Traditional basement walls are made from masonry materials, which typically include concrete or stone. The masonry materials may be cement blocks or poured concrete. A 2″ foam insulation barrier is commonly placed on the outside of the foundation wall. A vapor and/or water barrier is thereafter placed over the insulation. Then the exterior space may be back filled with crushed stone, gravel or sand. The above ground back fill is then grade downwardly away from the building.
Masonry foundation walls are typically cold in the winter. Often the basement and crawl spaces have a musty odor as moisture can wick-up through the cement walls from below. Mildew, leakage and dampness are common and problematic for masonry foundation walls in buildings. Finishing the basement of a building with masonry walls is difficult and expensive. Egress doors, windows and escape exits require cutting and extraction of the masonry walls. Inside framed wood walls with insulation and a moisture barrier are also common, but expensive.
Pressure-treated wood was developed in the 1960s. Permanent foundation wood used in foundations is treated by steam-impregnating it with a chemical called CCA (chromated copper arsenate) at a concentration of at least 0.6 pounds of chemical per cubic foot of wood so that the chemical penetrates deep into the core of the wood. The copper part of the compound is toxic to fungus, mold and bacteria, while the arsenate is toxic to pests like carpenter ants and termites. Other pressure and non-pressure treatment options include: borates, amommiacal copper quantenary (ACQ) and pentachlorophenols. Other wood treatments are in development and expected to enter the marketplace in time. With these advances, it has become possible for wood to be used in foundation walls without being prohibitively vulnerable to damage from insects and moisture. By the 1070s, permanent wood foundations (PWF) gained acceptance.
Long-term durability is attainable with a sound wood foundation that is properly constructed. When wood foundations fail, the case is almost always due to poor construction techniques. Strength is achieved by following guidelines laid out in wood foundation manuals. The deeper into the ground, the stronger the wall needs to be. Choice of 2×6″, 2×8″ or 2×10″ wall studs must be made correctly along with stud spacing and sheathing thickness. Ground pressure at the bottom of the foundation wall is resisted by the floor slab. Ground pressure at the top portion of the foundation wall is resisted because the foundation wall is anchored to the building floor system with hangers and clips. The intermediate ground pressure is resisted by proper selection of dimensioned wall studs, center-to-center stud proper spacing and outer sheathing thickness. Usually the sheathing is sealed with caulk and wrapped to cover the sheathing and header with an overlapping 6 mil polyethylene film and adhesively sealed to the sheathing and header. All water is typically filtered through the backfill, footings, and fill underneath the slab where the water is collected and pumped away by a sump pump or drained to the above ground if the building is built on a hill. Wood foundation costs are cheaper than concrete block or poured walls. Inside finishing is much easier and cheaper because you are finishing a stud wall.
Referring to prior art
Below the footing plates 14 is a gravel base and footings 22 on top of which is placed a bottom polyurethane moisture barrier 24 that extends throughout the interior space of the foundation. Thereafter a floor slab 26 is poured and allowed to cure. Insulation 28 is placed or sprayed between the wood foundation wall studs 12 that consist of insulative materials which might be glass fiber, mineral wool, cellulose or sprayed polyurethane foam. A polyethylene moisture barrier film (not shown) is secured over the interior of the foundation wall studs 12. Drywall (not shown) is then secured to the inside of the wood foundation wall studs 12. Graded back fill 34 then fills in the exterior space on the outside of the foundation wall 10. Above ground floor joists 31 are supported by the foundation walls 10 upon which is secured floor panels 30 to complete floors 32. For purposes here, the first above ground floor 32 is supported by floor joists 31 which may be 2″×6″, 2″×8″, 2″×10″ or 2″×12″ depending upon the floor support requirements.
Concerning above the ground walls, Applicant's prior U.S. Pat. Nos. 9,677,264 and 9,783,985 thoroughly discuss and show prior building walls and their shortcomings. In these patents Applicant discloses and claims composite thermal break wood studs with rigid insulation, mechanical fasteners and wall framing systems.
A composite reinforced, optionally treated, wood stud for permanent wood foundations, above ground walls, floor joists, vertical support columns and headers for commercial and residential buildings has a first lumber section having a width and a depth and a second lumber section inverted with respect to the first lumber section having a width and a depth. A plurality of adjacent, aligned in a longitudinal row, mechanical fastening dowels angularly pass through the depth of the first lumber section and pass substantially through the width of the second lumber section. The dowels maintain a spatial relationship between the first and second lumber sections. The angularity of the dowels alternate vertically oppositely between adjacent dowels. From an end view, the dowels may alternate in a cant relationship with adjacent dowels in a left and right manner.
A principal object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud may dimensionally be made 5″ to 12′ deep or more. Width is contemplated to range from 2″ to 4″ wide. Top and bottom plates would be dimensioned to 2×6″, 2×8″, 2×10″, 2×12″, etc. The height ranges could be 8′ to 24′ tall.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that by burrowing the dowels into the width W of the second lumber section, which is inverted to the first lumber section (90°), the composite wall stud has been incredibly stiffened because there is more dowel in the second lumber section hole increasing the surface area for adhesive securement. By way of example, a pencil held by the fingertips of both hand easily bends. If you hold the pencil with both hands, you cannot bend the pencil.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite reinforced stud having a dimension of 5½″ deep is 1.5 times stronger than a 2″×6″ traditional one piece all wood stud in all aspects including in floor applications.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud has incredible vertical or axial compression strength due the first and second lumber sections being inverted in relation to each other and the dowels are burrowed deeper into the second lumber section.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud can be used up to 24′ tall.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud provides a 95.5% complete thermal break through the wall assembly if used with conventional 2″×6″ lumber for top and bottom plates.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud has a R Value anywhere from 10.51 to 16.51 depending on insulation type used in the application.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud allows the builder to choose his own R Value by choosing what type of insulation is used to insulate the cavity between the composite wall studs.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud provides an increase in thermal efficiency through the framing members of 158% to 240%.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud will carry 3,660 pounds of axial load if used on a #2 spruce-pine-fur (spf) plate or up to 5,600 pounds if used with an laminated strand lumber (LSL) or laminated veneer lumber (LVL) plate.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the three-layer joined composite stud made into a column or header would be about 6″×6″ and only cost about $6 a foot. The column or header 90 of the present invention would hold 1150 psi, with only 6 pieces of wood 2″×3″ or 6″×1.5″×2.5″=22.5 sq in×1150 psi=25,875 pounds.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud can be used with 24″ on center framing because of the structural gains due to the increase in axial compression strength.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that the composite wall stud is that there is only a modest increase in building costs associated with purchase and use of the composite stud of $200 to $400 USD depending on shipping costs and retail markup (calculated based upon the North American US and Canadian Government statistics for basic one story house to be 2,450 square feet and has a 9′ wall height).
Another object and advantage of the present invention, more specifically, is that the composite wall stud in the North American basic house will have only a $0.15 increase per square foot of floor space to gain a 13% increase in energy efficiency in the wall assembly amounting to only a $350 cost increase.
Another object and advantage of the present invention is that a dimensioned composite stud of #2 pine 2″×6″ and 8′ long without any insulation with 2,500 pounds of shear pressure along its middle length only deflects only ½″ making the composite stud twice as shear resistant or stiff as a #2 pine 2″×6″ and 8′ long thereby having incredible shear strength along it length. This fact makes the composite stud ideal for wood found walls.
The composite reinforced, optionally treated, wood stud 50 of the present invention is used for permanent wood foundations 52, above ground walls 68, floor joists 82, vertical support columns or headers 90 and other undefined product replacements. Wood is defined as any wood or lumber product and any wood derivative composite product. Whereby the definition of “wood derivative” is defined as: a “New product that results from modifying an existing product, and which has different properties than those of the product it is derived from.” Lumber, timber, wood, or wood derivative, includes any and all structural composite lumber products, such as laminated strand lumber, LSL, as it is commonly coined when ordering these products. This would include structural composite lumber (SCL), which includes laminated veneer lumber (LVL), parallel strand lumber (PSL), laminated strand lumber (LSL), finger-jointed lumber and oriented strand lumber (OSL). Nanocellulose materials, such as cellulose nanocrystals (CNC), would be included in this group. These composite lumbers are of a family of engineered wood products created by layering dried and graded wood veneers, strands or flakes with moisture resistant adhesive into blocks of material known as billets, which are subsequently re-sawn into specified sizes. In SCL billets, the grain of each layer of veneer or flakes runs primarily in the same direction. The resulting products out-perform conventional lumber when either face- or edge-loaded. SCL is a solid, highly predictable, and uniform engineered wood product that is sawn to consistent sizes and is virtually free from warping and splitting.
Referring to
The wall stud 50 includes mechanical fasteners 58 which are suitably wood dowels 58 (#2 pine) ideally 11/16″ to 1½″ to match holes H. For smaller wall studs 50, the holes H are ideally ⅜″. The dowels 58 are run through an abrader device to create a helical outer grooved surface 60 which aids in retaining glue 62 on the outer surface of dowels 58. The assembly the composite wood stud 50 includes the step of wood glue 62 being coated on the inside surfaces of the angled holes H. Wood glues 62 choices might include polymethylene polyphenyl isocyanate or penta-NA diethylenetriamine pentaacetate obtainable from Ashland of Columbus, Ohio under the trademark Isoset™. Next, the dowels 180 are then pounded into and through the first lumber section 54 holes H and substantially into the second lumber section 56 holes H. Thereafter, sawing, sanding or grinding will make the dowels 58 flush with the wood section 54. Dowels 58 can also suitably be made of plastic, wood composite or man-made materials. By burrowing the dowels 58 deep into the width W of the second lumber section 56, there is more affective surface area for adhesive along the dowels 58, and thereby, the composite wood stud 50 has been incredibly stiffened.
The composite reinforced treated wood stud 50 may be used to construct a permanent composite reinforced, treated or not treated, wood foundation walls 52, exterior above ground, treated or not, wood walls. 68, floors 80 and vertical support columns and headers 90.
Referring to
Building 66 has a permanent wood foundation walls 52 made out of composite wood studs 50. The first lumber section 54 may be oriented inwardly or outwardly (as seen in
Determining the center-to-center vertical wall stud 50, made with 2″×3″ lumber sections 54 and 56, the spacing is dependent upon how deep the wood foundation wall 52 is into the ground and the type of soil, back fill material and water gradients around the building 66. Additionally, the ability of the composite stud 50 to hold an axial compression loads without crushing the header or footing plates 14 and 16 is important to consider. The plates 14 and 16 can hold roughly 3,300 pounds of load without crushing a #2 spruce, pine or fur material; or 5,600 pounds if the plate material is made from LSL or LVL. If the building 66 is 3 stories in height and is in a snow load area, the loads on the top floor may be 1,000 pounds per foot of wall just to hold up the roof. But the second floor will have to hold up the third floor and the roof load, so 2,000 pound per foot load is to be considered. So the top floor could have be 24″ on center and the middle floor could be at 16″ on center, and the bottom floor (foundation floor walls 52) could be at 12″ on center, just based on crushing the plates. One has to know the loads of every floor and roof in order to calculate spacing and materials to be used. The composite stud 50 is able to hold up to 8,600 pounds per foot load if the composite wood stud 50 is placed on steel or concrete plates 14 and 16. So the most the composite stud 50 can hold is based on the ability of the header and footing plates 14 and 16 to not crush. This is why LSL or LVL material plates 14 and 16 are recommended. It the composite wood stud 50 is made with 2″×4″ lumber sections 54 and 56, the composite wood stud 50 would be able to hold up to 12,000 pounds per foot load.
Building 66 is built on a gravel base or concrete footing 22 over which is covered with 6-mil polyurethane sheeting or film 24. After the foundation walls 52 are built, then the basement floor slab 26 is poured with in the basement space bounded by the permanent wood foundation walls 52. The basement floor slab 26 holds the bottom portions of the permanent wood foundation walls 52 from moving inward under the force of the back fill 34 and water. The plywood strip or plank 36 is attached to protect the poly film 36 above ground. Graded back till 34 and top soil is then moved into place. Interior insulation 40 may be placed or blown in place between foundation wall 52 composite studs 50. Afterwhich, another 6-mil poly moisture barrier film 24 is secured to studs 50. The sheet rock 44 may next be fastened to the interior of the foundation wall 52.
Building 66 also has a permanent exterior above ground walls 68 made from treated or untreated composite reinforced wood studs 50 that include, as described above, the first lumber section 54 with its dimensional width W and its dimensional depth D and the second lumber section 56 with its dimensional width W and its dimensional depth D. A plurality of alternating holes H pass through the depth D of the first lumber section 54 and through the width W of the second lumber section 56 along the length arrow L of the wood stud 50 in alternating fashion. The wall composite studs 50 of exterior above ground walls 68 includes angular adjacent mechanical fasteners or dowels 58 that are pounded into and glued into holes H. The composite wood studs 50 are fastened at their bottoms to footer plates 14 and at their top to header plates 16. The studs 50 are spaced vertically center-to-enter 24″ apart. Exterior treated wall sheathing 72 is mounded to the outside of the exterior wall 68. Exterior insulation may be added at this point if desired or required by ordinance. Six-mil poly film 76 is then wrapped to cover in overlapping fashion the exterior sheathing 72 (and insulation if present), header and glued thereat. Interior insulation 40 may be placed or blown in place between foundation wall 52 composite studs 50. Afterwhich, another 6-mil poly moisture barrier film 24 is secured to the interior side of composite studs 50 and the sheet rock 44 may next be fastened to the interior of the above ground exterior wall 68.
Building 66 also has interior above ground floors 80 made from treated or untreated composite reinforced wood studs 50 that include, as described above, the first lumber section 54 with its dimensional width W and its dimensional depth D and the second lumber section 56 with its dimensional width W and its dimensional depth D. A plurality of alternating holes H pass through the depth D of the first lumber section 54 and through the width W of the second lumber section 56 along the length arrow L of the wood stud 50 in alternating fashion. The widest portion of wood studs 50 is first lumber section 54. The first lumber section 54 may be oriented up or down depending on the desired application and where the most screw or nail surface area is desired. Wood studs 50 are used as floor joists 82 that support floor boards 84 from below. The composite studs 50 for floors 80 are spaced horizontally center-to-enter 24″ apart.
Referring to
Referring to
The closest competitor to this composite wood stud vertical column or header 90 is a PSL parallel strand lumber (PSL) column. A 6″×6″ PSL column costs $18.88 a foot today and the three-layer joined composite stud made into a column or header 90 would be about the same size and run about $6 a foot. The PSL column can hold a lot of weight, about 2000 psi (pounds per square inch). But a PSL column has 5.25″×5.25″=29.1 sq inches of area×2000 psi=58,000 pounds of vertical support. The column or header 90 of the present invention would hold 1150 psi, with only 6 pieces of wood 2″×3″ or 6″×1.5″×2.5″=22.5 sq in×1150 psi=25,875 pounds.
Energy efficiencies are achieved by using the composite reinforced treated, or untreated, wood stud 50 as shown in Table 2 below:
Lineal feet of standard 2″×6″ studs are saved when using the composite wood stud 50 according to Table 3 below:
The above embodiments are for illustrative purposes and the scope of this invention is described in the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4224774 | Petersen | Sep 1980 | A |
4329827 | Thorn | May 1982 | A |
4578909 | Henley et al. | Apr 1986 | A |
4578914 | Staples | Apr 1986 | A |
4671032 | Reynolds | Jun 1987 | A |
4720948 | Henley et al. | Jan 1988 | A |
4852310 | Henley et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4852322 | McDermid | Aug 1989 | A |
4937122 | Talbert | Jun 1990 | A |
5209036 | Cancilliari | May 1993 | A |
5609006 | Boyer | Mar 1997 | A |
5617693 | Hefner | Apr 1997 | A |
5720144 | Knudson et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
6125608 | Charlson | Oct 2000 | A |
7574837 | Hagen, Jr. et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7743578 | Edmondson | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7866112 | Edmondson | Jan 2011 | B2 |
8424266 | Edmondson | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8516778 | Wilkens | Aug 2013 | B1 |
8820034 | Watts | Sep 2014 | B1 |
9103113 | Lockhart | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9604428 | Walker | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9677264 | Iverson | Jun 2017 | B2 |
20050050847 | Lott | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050183367 | Lembo | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060236652 | Kismarton | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060254197 | Tiberi et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070130866 | Lott | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070227095 | Hubbe | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070283661 | Daniels | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080245030 | Sieber | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20100037542 | Tiberi et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100236172 | Wirth | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100300037 | Turner | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110107693 | Haskell | May 2011 | A1 |
20110239573 | Lockhart | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20120011793 | Clark et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120079776 | Beattie | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20160289968 | De Waal | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160356044 | Thompson | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170247883 | Iverson | Aug 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1705305 | Sep 2006 | EP |
2014197972 | Dec 2014 | WO |
2017011121 | Jan 2017 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Betzwood Associated PC, “5 Proven Ways to Optimize Framing,” http://www.betzwood.com/2012/08/09/optimize-framing/, pp. 1-7. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion of PCT/US2016/037357, dated Sep. 8, 2016. |