steel building house revisited

Forgive me but I am planning a steel frame house in the future and disagree
with some of your points. Being a welder steel is my material so to speak
and I know what can be done.

> 1. Energy efficiency - metal buildings are not efficient.

I dont see how they are much less efficient (assuming you are talking
heating etc) especially with modern insulations.

> 2. Modifications at some later date are more difficult.

Not a chance if anything they would be easier. if you want to add more floor
space for example you just unbolt one side of the house and add what you
want to add. assuming the planning was done properly to allow this without
undue hassle.

> 3. Egress - each bedroom or sleeping room must have 2 exits.

no different from any other house. again its all down to design.

> 4. Plumbing and wiring are more difficult than with stud construction.

Why? Its not that much harder to drill through steel than wood. probably
easier because you would be drilling a hole through, what 8mm? 10mm? got to
be better than drilling though 4 or 5 inches of wood and rubber grommets
around any holes would solve any chaffing problems.

> 5. Resale value - you or your family will need to sell the building

> sometime.

maybe at the moment people dont want steel frame houses but who knows what
the future will bring. someday people may want to buy a nostalgic steel
frame house when they are replaced by some other space age fibreglass.

Posted by Bob Morrison on October 5, 2006, 12:52 pm

In a previous post brianlanning wrote...

> How can I say this? I've made it my mission in life to ignore people

> who tell me I can't do things.

Okay! Don't take my advice. I don't care.

I do structural design on perhaps 20 houses per year and have done so for
more than 30 years. But I'm no expert.

If you choose to build a house that has very little resale value in the
future then that's your choice. I'm most certainly not going to stop you.

If you really want inexpensive, why not buy a bunch of shipping
containers, put them in a stack and cut a few holes for windows and doors.
That, in effect, is what you are proposing.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

Posted by brianlanning on October 5, 2006, 2:10 pm

Bob Morrison wrote:

> I do structural design on perhaps 20 houses per year and have done so for

> more than 30 years. But I'm no expert.

You're like the Ford dealer telling me that Ford is the best while the
Checy dealer tells me that Chevy is the best. You don't exactly have
an unbiased opinion. You're promoting the methods and materials that
are tried and true in your industry. It's easy and comfortable for you
because that's what you know. It's not bad advice, and I'm sure you
know what you're talking about. But it doesn't help me explore my
ideas.

> If you choose to build a house that has very little resale value in the

> future then that's your choice. I'm most certainly not going to stop you.

That's debatable. It depends on a lot of variables. If you watch some
of these show that talk about unusual houses, you'll see some really
strange stuff. A lot of people would never be caught dead in some of
those houses. But others would like it a lot. So the market isn't
really uniform. I guess you have to find the right buyer. In a normal
tract house, everyone agrees that they're normal. So the people
looking for a normal house, which is most people, would value that
house. We don't. Some of the houses on these shows are really
strange, yet are valued quite high. You can't just make a summary
judgement about the value of a house you've never seen simply because
it doesn't sound like something you'd want to live in, or look like the
buildings you work on.

> If you really want inexpensive, why not buy a bunch of shipping

> containers, put them in a stack and cut a few holes for windows and doors.

> That, in effect, is what you are proposing.

You saw that show too? :-) Actually, we considered that. We deciced
against it because of the inflexability of the layout. Every room
would be shaped like a shipping container. We didn't want to be
constrained that way. It's a good idea though.

I actually considered buying four used single-wide trailers and
arranging them in a square with a deck and courtyard connecting them.
We would gut an entire trailer and make it one big kitchen and dining
room, another for just bedrooms, and so on. The build quality of the
trailers made us turn this one down. The shipping containers would
work in this arrangement also. :-)

brian

Posted by Bob Morrison on October 5, 2006, 3:56 pm

In a previous post brianlanning wrote...

> You're like the Ford dealer telling me that Ford is the best while the

> Checy dealer tells me that Chevy is the best. You don't exactly have

> an unbiased opinion. You're promoting the methods and materials that

> are tried and true in your industry. It's easy and comfortable for you

> because that's what you know. It's not bad advice, and I'm sure you

> know what you're talking about. But it doesn't help me explore my

> ideas.

I also know metal buildings and all their attendant problems.

I'm not telling not to use a metal building for the shell of your house.
I'm simply trying to point out that it won't be as easy or as inexpensive
as you seem to think. If it were, more people would be doing it.

As I said before, don't take my advice. I don't care if you do or you
don't. Just don't complain that it doesn't match your pre-conceived
notions about what you want to do. If you have your mind already made up,
then don't ask for advice. It's that simple.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

Posted by solarsell on October 5, 2006, 8:43 pm