the structure in a negative way. I guess that you're not really comparing like for like here either, because nobody (at volume) is building new builds with stonework. The video is about timber frame versus brick and cavity.
@ricos1497 I know, but moving from America to France and seeing how things are/ have been built, I feel like I've been building with matchsticks. Timber framing (heavy) is still done with pegs, that is a niche way in the states.
I've recently moved into a timber framed property built in the 70s. It was manufactured in Sweden and assembled here in England. It has a lot of timber cladding. I had challenges with finding a mortgage provider but probably insurance was the bigger challenge - the percentage of timber cladding was their main issue and this has resulted in finding a specialist insurer at over twice the price of my previous insurance. I will have more time to shop around next year, any recommendations appreciated, but it makes me think replacing with stone cladding is the answer. Little did i know that my previous house was also timber framed and I i only realised this through my knowledge of buying the new place. The previous place was mock stone clad. The 70s house is better insulated than my previous 00s house. There is some room for improvement on windows and doors though so looking to triple glaze.
Much appreciation for your videos and the comparison of brick and block vs 2x4 timber frame. Perhaps you could do a follow up on traditional beam construction and stone builds, together with their modern analogues and options for updating?
I have a ex council Swedish house which was built in 1946. It still has the original stained pine weather boarding and the timber is in good condition. Now thinking of retrofitting on outside to improve insulation.
Thank you. I’d be really interested in seeing this World in Action documentary too. Timber frame will most likely be the route we go down. Primarily due to the costs being that much higher for a SIPs build. Please keep up the work👏👌
Used to own a Colt house. Timber framed with cedar cladding and cedar roof shingles. All built on a concrete base. Built in the 60s. Only main difference over a brick house from the same era was regular oiling of the outside woodwork. But in reality no different to painting the outside of the brick and render house.
You can get a morgage no problem in Scotland - I had a timber frame, timber clad house in Shetland with Halifax Building Society, which was no problem, but their in-house insurance company wouldn't touch it, so it has been a bit more expensive to insure (there not being much competition). The type is warm, very robust, standing up well to the strongest winds in Britain, and in Shetland has had far fewer structural problems than concrete block which tends to turn to mush in Shetland's climate!
Aye, the Halifax were a pain in the arse when we got our mortgage with them. My wife opened her account when they were Bank of Scotland, so it was a surprise when they mentioned that timber frame might be an issue. I went on the phone and accused them of being anti-Scottish and other such rants (quoting the figures in the video for the number of timber frames in Scotland), and they came back with an acceptable quote! It's not been a problem since, still have mortgage and insurance through them. It is wholly based on ignorance of Scotland and Scottish buildings that there was an issue. We also had an issue because our builder wasn't part of some bought-and-paid-for industry regulator (NHSBC?), rather we had an independent architects' certification of the build (our house was built to far higher standards than the volume builders, obviously). I think that self-building, or small developers/developments, are extremely harshly treated by a nepotistic building, insurance and banking industry.
My first house which i bought in 1976,was ex local authority built in Northampton around 1970. There were thousands of similar properties on the eastern district mostly brick first floor then timber cladding or tile hanging above. I only lived in it for 5yrs but remember it being warm and felt solid. Some 50 yrs on they're still standing and I've not heard of any issues regarding them. A further point is that concrete block production produces large amount of co2 so timber framing is beneficial in that regard also
I design and build masonry buildings in the north of England, many faced in stone, because only two trades are involved. Blockwork is quick to erect and where space is available you can quickly build a blockwork cavity wall with a fully insulated cavity, leave wall ties projecting, put the roof on and face it with stonework at leisure. battens and plasterboard can be installed internally. Masonry buildings retain their heat and are slow to cool down and the recent dreadful fires in California were in part fuelled by burning timber framed houses.
🙏 Thanks for sharing. I am not a builder, but, at the age of 72, I successfully constructed a timber-frame annexe 92m2 with underground heating, slightly different from the typical studded walls. I used 23 175x175mm good-quality timber pillars to make the basic framework which I am currently wall-studding with 125mm of insulated cavity. Great experience and learning process from learning Autocad Revit, preparing the plans and all the rest including french drains for the entire perimeter of the building. It totally is energy-independent thanks to my self-designed ground-mounted Photovoltaic system with 45kWh battery storage. I love timber as it is warm to the heart, easily recyclable and aesthetically very nice. 🥰
I'm in northern Scotland and most builders around here will simply turn down new builds that aren't timber frame. One of the main reasons is poor weather during construction has a huge effect on the overall timescale for "traditional" builds. Once foundations are done a timber frame house can be wind and watertight in 3-5 days then interior trades can crack on with no delays, meanwhile the masons can do the blockwork and render as the weather allows.
I think galvanised steel framing is the way to go. It doesn't rust or is prone to insect infestation. The problem with timber and the modern cheap fast builds, is the quality of the wood, the care in storing it (keeping it dry and straight so that there is no warping) and making the trusses watertight until the roof is attached.
@@eattherich9215 ChatGPT replies as to why this doesn't happen (and seems to make sense to me): Tradition: UK homes are traditionally built with brick and masonry, and the workforce is trained in these methods. Cost: Steel is expensive, both in materials and labour. Thermal Conductivity: Steel conducts heat, causing insulation issues like cold bridging. Corrosion Risk: Even galvanised steel can face long-term corrosion in the UK’s damp climate. Fire Safety: Steel loses strength at high temperatures and needs extra fireproofing. Environmental Impact: Steel has a higher carbon footprint compared to renewable timber. Limited Advantages: Steel’s strength isn’t as critical for residential buildings in the UK. Design Flexibility: Timber is easier to modify and adapt during construction or renovation.
@@eattherich9215 don't think so. A lot of houses in Scotland are timber kit, and built and transported to site, with insulation etc installed in a factory. I don't think that steel offers a lot in that regard. Is insect infestation a big issue in the UK?
@@eattherich9215 Wood quality isn't a problem, all construction timber is dried, graded and treated, and a bit of rain on the roof trusses won't do any harm. Typically they'll be fitted within a week of arriving on site, then sarked and underfelted within a day or two. As ricos1497 asks, what insect infestation?
Having lived in northeast Massachusetts, we love timber frame construction. We did a lot of renovations and also DIY construction on our house there -- sturdy and so easy to renovate and repair compared to bricks and concrete. The worst thing, however, is the cedar cladding (aka "siding") on the outside of these USA houses -- very expensive because it's enormous pain to maintain since every board has to be cleaned, scraped/sanded before being painted (or stained). Brick exterior is so much more maintenance-free, and thus cheaper. Vinyl cladding/siding as an alternative in USA is dead ugly to look at, and environmentally toxic to manufacture & dispose of. Cement-board cladding/siding is heavy and also needs periodic painting. No wonder the word painting has the prefix "pain"!!!
The problem is the timber frame is the load bearing part of the build, if water finds its way in, which it eventually will, then the frame will start to deteriorate quickly, totally unseen and with catastrophic consequences. Age is a factor, I’d be worried about the structural integrity of a timber frame after 50 years.
I’ve designed homes in brick veneer construction for over 30 years in Australia. Although it’s starting to change, the vast majority of homes in the cooler states are built with timber frames and clad in various materials, brick being the most common but in recent years rendered foam, aerated concrete and various other materials are being used for cladding. The frames are usually only 90mm think which are adequate for current insulation requirements depending on orientation and location of windows.
Homes in Japan are predominantly timber frame, and many have been around for 100s of years. Most wooden temples are 500 to 1,000 years old with the oldest being 1,300 yrs. The beams and joists are jointed, with wooden dowels or plugs to fix. Earthquake proof is one of the main reasons for using timber.
Ultimately the longevity of any timber-frame house will depend on how well the occupants can keep water (and fire) away from the timber. If they go around damaging the weatherproof and air barriers due to a lack of knowledge as to how to penetrate these correctly when needed, then the building is going to suffer premature failure.
@5:05; this documentary did not, in fact, kill timber frame building in the UK, but it did focus on one particular mass house builder, Barrett Homes (still pretty much building crap homes). In the 26 September 2022 edition of 'Inside housing', a report called 'Timber-frame buildings and cavity fires: the burning question', looked at the September 2019 fire that burnt four storey Richmond House, Worcester Park, South West London, the ground in a matter of minutes and the contributing factors. Timber framing continues to be used and the outbreak of fires is always because of poor construction methods that leaves voids in the cavity walls, thereby allowing fire to spread rapidly.
It is no different here in the US with mass builders that prefer profits over quality. Timber is also a renewable resource compared to concrete which is highly energy consuming that is only second to oil and gas and also the world is running out masonry quality sand.
Fascinating stuff! I had no idea timber framing was so popular in Scotland. It makes good sense as a construction method. The hard part is persuading people to move on from the “bricks and mortar” mindset. Having said that, how well would it cope with the sort of build quality you see on a lot of new houses down here?
That’s hard to answer. Timber kit, which is a prefabricated version of timber frame, could be part of the answer. I think the bigger picture is that bad workmanship is caused by de-skilling, the retirement crucial, outsourcing and agency working.
@@RealLifeArchitecture I don't think I've seen a "stick build" timber frame done in this part of northern Scotland for decades, they're invariably kits and increasingly at least partially factory fitted with insulation, trunking, conduit, etc. The factory based production of kits allows the use of a semi-skilled workforce whilst improving quality and productivity.
11:09 I think more hybrid options due to timber’s better insulation properties will be the best option for most. 12:47 100% agree, supply chain will have to catchup it will.
Lots of valid points made and it's truly mind-blowing that timber construction is not more widespread given the real cost savings and speed of construction that it offers. That said, Aviva is one of the largest UK insurers. The home insurance that they sell and underwrite expressly excludes timber frame construction. I don't need to tell you how big of a problem something like this is for the construction industry. And in case you thought that maybe regulators can fix this, the insurance industry self-regulates ...
Aviva do insure timber framed houses, I've been insured through them two or three times in the past 30 years, my last policy with them ended middle of last year.
At 3:48 I would dispute what you say about windows to identify the construction. We live in a block and Fyfe stone construction house and the windows are set back. If someone applies your logic to our house, then they assume ours is timber frame which it is definitely not. You're also saying that 90% of homes are timber frame in Scotland. I would dispute this where Aberdeenshire is concerned. I'm currently renovating and when looking for properties, speaking with local trades etc, the overwhelming number of houses are block & fyfe stone or granite.
I’m an acoustic engineer and run a construction company that specialises in recording studio builds, it is impossible to achieve Low Frequency attenuation from a timber frame home. Yes you can get acceptable dB reduction levels particularly in the mid and upper frequencies, but not below 150Hz without considerable expense that if you had to have low reduction on par with upper frequencies you’d have to go block or concrete etc. plus other attenuations. I’ve done a few cement sheet clad timber frames and that really helps but it’s just not the mass.
are you talking about, what US calls, Light Wood Framing? In the US, Timber Framing is 8x8 inches, joined with Mortise and Tenon. Light Wood Framing is 2x4 inches, joined with Nail Plate and Screw.
2x4 was usual here in Scotland for external walls but 2x6 ( or 45 x 145mm finished size as typically sold } became necessary in the last couple of decades to meet higher insulation standards.
@@mackmonkey1 based on the video title, i was hoping to see some beautiful, rustic, Timber Frame House or Cabin. And i was wonders why UK is not ok with it.
I would always go for block construction for the internal walls. Hard to put it into words but I don't like the hollow feeling of timber frames especially with laminate flooring. Block work built just feels more solid in comparison.
Some block construction houses in England have cement-poured floors, but most have timber joists onto which the wood sub-floor planks are attached. In other words, the flooring in most houses in England is "timber framed" -- so what are you taking about when you say "I don't like the hollow feeling of timber frames especially with laminate flooring"?
@@lanialost1320 It's hard to put into words- but I can definitely feel the difference between a 1930s semi and a new build. Just feels more substantial and the acoustics are very different. An older house has less echo.
@@roystonvasey5471 but new-builds in England will be cavity wall, brick houses? I live in a timber frame, and have lived in solid wall before. My house is new, but built by a small developer, and is highly insulated. We get absolutely battered by the wind. The house feels as solid as any stone built house I've lived in.
@@ricos1497 Most round here are timber framed as in the video. I understand the pros and cons as outlined but if I am sinking my money into a property I want to have a property of substance not something that’s constructed in 3 weeks. Besides new builds are so small and narrow that in some places the living rooms are barely 3-4 mtrs wide.
@@roystonvasey5471 What you seem to be saying, is that you want a well constructed house? I'd argue that a well constructed timber frame is equal to a well constructed block house. I'd also argue that a poorly constructed new build is equally poor in both timber and blockwork, and both suffer from the same size issues. I guess I'm struggling to understand the focus on material rather than quality.
Timber framed construction was heavily used by the various New Towns Authorities in 1970's. 100,000s of homes in Northampton, Corby, Peterborough, Milton Keynes and Telford by the Development Corporations using Midland Housing Consortium (MHC) frames that were prefabricated and delivered to site on the backs of lorries for fixing to prepared foundations. Most timber framed Development Corporation houses were clad in brick with particularly quick completion time. I remember one exercise that P'boro' DC carried out saw a 3 bed detached house erected onto prepared foundations and ready for occupation within 9 days, including all the external brickwork. To my knowledge the majority of the DC homes are still in use today, 50 years on with no issues,
I’m considering a timber frame house for when I move to France, simply because I want to do a self build project. What interests me is lower construction costs (I would do most of the work myself) and I could have it insulated to the highest standards. I have a question - do I have to have a concrete foundation or is there any other type of foundation that is suitable?
@@jimh4072 I live in France.. timber framed construction is not how it is done. There are extreme differences in temperature here . Additionally wood boring insects are a serious problem. Unless you are saving a lot of money why bother? Build with insulated bricks that are available in Europe but rarely used in the UK..
Another aspect of timber framed housing that I’ve recently encountered. Building insurance. I live in an 2012 architect designed home near Aberfeldy. Timber framed clad in stone 70% and Siberian larch 30%. The comparison sites and insurance company applications offer external wall construction options of brick, stone, concrete or timber framed with brick. As my house is none of these it limits insurance company options, competition and likely results in higher premiums when risk is no higher.
I had this issue with insurance as well recently with my new property having about 30-40% timber cladding. I had to find a new insurer at short notice and ended up paying double my previous premium.
Same here - same type of property in same area, though ours is clad approx 40% stone/60% Siberian larch. We've just switched house insurers and because of the "non-standard" construction our new insurers had to refer to their underwriters before acceptance at a premium rate higher than for a 'normal' property because of the perceived higher risk. They also make it a condition that we must have an electrical system inspection every 10 years.
NFU insure anything, if you're struggling. Probably more expensive though. (I live in a Colt House, built in the '60s. 100% wood - timber frame and clad in cedar shingles.)
Timber frame components are cut and assembled on jigs in a factory making for higher and controlled accuracy which is not so easy on a site also speed of erection means the roof is on quicker protecting the internal components from the weather where traditional masonry build would see internal timber components such as floor joists being exposed till walls reach roof level
In Southern Africa (Savana region) brick and mortar is waaaay cheaper compared to timber, and cavity walls (insulation issues) are not common . I guess that makes timber timber frames very rear in those areas and also makes roofs one of the most expensive stages in construction
When properly done timber framing is a good solution for building houses. They start to take off here in the Netherlands as well, in the same form as in Scotland, with a brick outer leaf or brick slip covering to maintain the traditional look. But in my eyes there would be nothing wrong with a good metal, wood or composite cladding, just not the awful UPVC which is used in the US so much. When providing for stud walls that are a minimum of 8" deep a superb insulation value can be obtained which can reach passive house standards, I have seen timber houses premanufactured in Switzerland which had 12" thick insulation. Funny is the fact that the single most widespread building methods in the Netherlands is considered non standard in the UK, that is premanufactured concrete elements.
I don't think anyone would deny that it's possible to build a timber frame house with great durability and safety but I think the issue is that a lot of people don't trust the house builders to actually do it properly or a previous owner to not have made modifications that compromise it. I wouldn't speculate on whether or not it's representative but we've all seen the videos of that Welsh guy who does inspections pulling fake weep vents out of the walls. If they're doing that kind of thing with the parts of the house we can see how is anyone to trust that all the membranes and barriers are installed correctly?
You make a good point. My own view is that builders should be regulated and required to carry out annual training. Thats how it is for architects, so why shouldn’t it be the same for those who carry out the work.
I like timber frame now the cavity requirement for block/brick is 150mm, makes extensions onto existing end up with a staggered internal wall line and it looks awful - Timber frame removes that need. That said the way we do our vapour barriers in the UK for wooden frame is crap and I've come across too many new builds that have mold issues because we put an internal vapour barrier into our timber framed buildings when our climate is no longer what it was 20 years ago.
Surprised you didn't mention the tudor timber frame houses from 500-600 years ago! Still a lot standing strong. If/when I do a self build i would choose a timber frame construction. I enjoy working with wood. One negative is the modern fast groun softwood is rubbish quality compared to the wood they used to use.
My issue with timber framed homes in Scotland is that you have a cavity which SHOLUD be sealed but is IMPOSSIBLE to insulate. I have a nice 20 year old home buit to a "4 inch kit" standard, with nice decorative stone exterior. I have a 10cm waste of valuable space between the external 10cm thick stone and the outer face of the timber frame. Insulation in those days will be poorly fitted with no attention to detail. It will be sagged and ineffective. At least building regs have adbanced to "6 inch kit" standard but really 8 inches is needed in Scotland. Meanwhile, any form of after-the-fact wall insulation involves taking apart the insde of the house on all exterior walls, or removing the decorative exterior to fit external insulation. Its a dead end road that home-owners are stuck with in all timer frame houses in terms of permanently elevated heatibg costs, without EXTREME cost and inconvenience. In contrast, double block or brick and block construction is easy and inexpensive to insulate either during construction or after the fact. Building regs need to ban timber frames from an enery effficency standpoint or REQUIRE 8 inches of EXTERNAL insulation, with internal interstitial insulation optional.
Your crystal ball wont be too far off, a good number of the national house builders have already invested in timber frame manufacturing plants to help them keep up with current demand and I expect to trial and move towards the "new" technology. There has been housing sites with half traditional and half timber frame going on for years. To me it seems that there are issues delivering the demand with traditional construction and there's no option but to add timber frame. For full disclosure, I'm a timber frame designer so I'm biased
Timber Frame, the clue is in the name!! I am planning a self build in central Scotland in the next few years, I am pretty set on the timber frame route on the following reasons, Better straightness and accuracy of walls due to being factory built. Not saying brickies can’t build straight walls but they are hard to come by, proper ones that is. Superior insulation abilities which is a big thing these days. Insulation can be inbuilt at the factory saving site time and risk of errors. Service cavities can be built on to maintain the insulation values allowing cables and pipes to be run in the walls. My biggest fear of this self build is trying to find a proper builder that can do the bits I can’t. I served my time as an electrician in the early nineties, we had skilled people then who could build a straight wall and plaster it flat. Joiners who could make things from stock. Nowadays it’s all posers with every tool imaginable wrapped up in ppe cluelessly going forward.
i think rammed reinforced earth also needs to become more common in the uk. We've got plenty of dirt :P it wont rot, wont burn, can't be infested, acts as a thermal mass to regulate temperature, and most importantly i think is the benefit of it being much easier to make air tight. you know a solid slab is air tight, but a timber and masonry build there could be gaps all over the place. I really think its the direction construction should have gone. we used to build with clay/dirt and straw, and ram it together. After concrete was invented and firing clay bricks started to be mass produced, rather than realising we could use the cement to reinforce the way we already built, we abandoned it entirely in favour of either pure clay bricks, or pure concrete. Though the one main issue seems to be the method. theres not really been a well developed and fast way to create rammed earth. even the biggest scale builders i've seen using it have guys mix up a batch, wheel barrow it into the form, and then theres a guy standing in forms with a pneumatic tamper who has to whack it all down, and the result is an inconsistent compression thats visible from the outside. From doing some small scale test theres ways to ensure a more consistent finish on the outside face, but the problem is scale. theres no large machines built specifically for ramming earth, but i think if there was it'd be a lot more practical than wheel barrows and hand ramming. But as you say, resistance to new methods is just due to infrastructure. Those machines dont exist, someone would have to invent them, and so rammed earth is only built by specialist builders and self builders.
In the states everything is coad or sided as they call it in hardy plank. Its cement board that looks like wood. Comes in loads of colour combinations and can look nice .
just after a quick look i couldn't really find anything. unfortunately theres so many episodes of world in action (over a thousand) that it'd be unlikely anyone has ripped that many vhs'. Though one interesting thing i noticed in a synopsis of the episode, is they describe it as "Investigates the building practices of one of the UK's largest house builders 'Barrett Homes' and whether their quickly built timber frame system houses are suffering quality issues" As i live in a barrett house i feel more than qualified to say the issue is barrett, not the construction method. Sound slike the documentary needed to be more specific. Maybe it would have been barrett that went away and not timber construction.
It is not what timber framing normally called in US and Canada, it is cheap stick construction as it uses standardized pre-cut lumber as opposed to heavy timbers (usually 7+ inch thick). There is also a similar beam-and-post building technique, which is closer to timber framing but uses steel plates and not tenon and mortise connections.
It can be quite a bit higher to have a timber framed and timber clad house insured vs timber framed, brick or block clad. I moved locally within Shetland to the former from the latter and my costs jumped from about £250 to £400 back in 2013. In Scotland I don't really see a justification for that - almost all fires are going to originate inside from electrical faults, cooking or careless candles - I think it is just the lack of competition. Shopping around in subsequent years I got a better deel which took it back closer to parity, but it was a struggle to get a fair quote.
Timber framed houses might be more popular in England if that discount in building cost compared to a solid masonry house carried through to a lower retail price to the end customer, it doesn't so why would you pay the same money for a large shed over a brick house?
We're going timber framed for our extension. I've lived in one timber framed home and was the most quiet and comfy. Good history of timber framed homes where I am which is even better. Anyway you cannot grow concrete!
The sad fact is, that there are well built (quality materials etc), timber frame houses and poorly built (poor quality materials etc) timber frame houses. The Scandinavian countries, have been building these types of houses for centuries and they last. The skills have been passed down to the next generation of builders. In England, it is still a relatively new and untrusted way of building. The skills are simply not there. Neither is the quality.
The BBC did a Panorama show called 'Transplant: Are the donors really dead'. Stopped people from being organ donors for years. Strangely, this documentary has also disappeared.
You do seem to defend timber a lot. It can't burn down? It can't rot? Very brave words. You must know the reality is that buildings are never perfect and builders are not perfect and owners do bad things to buildings. These factors which I bet will happen over 100yrs of a house will impact the quality of the timber. I.e. damp. One little mistake and it can have a big impact. You should at least say there is a greater risk to the structural integrity over 100yrs to timber than brick as the risk from damp and fire is higher. Bricks can get damp and dry out, they're quite forgiving. What life expectancy would you genuinely give a timber house vs a brick house? People widely question if houses in the US will last 30yrs. We have a history of houses lasting hundreds of years.
Sod the local suppliers. We're going to import everything because it is cheaper and higher quality. We won't be taking their advice either. As for workmen, well we get them in directly. I also hear local contractors make a pig's ear of heat pump installations. The main reasons for these decisions is to cut costs and get more bang for your bucks.
Modern timber frames are just sheds. Besides, an inside wall that is only plasterboard is useless, tacky, to screw things to. Land prices do NOT rise due to limited supply. Houses are bid up to the max people 'can' pay. Then all that money gets used up on the new builds. All that is left over, large or small, is the land price as it is at the end of the chain. The price of houses does not alter due to building costs. If new houses were made cheaper no one would sell them cheaper!
Getting insurance on timber frame is easy. Anyone will take your money. But will they pay out any claim or underwrite it that timber frame isn't covered?
I haven’t used it but did consider it for a couple of projects. I mostly c build extensions and it places serious limits on the design compared with timber frame
Dont do it, some prick decided to reinvent the wheel and make money out of it, As a ball park measure it will add 10 to 15% cost over timber frame costs. The only tangeable benifit that is pushed for it is that it is suposedly easier to achieve air tighness with a sips pannel, but as long as you get your membrane overlap and sealing correct with timber frame then that disapears. as a self builder, essentially you take a task that you can do yourself, the insulationg and membrane fitting away and hand it to the manufacture, so the cost difference is in reality greater if you were going to insulate the build yourself. Additionally any errors in timber frame are more easily corrected on site by any half decent chippie. but this isnt consistently the case for sips, where there is a high probability that you will need a replacmentr sips pannel manufactured with the lead time and consequent delays that that incurs, that to can add costs, as it may impact the date that you achieve weather tightness, affecting the following trades. Additionally SIPs pannels tend to be a little heavier than the equlivalent timber frame, so a bit more taxing to handle.
Thinking of buying a house that is '80s timber frame and brick clad but it shows no signs of insulation having been upgraded(loft minimal). Would i be right in the best way would be to remove plasterboard and re-insulate,vapour barrier and plasterboard? Or were they sufficiently insulated then?
Was that meant to be a pun? In all seriousness the Scottish government publish detailed technical guidance on how to achieve acoustic separation between properties built using timber frame. The construction methods are well understood for party walls and separating floors.
I presume brick cladding on timber frame costs more than a wood or metal exterior? Maybe dont tell me. I dont really like the look of the exteriors on most new Scottish houses, id like ut even less if I knew it also cost more...
I have no issue with timber frames, when done well. Alot of my criticism is based on American methods, that use cheap fast grown wood, built with cheap methods and cladded in paper mache. Also in terms of no widespread issues in North America, i don't think you've researched much on modern matchstick framed houses in America.
The original documentary is archived on VHS tape in the collection of the BFI. You can request to view it at the BFI Southbank mediateque in London. You are right that it is an important piece of UK history and should be digitised. You could get in touch with them about it and see what they say. They are unlikely to have a liscence to distribute it but it would be good for it not to be only on a fragile VHS otherwise it will one day be completely lost. It would be free to view it at the BFI.
The documentary was produced by Granada television and there may be a copy in some form in the ITV archive. They would probably want you to pay to access any material they have.
Written material from Granada is archived at the University of Manchester library and they may have a transcript and documents relating to the broadcast, but it is uncatalogued so you'd have to sort through boxes with no guarantee.
Sadly there is lots of "lost" tv that is kept from the public so that companies can monetise their archives, or as you say to busy controversial shows. Lots of C4's After Dark, which dealth with controversial issues, is nowhere to be seen online, for example. It's not good for research or education!
Thank you so much, I really appreciate your knowledge. The internet is amazing. Sometimes…
@@RealLifeArchitecture Well, sorry it's not more accessible! The other white whale of UK construction documentaries is Patrick Keiller's "The Dilapidated Dwelling" which was shown on TV in 2000 and is often referenced in books and the press and looms large in the memories of architects, builders, and critics. However, I don't think it was ever shown again on TV and is not anywhere online as far as I know. It was screened as a one off thing in London a few years ago and introduced by Keiller and Owen Hatherley but I didn't get to see it. Glad that it does at least exist!
@@clarksonad If you have academic access, perhaps you could request that it be digitised and uploaded to Box of Broadcasts? I couldn't find it there currently, but apparently if you know it was broadcast and that there's a need for it, you can request it.
@@BrookeSimmons I haven't used BoB since university but that is a good idea. If you have access maybe you could make the request and report back? I think there is definitely a good case for preservation and access.
My house is timber framed, over 300yrs old and doing just fine.
When I was a building inspector I loved timber frame as there was less to get wrong (depending who the contractor was) but definitely gave the client a much better product and completed in a much quicker time frame. I would have a timber frame house over brick and block any day.
Great point!
Here in Norway just about all free standing homes are timberframe with wooden board cladding, and boy do we have some weather here. It takes a little maintenance, and it doesn't hurt to have some practical knowledge about your house, but they are solid as hell.
I've heard its because the UK is an almost permanent damp climate ,especially winter,unlike Nordic countries which at least have dry but snowy winters??
@@OurnameisLegion66 It all depends what part of Norway we are talking about, but I'm sure that the british climate is less than ideal. However; britain has loads of half timbered buildings that have been standing for hundreds of years, so I guess it's not that bad. Then again modern timber is pretty shoddy compared to what was utilized just 40 or 50 years ago, so who knows.
@@OurnameisLegion66 Nothing to do with climate. Virtually every house built in Scotland in the past 50 years has been timber framed, probably because Scottish building regulations have tended to be 20-30 years ahead of those in England and Wales, and insulating a timber framed house to the required standard is easier than it is in a "traditional" build. Builders in England have been allowed to keep putting up substandard houses, and the cheapest way to do it is brick and block.
Timber framed houses are not build the best in the UK. I am currently working on a horrible timber house that's fit for purpose
The standard of tradesman in Norway is probably much higher, the UK has so many cowboy tradesmen who just bodge job after job and don't do anything properly. They also use really cheap wood that rots quickly, in Norway they probably use the more expensive wood that is more rot resistant.
Solid advice. I built a 30ft extension at the back of my house using timber frame rather than brick and block as the time saving and superior thermal performance impressed me. Building control made sure it was done properly. I would have no hesitation doing it again on my next project.
@johngalt6708 see what the mortgage compnaies make of it in 20 years
Thanks for making me no doubts about building houses as I'm mastered skills from back to Sweden in the UK.
13:20 in your video describes what Barratts and others are doing on a lot of sites now in England, and you are correct its all about cost pressures.
Having designed both masonry and timber frame houses there are advantages and disadvantages to both methods, I think a skilled workforce, experienced in a given method probably has more effect than what the wall is made out of given both meet relevant standards.
Timber has a speed advantage but the cost savings (in England) are not realised all of the time and differetial movement has to be accounted for.
We do not have large forests in the UK so price depends on Canadian and Scandinavian supplies and has been very expensive post Covid leading to one site I worked on switching back to masonry half way through the build-out to save money with a hundred or so plots to go.
Thermal drift over time, or degradation or compaction of mineral wool insulation is an issue for both methods but the lack of wall ties where the insulation is placed means timber frame is more exposed to this and often (depending on design of wall build up) the timber studs are a thermal bridges reducing the overall U-value (although wood is a better insulator than Brick or Block).
Lack of resilience against common defects is always an issue in modern methods of construction, Timber frame cannot take a leaking roof or window head or cill for long and relies on membranes to protect the structural part of the building.
Although when well constructed and new the performance is great, over time I can see it being an issue.
Timber structures are less resilient to fire damage as the structural members can burn.
To be fair its not a deal breaker as a fire in any house will then result in major repairs being required but more damage can be done quicker to a timber framed building.
They are also less resilient to flooding than masonry which is becoming more of an issue in England in the past decade or so.
Sound on party walls is also a problem, without the mass of masonry or special detailing with MLV, resilient bars etc and is expensive in floor space and £'s
Terraced or Semi detached properties do not perform as well as masonry as easily but can be made to work.
Masonry has benefits in thermal mass dependant on block type used (not taken into consideration within the regulations which is a big oversight and leads to Part O which IMO is overly onerous and prescriptive and badly thought through causing confusion by overruling other parts of the regs like K and M for no benefit).
Phase shift and amplitude attenuation in heat energy is used in DIN standards and more informative for real world performance than just U-value alone.
Timber framed buildings tend to heat up and cool down quicker, I think of it like a pendulum with the time of year, day, night and heating cycles all effecting the temperature inside the home.
A light pendulum (Timber frame) is more susceptible to cold spells and heat waves as it is easy to move quickly.
A heavy pendulum (Masonry) acts as a break to the heating or cooling by storing the heat and releasing it back into the rooms or absorbing excess heat keeping the rooms cooler smoothing the fluctuations over a 24 hour period or more.
in a perfect world i agree, no difference, but.......
a house made of brick will always be more forgiving in terms of long term resiliance when it is built by the same contractors who are a tad bit lazy, of have a tendancy to cut corners to save time/money, or lack full training, or pride in their work etc... etc..
unfortunantly there a a lotta of them about :)
even more so with the newer generations contractors having grown up in a world tech world of instant gratification, lack of sleep etc
I don't think so. Or, I'm not convinced. Wall ties, cavity insulation, shite in the cavity etc will all cause problems. What specifically is it about timber frame that would cause the issue in your view? What would make it inherently more difficult to rectify in a timber frame than a block construction?
Timber frame is fine if you use the right quality wood, protect it with block walls and it is built by someone competent. But the problem in the UK is there are so many cowboy builders who just bodge jobs, they use the wrong wood that rots quickly and they put wood cladding on the houses instead of block walls. I've seen lots of timber framed buildings that are only about 15 years old and all the wood cladding is completely rotten and needing replaced because the builder used a cheap wood that rots quickly in this wet climate.
We put a two storey extension up the side of a 3 bed thirties semi with a loft conversion on top, we went a bit over the top with air tightness and insulation. Despite nearly doubling the floor area the heating bills have gone down quite a bit.
Was the new extension was timber frame?
@@RealLifeArchitecture Sorry I was not clear, yes all built out of 6 by 2 treated studs filled with rock wool and then 50mm of EPS EWI and silicone render to finish. The build up from inside was Plaster skim on 15 mm pink plaster board, Vapour control membrane, 150mm rockwool, 12mm OSB, breather membrane, 50mm EPS insulation, 6mm magply fire protection, basecoat mesh and beading, finally silicone render. Cant remember what the U value worked out to but it was well below the minimum in force at the time. A lot of our radiators are looking for a new job!
Thank you, I have developed a fascination of timber framed buildings the last few years and wondered why they are looked down on so much in the UK, well England only it seems from watching this, when they seemed to offer a lot of benefits. I had already got round the it can’t be our weather conditions as Scandinavian countries and North America have it much harsher.
There's another comment to the effect that we are always damp whereas those countries get dryer winters (because the air is frozen) and dryer summers (less humid heat). Seems to make sense. Obviously this could be overcome but you're then relying on the skill and integrity of the architects, builders and building controllers. By building in brick you're more guaranteed a solid house in future years.
A nice, concise list of the necessary features, thank you. 30 years ago, I used to walk past a small plot of timber framed housing, encased in brickwork. It was in Aberystwyth, a damp(er) part of the UK. Over the weeks, before they were occupied and heated, you could see the wooden window cills rise and fall with the humidity.
My timber frame extension onto brick semi is going up right now. Walls up, roof about to start. Timber cladding on the back and brick slips on the side and front as the council didn't want anything other than brick appearence from the street (even though not a conservation area) which i guess is just an extension of the widespread traditional is best attitude. It has gone up ever so quickly, and the insulation advantage is extreme.
I have to be honest. I'm American, I'm a carpenter, i owned a construction company for 25 years. We bought a 200 year old stone home in france almost 3 years ago for a vacation/ retirement home. Within 6 months we decided to permanently live in france, france isn't perfect, but the us is just failing. I can live in france for what i was paying for health insurance in the us. Anyways, after doing some remodeling and watching a new 6 unit apartment being built, I feel like I've been building with popsicle sticks. Floors, walls, ceilings, it's all concrete, and blocks. The only wood in my house is the 2nd floor and roof framing. There are literally homes in my village that are 500 years old. I'm a carpenter by trade, but i love my stone home.
lol you do realise there are many timber framed buildings many hundreds of years old, have a look around England.
A good explanation for why US houses are mostly timber is that there are a lot more trees per capita but also because houses are larger the cost factor for using masonry goes up massively compared to timber frames and cladding.
Concrete is fine for large apartment blocks, it is good for sound insulation and in fires. There are stone homes throughout Scotland too, but more often than not a newly refurbished one will have timber interior to accomodate insulation, where the external stone acts in the same way as rendered block. I'm not actually sure why you would need concrete on a solid wall building, and I suspect that it would affect the overall breathability of the structure in a negative way. I guess that you're not really comparing like for like here either, because nobody (at volume) is building new builds with stonework. The video is about timber frame versus brick and cavity.
@ricos1497 I know, but moving from America to France and seeing how things are/ have been built, I feel like I've been building with matchsticks. Timber framing (heavy) is still done with pegs, that is a niche way in the states.
@@brianparkhurst1019 where are all the Roman era timber buildings. He He.
I've recently moved into a timber framed property built in the 70s. It was manufactured in Sweden and assembled here in England. It has a lot of timber cladding. I had challenges with finding a mortgage provider but probably insurance was the bigger challenge - the percentage of timber cladding was their main issue and this has resulted in finding a specialist insurer at over twice the price of my previous insurance. I will have more time to shop around next year, any recommendations appreciated, but it makes me think replacing with stone cladding is the answer.
Little did i know that my previous house was also timber framed and I i only realised this through my knowledge of buying the new place. The previous place was mock stone clad.
The 70s house is better insulated than my previous 00s house. There is some room for improvement on windows and doors though so looking to triple glaze.
Much appreciation for your videos and the comparison of brick and block vs 2x4 timber frame. Perhaps you could do a follow up on traditional beam construction and stone builds, together with their modern analogues and options for updating?
I have a ex council Swedish house which was built in 1946. It still has the original stained pine weather boarding and the timber is in good condition. Now thinking of retrofitting on outside to improve insulation.
Thank you. I’d be really interested in seeing this World in Action documentary too. Timber frame will most likely be the route we go down. Primarily due to the costs being that much higher for a SIPs build. Please keep up the work👏👌
No problem, glad you found my video useful
Used to own a Colt house. Timber framed with cedar cladding and cedar roof shingles. All built on a concrete base. Built in the 60s.
Only main difference over a brick house from the same era was regular oiling of the outside woodwork. But in reality no different to painting the outside of the brick and render house.
You shouldn't be painting a brick or render wall.
You can get a morgage no problem in Scotland - I had a timber frame, timber clad house in Shetland with Halifax Building Society, which was no problem, but their in-house insurance company wouldn't touch it, so it has been a bit more expensive to insure (there not being much competition). The type is warm, very robust, standing up well to the strongest winds in Britain, and in Shetland has had far fewer structural problems than concrete block which tends to turn to mush in Shetland's climate!
Aye, the Halifax were a pain in the arse when we got our mortgage with them. My wife opened her account when they were Bank of Scotland, so it was a surprise when they mentioned that timber frame might be an issue. I went on the phone and accused them of being anti-Scottish and other such rants (quoting the figures in the video for the number of timber frames in Scotland), and they came back with an acceptable quote! It's not been a problem since, still have mortgage and insurance through them. It is wholly based on ignorance of Scotland and Scottish buildings that there was an issue. We also had an issue because our builder wasn't part of some bought-and-paid-for industry regulator (NHSBC?), rather we had an independent architects' certification of the build (our house was built to far higher standards than the volume builders, obviously). I think that self-building, or small developers/developments, are extremely harshly treated by a nepotistic building, insurance and banking industry.
My first house which i bought in 1976,was ex local authority built in Northampton around 1970. There were thousands of similar properties on the eastern district mostly brick first floor then timber cladding or tile hanging above. I only lived in it for 5yrs but remember it being warm and felt solid. Some 50 yrs on they're still standing and I've not heard of any issues regarding them. A further point is that concrete block production produces large amount of co2 so timber framing is beneficial in that regard also
I design and build masonry buildings in the north of England, many faced in stone, because only two trades are involved. Blockwork is quick to erect and where space is available you can quickly build a blockwork cavity wall with a fully insulated cavity, leave wall ties projecting, put the roof on and face it with stonework at leisure. battens and plasterboard can be installed internally. Masonry buildings retain their heat and are slow to cool down and the recent dreadful fires in California were in part fuelled by burning timber framed houses.
🙏 Thanks for sharing. I am not a builder, but, at the age of 72, I successfully constructed a timber-frame annexe 92m2 with underground heating, slightly different from the typical studded walls. I used 23 175x175mm good-quality timber pillars to make the basic framework which I am currently wall-studding with 125mm of insulated cavity. Great experience and learning process from learning Autocad Revit, preparing the plans and all the rest including french drains for the entire perimeter of the building. It totally is energy-independent thanks to my self-designed ground-mounted Photovoltaic system with 45kWh battery storage. I love timber as it is warm to the heart, easily recyclable and aesthetically very nice. 🥰
Can you talk more about the different types of pressure treatment there are for woods and why in Norway they use much better pressure treatment
I'm in northern Scotland and most builders around here will simply turn down new builds that aren't timber frame. One of the main reasons is poor weather during construction has a huge effect on the overall timescale for "traditional" builds. Once foundations are done a timber frame house can be wind and watertight in 3-5 days then interior trades can crack on with no delays, meanwhile the masons can do the blockwork and render as the weather allows.
I think galvanised steel framing is the way to go. It doesn't rust or is prone to insect infestation. The problem with timber and the modern cheap fast builds, is the quality of the wood, the care in storing it (keeping it dry and straight so that there is no warping) and making the trusses watertight until the roof is attached.
@@eattherich9215 ChatGPT replies as to why this doesn't happen (and seems to make sense to me):
Tradition: UK homes are traditionally built with brick and masonry, and the workforce is trained in these methods.
Cost: Steel is expensive, both in materials and labour.
Thermal Conductivity: Steel conducts heat, causing insulation issues like cold bridging.
Corrosion Risk: Even galvanised steel can face long-term corrosion in the UK’s damp climate.
Fire Safety: Steel loses strength at high temperatures and needs extra fireproofing.
Environmental Impact: Steel has a higher carbon footprint compared to renewable timber.
Limited Advantages: Steel’s strength isn’t as critical for residential buildings in the UK.
Design Flexibility: Timber is easier to modify and adapt during construction or renovation.
@@eattherich9215 don't think so. A lot of houses in Scotland are timber kit, and built and transported to site, with insulation etc installed in a factory. I don't think that steel offers a lot in that regard. Is insect infestation a big issue in the UK?
@@eattherich9215 Wood quality isn't a problem, all construction timber is dried, graded and treated, and a bit of rain on the roof trusses won't do any harm. Typically they'll be fitted within a week of arriving on site, then sarked and underfelted within a day or two.
As ricos1497 asks, what insect infestation?
Concrete columns and roofs with thermal brick infill is popular here in Italy. But there are builders offering wood construction.
Having lived in northeast Massachusetts, we love timber frame construction. We did a lot of renovations and also DIY construction on our house there -- sturdy and so easy to renovate and repair compared to bricks and concrete. The worst thing, however, is the cedar cladding (aka "siding") on the outside of these USA houses -- very expensive because it's enormous pain to maintain since every board has to be cleaned, scraped/sanded before being painted (or stained). Brick exterior is so much more maintenance-free, and thus cheaper. Vinyl cladding/siding as an alternative in USA is dead ugly to look at, and environmentally toxic to manufacture & dispose of. Cement-board cladding/siding is heavy and also needs periodic painting. No wonder the word painting has the prefix "pain"!!!
The problem is the timber frame is the load bearing part of the build, if water finds its way in, which it eventually will, then the frame will start to deteriorate quickly, totally unseen and with catastrophic consequences. Age is a factor, I’d be worried about the structural integrity of a timber frame after 50 years.
I’ve designed homes in brick veneer construction for over 30 years in Australia. Although it’s starting to change, the vast majority of homes in the cooler states are built with timber frames and clad in various materials, brick being the most common but in recent years rendered foam, aerated concrete and various other materials are being used for cladding. The frames are usually only 90mm think which are adequate for current insulation requirements depending on orientation and location of windows.
Homes in Japan are predominantly timber frame, and many have been around for 100s of years. Most wooden temples are 500 to 1,000 years old with the oldest being 1,300 yrs. The beams and joists are jointed, with wooden dowels or plugs to fix. Earthquake proof is one of the main reasons for using timber.
Ultimately the longevity of any timber-frame house will depend on how well the occupants can keep water (and fire) away from the timber. If they go around damaging the weatherproof and air barriers due to a lack of knowledge as to how to penetrate these correctly when needed, then the building is going to suffer premature failure.
@5:05; this documentary did not, in fact, kill timber frame building in the UK, but it did focus on one particular mass house builder, Barrett Homes (still pretty much building crap homes). In the 26 September 2022 edition of 'Inside housing', a report called 'Timber-frame buildings and cavity fires: the burning question', looked at the September 2019 fire that burnt four storey Richmond House, Worcester Park, South West London, the ground in a matter of minutes and the contributing factors. Timber framing continues to be used and the outbreak of fires is always because of poor construction methods that leaves voids in the cavity walls, thereby allowing fire to spread rapidly.
It is no different here in the US with mass builders that prefer profits over quality. Timber is also a renewable resource compared to concrete which is highly energy consuming that is only second to oil and gas and also the world is running out masonry quality sand.
Fascinating stuff! I had no idea timber framing was so popular in Scotland. It makes good sense as a construction method. The hard part is persuading people to move on from the “bricks and mortar” mindset. Having said that, how well would it cope with the sort of build quality you see on a lot of new houses down here?
That’s hard to answer. Timber kit, which is a prefabricated version of timber frame, could be part of the answer.
I think the bigger picture is that bad workmanship is caused by de-skilling, the retirement crucial, outsourcing and agency working.
@@RealLifeArchitecture I don't think I've seen a "stick build" timber frame done in this part of northern Scotland for decades, they're invariably kits and increasingly at least partially factory fitted with insulation, trunking, conduit, etc. The factory based production of kits allows the use of a semi-skilled workforce whilst improving quality and productivity.
11:09 I think more hybrid options due to timber’s better insulation properties will be the best option for most. 12:47 100% agree, supply chain will have to catchup it will.
Lots of valid points made and it's truly mind-blowing that timber construction is not more widespread given the real cost savings and speed of construction that it offers. That said, Aviva is one of the largest UK insurers. The home insurance that they sell and underwrite expressly excludes timber frame construction. I don't need to tell you how big of a problem something like this is for the construction industry. And in case you thought that maybe regulators can fix this, the insurance industry self-regulates ...
Very interesting, it’s not an area I am knowledgeable on so thank you for sharing.
Aviva do insure timber framed houses, I've been insured through them two or three times in the past 30 years, my last policy with them ended middle of last year.
At 3:48 I would dispute what you say about windows to identify the construction. We live in a block and Fyfe stone construction house and the windows are set back. If someone applies your logic to our house, then they assume ours is timber frame which it is definitely not. You're also saying that 90% of homes are timber frame in Scotland. I would dispute this where Aberdeenshire is concerned. I'm currently renovating and when looking for properties, speaking with local trades etc, the overwhelming number of houses are block & fyfe stone or granite.
I’m an acoustic engineer and run a construction company that specialises in recording studio builds, it is impossible to achieve Low Frequency attenuation from a timber frame home. Yes you can get acceptable dB reduction levels particularly in the mid and upper frequencies, but not below 150Hz without considerable expense that if you had to have low reduction on par with upper frequencies you’d have to go block or concrete etc. plus other attenuations. I’ve done a few cement sheet clad timber frames and that really helps but it’s just not the mass.
are you talking about, what US calls, Light Wood Framing?
In the US,
Timber Framing is 8x8 inches, joined with Mortise and Tenon.
Light Wood Framing is 2x4 inches, joined with Nail Plate and Screw.
2x4 was usual here in Scotland for external walls but 2x6 ( or 45 x 145mm finished size as typically sold } became necessary in the last couple of decades to meet higher insulation standards.
@@mackmonkey1
based on the video title,
i was hoping to see some beautiful, rustic, Timber Frame House or Cabin.
And i was wonders why UK is not ok with it.
@@infinitybeyond6357 I know what you mean, exposed Oak frame houses do get built but it's an expensive option. Very pretty though 🙂
I would always go for block construction for the internal walls. Hard to put it into words but I don't like the hollow feeling of timber frames especially with laminate flooring. Block work built just feels more solid in comparison.
Some block construction houses in England have cement-poured floors, but most have timber joists onto which the wood sub-floor planks are attached. In other words, the flooring in most houses in England is "timber framed" -- so what are you taking about when you say "I don't like the hollow feeling of timber frames especially with laminate flooring"?
@@lanialost1320 It's hard to put into words- but I can definitely feel the difference between a 1930s semi and a new build. Just feels more substantial and the acoustics are very different. An older house has less echo.
@@roystonvasey5471 but new-builds in England will be cavity wall, brick houses? I live in a timber frame, and have lived in solid wall before. My house is new, but built by a small developer, and is highly insulated. We get absolutely battered by the wind. The house feels as solid as any stone built house I've lived in.
@@ricos1497 Most round here are timber framed as in the video. I understand the pros and cons as outlined but if I am sinking my money into a property I want to have a property of substance not something that’s constructed in 3 weeks. Besides new builds are so small and narrow that in some places the living rooms are barely 3-4 mtrs wide.
@@roystonvasey5471 What you seem to be saying, is that you want a well constructed house? I'd argue that a well constructed timber frame is equal to a well constructed block house. I'd also argue that a poorly constructed new build is equally poor in both timber and blockwork, and both suffer from the same size issues. I guess I'm struggling to understand the focus on material rather than quality.
Timber framed construction was heavily used by the various New Towns Authorities in 1970's. 100,000s of homes in Northampton, Corby, Peterborough, Milton Keynes and Telford by the Development Corporations using Midland Housing Consortium (MHC) frames that were prefabricated and delivered to site on the backs of lorries for fixing to prepared foundations. Most timber framed Development Corporation houses were clad in brick with particularly quick completion time. I remember one exercise that P'boro' DC carried out saw a 3 bed detached house erected onto prepared foundations and ready for occupation within 9 days, including all the external brickwork. To my knowledge the majority of the DC homes are still in use today, 50 years on with no issues,
Thank you for sharing. More people should be made aware of this
I’m considering a timber frame house for when I move to France, simply because I want to do a self build project. What interests me is lower construction costs (I would do most of the work myself) and I could have it insulated to the highest standards.
I have a question - do I have to have a concrete foundation or is there any other type of foundation that is suitable?
@@jimh4072 I live in France.. timber framed construction is not how it is done. There are extreme differences in temperature here . Additionally wood boring insects are a serious problem.
Unless you are saving a lot of money why bother? Build with insulated bricks that are available in Europe but rarely used in the UK..
Are CLT houses better than timber frame ones?
Another aspect of timber framed housing that I’ve recently encountered. Building insurance. I live in an 2012 architect designed home near Aberfeldy. Timber framed clad in stone 70% and Siberian larch 30%. The comparison sites and insurance company applications offer external wall construction options of brick, stone, concrete or timber framed with brick. As my house is none of these it limits insurance company options, competition and likely results in higher premiums when risk is no higher.
I had this issue with insurance as well recently with my new property having about 30-40% timber cladding. I had to find a new insurer at short notice and ended up paying double my previous premium.
Same here - same type of property in same area, though ours is clad approx 40% stone/60% Siberian larch. We've just switched house insurers and because of the "non-standard" construction our new insurers had to refer to their underwriters before acceptance at a premium rate higher than for a 'normal' property because of the perceived higher risk. They also make it a condition that we must have an electrical system inspection every 10 years.
NFU insure anything, if you're struggling. Probably more expensive though. (I live in a Colt House, built in the '60s. 100% wood - timber frame and clad in cedar shingles.)
Timber frame components are cut and assembled on jigs in a factory making for higher and controlled accuracy which is not so easy on a site also speed of erection means the roof is on quicker protecting the internal components from the weather where traditional masonry build would see internal timber components such as floor joists being exposed till walls reach roof level
In Southern Africa (Savana region) brick and mortar is waaaay cheaper compared to timber, and cavity walls (insulation issues) are not common . I guess that makes timber timber frames very rear in those areas and also makes roofs one of the most expensive stages in construction
Do you happen to have a video on suitable types of foundations for timber frame homes?
When properly done timber framing is a good solution for building houses. They start to take off here in the Netherlands as well, in the same form as in Scotland, with a brick outer leaf or brick slip covering to maintain the traditional look. But in my eyes there would be nothing wrong with a good metal, wood or composite cladding, just not the awful UPVC which is used in the US so much.
When providing for stud walls that are a minimum of 8" deep a superb insulation value can be obtained which can reach passive house standards, I have seen timber houses premanufactured in Switzerland which had 12" thick insulation.
Funny is the fact that the single most widespread building methods in the Netherlands is considered non standard in the UK, that is premanufactured concrete elements.
The wood that you're using is not correctly pressure treated there is different grades
I don't think anyone would deny that it's possible to build a timber frame house with great durability and safety but I think the issue is that a lot of people don't trust the house builders to actually do it properly or a previous owner to not have made modifications that compromise it. I wouldn't speculate on whether or not it's representative but we've all seen the videos of that Welsh guy who does inspections pulling fake weep vents out of the walls. If they're doing that kind of thing with the parts of the house we can see how is anyone to trust that all the membranes and barriers are installed correctly?
You make a good point. My own view is that builders should be regulated and required to carry out annual training. Thats how it is for architects, so why shouldn’t it be the same for those who carry out the work.
😊bit late to be asking this question they have been building them for decades.
I like timber frame now the cavity requirement for block/brick is 150mm, makes extensions onto existing end up with a staggered internal wall line and it looks awful - Timber frame removes that need. That said the way we do our vapour barriers in the UK for wooden frame is crap and I've come across too many new builds that have mold issues because we put an internal vapour barrier into our timber framed buildings when our climate is no longer what it was 20 years ago.
Surprised you didn't mention the tudor timber frame houses from 500-600 years ago!
Still a lot standing strong.
If/when I do a self build i would choose a timber frame construction. I enjoy working with wood.
One negative is the modern fast groun softwood is rubbish quality compared to the wood they used to use.
My issue with timber framed homes in Scotland is that you have a cavity which SHOLUD be sealed but is IMPOSSIBLE to insulate. I have a nice 20 year old home buit to a "4 inch kit" standard, with nice decorative stone exterior. I have a 10cm waste of valuable space between the external 10cm thick stone and the outer face of the timber frame. Insulation in those days will be poorly fitted with no attention to detail. It will be sagged and ineffective. At least building regs have adbanced to "6 inch kit" standard but really 8 inches is needed in Scotland. Meanwhile, any form of after-the-fact wall insulation involves taking apart the insde of the house on all exterior walls, or removing the decorative exterior to fit external insulation. Its a dead end road that home-owners are stuck with in all timer frame houses in terms of permanently elevated heatibg costs, without EXTREME cost and inconvenience. In contrast, double block or brick and block construction is easy and inexpensive to insulate either during construction or after the fact. Building regs need to ban timber frames from an enery effficency standpoint or REQUIRE 8 inches of EXTERNAL insulation, with internal interstitial insulation optional.
Your crystal ball wont be too far off, a good number of the national house builders have already invested in timber frame manufacturing plants to help them keep up with current demand and I expect to trial and move towards the "new" technology. There has been housing sites with half traditional and half timber frame going on for years. To me it seems that there are issues delivering the demand with traditional construction and there's no option but to add timber frame. For full disclosure, I'm a timber frame designer so I'm biased
Thank you for sharing. With a larger timber frame industry in the UK, it will help bring costs down for everyone.
thank you! very informative.
Glad it was helpful!
Why not build more reinforced concrete blocks of flats? Isn't high rise the so needed affordable housing?
Timber Frame, the clue is in the name!! I am planning a self build in central Scotland in the next few years, I am pretty set on the timber frame route on the following reasons,
Better straightness and accuracy of walls due to being factory built. Not saying brickies can’t build straight walls but they are hard to come by, proper ones that is.
Superior insulation abilities which is a big thing these days. Insulation can be inbuilt at the factory saving site time and risk of errors.
Service cavities can be built on to maintain the insulation values allowing cables and pipes to be run in the walls.
My biggest fear of this self build is trying to find a proper builder that can do the bits I can’t. I served my time as an electrician in the early nineties, we had skilled people then who could build a straight wall and plaster it flat. Joiners who could make things from stock. Nowadays it’s all posers with every tool imaginable wrapped up in ppe cluelessly going forward.
i think rammed reinforced earth also needs to become more common in the uk. We've got plenty of dirt :P it wont rot, wont burn, can't be infested, acts as a thermal mass to regulate temperature, and most importantly i think is the benefit of it being much easier to make air tight. you know a solid slab is air tight, but a timber and masonry build there could be gaps all over the place. I really think its the direction construction should have gone. we used to build with clay/dirt and straw, and ram it together. After concrete was invented and firing clay bricks started to be mass produced, rather than realising we could use the cement to reinforce the way we already built, we abandoned it entirely in favour of either pure clay bricks, or pure concrete.
Though the one main issue seems to be the method. theres not really been a well developed and fast way to create rammed earth. even the biggest scale builders i've seen using it have guys mix up a batch, wheel barrow it into the form, and then theres a guy standing in forms with a pneumatic tamper who has to whack it all down, and the result is an inconsistent compression thats visible from the outside.
From doing some small scale test theres ways to ensure a more consistent finish on the outside face, but the problem is scale. theres no large machines built specifically for ramming earth, but i think if there was it'd be a lot more practical than wheel barrows and hand ramming. But as you say, resistance to new methods is just due to infrastructure. Those machines dont exist, someone would have to invent them, and so rammed earth is only built by specialist builders and self builders.
Excellent informative video.
Glad it was helpful!
Is brick/block cladding cheaper than timber, metal or other materials?
Would it be any cheaper to do away with block exterior? Are you aware of any in Scotland?
Yes, cladding would reduce costs. The foundations and wall would be thinner. Construction time reduced. Lots of options to choose from.
In the states everything is coad or sided as they call it in hardy plank. Its cement board that looks like wood. Comes in loads of colour combinations and can look nice .
What about the cost? Quicker would suggest it also cheaper to build with timber frame?
True but most of reason for high prices for new house in the UK is down to the cost of land.
just after a quick look i couldn't really find anything. unfortunately theres so many episodes of world in action (over a thousand) that it'd be unlikely anyone has ripped that many vhs'. Though one interesting thing i noticed in a synopsis of the episode, is they describe it as "Investigates the building practices of one of the UK's largest house builders 'Barrett Homes' and whether their quickly built timber frame system houses are suffering quality issues"
As i live in a barrett house i feel more than qualified to say the issue is barrett, not the construction method. Sound slike the documentary needed to be more specific. Maybe it would have been barrett that went away and not timber construction.
It is not what timber framing normally called in US and Canada, it is cheap stick construction as it uses standardized pre-cut lumber as opposed to heavy timbers (usually 7+ inch thick). There is also a similar beam-and-post building technique, which is closer to timber framing but uses steel plates and not tenon and mortise connections.
What about buildings insurance for timber frame homes?
It can be quite a bit higher to have a timber framed and timber clad house insured vs timber framed, brick or block clad. I moved locally within Shetland to the former from the latter and my costs jumped from about £250 to £400 back in 2013. In Scotland I don't really see a justification for that - almost all fires are going to originate inside from electrical faults, cooking or careless candles - I think it is just the lack of competition. Shopping around in subsequent years I got a better deel which took it back closer to parity, but it was a struggle to get a fair quote.
Australians call them brick veneer, but they never used to insulate them.
very interesting, thank you.
Timber framed houses might be more popular in England if that discount in building cost compared to a solid masonry house carried through to a lower retail price to the end customer, it doesn't so why would you pay the same money for a large shed over a brick house?
More competition is needed to reduce prices
We're going timber framed for our extension. I've lived in one timber framed home and was the most quiet and comfy. Good history of timber framed homes where I am which is even better.
Anyway you cannot grow concrete!
So true!
A house made of fast grown pine that's not correctly pressure treated
The sad fact is, that there are well built (quality materials etc), timber frame houses and poorly built (poor quality materials etc) timber frame houses. The Scandinavian countries, have been building these types of houses for centuries and they last. The skills have been passed down to the next generation of builders. In England, it is still a relatively new and untrusted way of building. The skills are simply not there. Neither is the quality.
The BBC did a Panorama show called 'Transplant: Are the donors really dead'. Stopped people from being organ donors for years. Strangely, this documentary has also disappeared.
Timber Frame can last with proper maintenance, but how about the maintenance?
I’m pretty sure that just involves living in the building, keeping it warm and ventilated
You do seem to defend timber a lot. It can't burn down? It can't rot? Very brave words. You must know the reality is that buildings are never perfect and builders are not perfect and owners do bad things to buildings. These factors which I bet will happen over 100yrs of a house will impact the quality of the timber. I.e. damp. One little mistake and it can have a big impact. You should at least say there is a greater risk to the structural integrity over 100yrs to timber than brick as the risk from damp and fire is higher. Bricks can get damp and dry out, they're quite forgiving. What life expectancy would you genuinely give a timber house vs a brick house? People widely question if houses in the US will last 30yrs. We have a history of houses lasting hundreds of years.
Sod the local suppliers. We're going to import everything because it is cheaper and higher quality. We won't be taking their advice either. As for workmen, well we get them in directly. I also hear local contractors make a pig's ear of heat pump installations. The main reasons for these decisions is to cut costs and get more bang for your bucks.
I thought this was going to be timber versus steel. Lol. Aussie here.
We're supposed to be building homes for the future not wooden temporary sheds
Modern timber frames are just sheds.
Besides, an inside wall that is only plasterboard is useless, tacky, to screw things to.
Land prices do NOT rise due to limited supply. Houses are bid up to the max people 'can' pay. Then all that money gets used up on the new builds. All that is left over, large or small, is the land price as it is at the end of the chain. The price of houses does not alter due to building costs. If new houses were made cheaper no one would sell them cheaper!
Getting insurance on timber frame is easy. Anyone will take your money. But will they pay out any claim or underwrite it that timber frame isn't covered?
Great video. What do you think of SIPS panel construction?
I haven’t used it but did consider it for a couple of projects. I mostly c build extensions and it places serious limits on the design compared with timber frame
Dont do it, some prick decided to reinvent the wheel and make money out of it, As a ball park measure it will add 10 to 15% cost over timber frame costs. The only tangeable benifit that is pushed for it is that it is suposedly easier to achieve air tighness with a sips pannel, but as long as you get your membrane overlap and sealing correct with timber frame then that disapears. as a self builder, essentially you take a task that you can do yourself, the insulationg and membrane fitting away and hand it to the manufacture, so the cost difference is in reality greater if you were going to insulate the build yourself. Additionally any errors in timber frame are more easily corrected on site by any half decent chippie. but this isnt consistently the case for sips, where there is a high probability that you will need a replacmentr sips pannel manufactured with the lead time and consequent delays that that incurs, that to can add costs, as it may impact the date that you achieve weather tightness, affecting the following trades. Additionally SIPs pannels tend to be a little heavier than the equlivalent timber frame, so a bit more taxing to handle.
Word of caution “ 3 little pigs “
Thinking of buying a house that is '80s timber frame and brick clad but it shows no signs of insulation having been upgraded(loft minimal).
Would i be right in the best way would be to remove plasterboard and re-insulate,vapour barrier and plasterboard? Or were they sufficiently insulated then?
I didn't hear anything about sound insulation...
Was that meant to be a pun?
In all seriousness the Scottish government publish detailed technical guidance on how to achieve acoustic separation between properties built using timber frame. The construction methods are well understood for party walls and separating floors.
All that matters is what the mortgage insurers say…
I presume brick cladding on timber frame costs more than a wood or metal exterior?
Maybe dont tell me. I dont really like the look of the exteriors on most new Scottish houses, id like ut even less if I knew it also cost more...
I have no issue with timber frames, when done well. Alot of my criticism is based on American methods, that use cheap fast grown wood, built with cheap methods and cladded in paper mache. Also in terms of no widespread issues in North America, i don't think you've researched much on modern matchstick framed houses in America.
Standard UK timber frame construction methods have evolved from US methods. Ours seem to more robust.
Yeah we still put proper cladding and roofs on our homes, for now.
The images your showing are stick frames? Timber frames uses few large beems like traditional medieval construction
They are called timer framed in the UK, after all they are framed with timber.
Banks don't like non standard. Which leaves traditional builds. If you can't get a mortgage , it's not worth a wnk
Only a problem if the manufacturer of the timber cannot be determined.
Timber framed with a brick exterior is not exactly specialist.
We've had timber framed buildings in the UK for years - they're called beach huts 🙄
D.E.W. WEAPON KINDLE