Permanent Wooden Foundation?
David Swanger
My wife and I recently looked at a house for sale. It is a nice house but
it has a wooden foundation! I commented about this to the realtor and she
gave me a pamphlet from a group named the "Home Builder's Institute". The
pamphlet discusses Permanent Wood Foundation Systems (PWF) and claims that
if you use correctly treated wood, a PWF should conservatively last 120
years. Of course, this technology doesn't seem to be that old. The
builder is the seller and is a professor of Building Science at a local
university.
This foundation makes me nervous. Are my feelings justified or am
I worrying for nothing? I live in humid area.
I would like to hear from anyone who has experience with this. Thanks for
any help you can send.
--
David Swanger
Division of University Computing
Auburn University, Alabama
swa...@mail.auburn.edu
(p.s., Do termites like treated lumber?)
Peter Narsavage
wood pilings to support buildings. It is a sound idea, so long as it is
done correctly. The worst situation for wood foundations is when the wood
will be allowed to continuously be soaked and dry out, such as near a
fluctuating river. This will eventually rot any wood, no matter how well
treated it is.
-Peter
--
Peter Narsavage Instant gratification just
pete...@freenet.columbus.oh.us isn't fast enough anymore.
danh...@millcomm.com
>
>My wife and I recently looked at a house for sale. It is a nice house but
>it has a wooden foundation! I commented about this to the realtor and she
>gave me a pamphlet from a group named the "Home Builder's Institute". The
>pamphlet discusses Permanent Wood Foundation Systems (PWF) and claims that
>if you use correctly treated wood, a PWF should conservatively last 120
>years. Of course, this technology doesn't seem to be that old. The
>builder is the seller and is a professor of Building Science at a local
>university.
>
>This foundation makes me nervous. Are my feelings justified or am
>I worrying for nothing? I live in humid area.
>
>I would like to hear from anyone who has experience with this. Thanks for
>any help you can send.
No personal experience, but my brother-in-law (an architect) tells me that
it is a good technology when installed according to PWF specs. It is warmer
and actually dryer than the typical masonary foundation. And, no, the
termites shouldn't bother it -- the wood used in a PWF is foundation-grade
treated lumber -- about twice as heavily treated as standard treated lumber.
Dan Hicks
Joseph Kral
David Swanger <swa...@mail.auburn.edu> wrote:
>
>My wife and I recently looked at a house for sale. It is a nice house but
>it has a wooden foundation! I commented about this to the realtor and she
>gave me a pamphlet from a group named the "Home Builder's Institute". The
>pamphlet discusses Permanent Wood Foundation Systems (PWF) and claims that
>if you use correctly treated wood, a PWF should conservatively last 120
>years. Of course, this technology doesn't seem to be that old. The
>builder is the seller and is a professor of Building Science at a local
>university.
>
>This foundation makes me nervous. Are my feelings justified or am
>I worrying for nothing? I live in humid area.
>
>I would like to hear from anyone who has experience with this. Thanks for
>any help you can send.
>
From what I've heard it should work fine. Properly treated wood in ground
contact has an almost indefinite life. One problem you could run into is
convincing a lender that its a good system. Most lenders I've delt with
won't loan on a house without a concrete perimeter foundation.
Mark F. Asman
>>My wife and I recently looked at a house for sale. It is a nice house but
>>it has a wooden foundation! I commented about this to the realtor and she
>>gave me a pamphlet from a group named the "Home Builder's Institute". The
>>pamphlet discusses Permanent Wood Foundation Systems (PWF) and claims that
>>if you use correctly treated wood, a PWF should conservatively last 120
>>years. Of course, this technology doesn't seem to be that old. The
>>builder is the seller and is a professor of Building Science at a local
>>university.
>>
>>This foundation makes me nervous. Are my feelings justified or am
>>I worrying for nothing? I live in humid area.
>>
>>I would like to hear from anyone who has experience with this. Thanks for
>>any help you can send.
>>
After extensive research including site visits to houses under construction
and finished, my wife and I are building a house with a PWF. The key is
proper engineering and construction. Ours was engineered by a firm
specializing in such work and is being built by a reliable builder with prior
experience in wood foundations. No problem at all with the lender. BTW, the
design life is over 200 years.
My research led to the following conclusions.
In most cases, wood foundations are better than concrete. They are dryer,
have a longer design life, and allow for more flexible use of the interior
space.
Wood foundations have been around for a long time. The Empire State Building
sets on one as does the Cape Hatteras Light House.
All foundations are flawed if not properly designed and installed correctly.
Concrete is not as durable as some believe and once cracked, cannot be
restored to original strength.
Mark F. Asman, Chair mas...@cba.bgsu.edu
Department of Accounting and MIS 419-372-8351
Bowling Green State University FAX 419-372-2875
Bowling Green, OH 43403 Flying Comanche 7836P@1G0
Jim A
>
>In article <DEt9n...@mail.auburn.edu>,
>David Swanger <swa...@mail.auburn.edu> wrote:
>>
house but>>it has a wooden foundation! I commented about this to the
realtor and she>>gave me a pamphlet from a group named the "Home
Builder's Institute". The>>pamphlet discusses Permanent Wood
Foundation Systems (PWF) and claims that>>if you use correctly treated
wood, a PWF should conservatively last 120>>years. Of course, this
technology doesn't seem to be that old. The>>builder is the seller and
is a professor of Building Science at a local>>university.
>>
>>This foundation makes me nervous. Are my feelings justified or am
>>I worrying for nothing? I live in humid area.
>>
>>I would like to hear from anyone who has experience with this.
Thanks for>>any help you can send.
>>
>
ground>contact has an almost indefinite life. One problem you could run
into is>convincing a lender that its a good system. Most lenders I've
delt with>won't loan on a house without a concrete perimeter
foundation.
>
>
>
quality of the treated lumber, the design of the system, and the
execution of the work. Remember, there is not much of a track record,
so I'd be very leery of rosy claims.
One of my neighbors built a home a few years ago with a wood footer
and foundation: PT lumber wrapped in plastic and guaranteed 30 years.
Yeah, right. Who's gonna' honor the guarantee? Go talk to that national
home warranty company that just sent bankrupt.
I choose not to be somebody's experiment, at my expense.
Good luck,
JimA
Tom Strickland
mas...@cba.bgsu.edu (Mark F. Asman) writes:
>
>
>>>My wife and I recently looked at a house for sale. It is a nice house but
>>>it has a wooden foundation! I commented about this to the realtor and she
>>>gave me a pamphlet from a group named the "Home Builder's Institute". The
>>>pamphlet discusses Permanent Wood Foundation Systems (PWF) and claims that
>>>if you use correctly treated wood, a PWF should conservatively last 120
>>>years. Of course, this technology doesn't seem to be that old. The
>>>builder is the seller and is a professor of Building Science at a local
>>>university.
>>>
>>>This foundation makes me nervous. Are my feelings justified or am
>>>I worrying for nothing? I live in humid area.
>>>
>>>I would like to hear from anyone who has experience with this. Thanks for
>>>any help you can send.
>>>
>
There is a product available that was recently shown on This Old House for
a foundation wall that used no footer, looked like a stud wall with furing
strips to screw sheetrock to (easy to insulate and finish). I used this
system on my house two years ago an it works well. Has all the advantages
of PWF, but not the probem of "selling" the system to the future buyer(s)
of your house. The system is called Superior Walls. I don't remember the
national number to call to find out if there is a manufacturing facility
in your area, but I'm sure my local dealer could tell you. It is Advanced
Construction Technologies at 215-758-8020. The foundation comes -
insulated with R-5 styrofoam and you can add 8" more insulation. The walls
are typically up in less than a day.
zu...@cobra.uni.edu
was wonderful. technically it was the basement of a house, but it had a
walk-out on one side and was underground on the other. This is also in a
humid climate - also where there are extreme hot and cold temps. The nicest
thing about the wood foundation was the warmth and the feeling that you were
NOT in a basement. It was not damp and was easy to decorate. I wouldn't be
the least bit afraid of one as long as it was done by a reputable construction
firm. The cost was lower to build also. Incedently, the basement floor was
cement poured over a layer of gravel and styrofoam. Also made for warm floors.
The basement was padded and carpeted - it was just fine.
zu...@cobra.uni.edu
house has a wood foundation. I worked for a national mortgage servicer that
originated loans and sold them on the secondary market to investors - still not
a problem. My sister had no trouble financing hers in 1977 when the technology
was fairly new.
Eric w.
>I've seen plenty of rotten *treated* wood. Things to consider are the
>quality of the treated lumber, the design of the system, and the
>execution of the work. Remember, there is not much of a track record,
>so I'd be very leery of rosy claims.
> One of my neighbors built a home a few years ago with a wood footer
>and foundation: PT lumber wrapped in plastic and guaranteed 30 years.
>Yeah, right. Who's gonna' honor the guarantee? Go talk to that national
>home warranty company that just sent bankrupt.
> I choose not to be somebody's experiment, at my expense.
>Good luck,
>JimA
I heartily agree with Jim. I've seen entirely too many new ideas in
the building industry become an expensive mistake for the unsuspecting
homeowner. A foundation is an expensive thing to replace. Look at all
the pressure treated lumber that wasn't supposed to rot, and quickly
some of it rots. All you need is a lousy batch of treated wood, or a
contractor that's in a hurry and doesn't take all of the required
steps, or a contractor that wants to fatten his profits by buying
substandard wood. 15-20 years later, the wood treater is out of
business, and the contractor is long gone, and you and your neighbors
are left seeking bids to repair your homes.
30 years from now, if these wood foundation homes are still standing,
I'll eat crow. My theory is the potential for corner cutting is too
great, and the homeowner is left holding the bag. No thanks, not for
me.
Eri...@Genie.Com Eri...@Interaccess.com
================================================================================
Sysop: The Home Improvement RoundTable on GEnie
Sysop: The Home & Real Estate RoundTable on GEnie
* * *
Over 20 years experience in the Window & Door Industry
================================================================================
All opinions expressed are mine and mine alone.
Chris Chubb
>
>til...@ix.netcom.com (Jim A) wrote:
>
>>I've seen plenty of rotten *treated* wood. Things to consider are the
>>quality of the treated lumber, the design of the system, and the
>>execution of the work. Remember, there is not much of a track record,
>>so I'd be very leery of rosy claims.
>
>> One of my neighbors built a home a few years ago with a wood footer
>>and foundation: PT lumber wrapped in plastic and guaranteed 30 years.
>>Yeah, right. Who's gonna' honor the guarantee? Go talk to that national
>>home warranty company that just sent bankrupt.
Just think, the railroad companies lay down many million board feet
of railroad ties a year. If they could come up with a reliable way to
preserve the ties for longer, they prob. would. You cant even use
creasote in home construction. If PT lumber lasted longer,
they would use it instead...
And, the useful life for ties is about 9 years in moderate climates.
As few as 5 in damp climates, but only about 19 years in
dry climes.
--
Chris Chubb -- cch...@ida.org (Alexandria, VA)
** Leading a life of noisy desperation. **
My opinions and $0.75 will get you a cup of coffee.
danh...@millcomm.com
>In article <43leql$d...@nntp.interaccess.com>, Er...@interaccess.com says...
>Just think, the railroad companies lay down many million board feet
>of railroad ties a year. If they could come up with a reliable way to
>preserve the ties for longer, they prob. would. You cant even use
>creasote in home construction. If PT lumber lasted longer,
>they would use it instead...
>
>And, the useful life for ties is about 9 years in moderate climates.
>As few as 5 in damp climates, but only about 19 years in
>dry climes.
In a properly installed permanent wood foundation the wood itself remains
fairly dry. A plastic moisture barrier is installed on the outside, and the
footing is well drained with gravel and tile.
Also, re railroad tiles, one of the problems is that the wood is so thick. It's
possible to treat the outside, but as soon as the wood develops splits the
inside begins to rot. The wood used in a PWF is obviously much thinner, so
it can be treated to a greater (relative) depth, plus the smaller dimensions
make it much less prone to cracking.
And, though railroad tiles may not last that long, think about utility poles.
The ones behind our house are about 30 years old and show no signs of
failing.
Dan Hicks
jdou...@mitre.org
>Just think, the railroad companies lay down many million board feet
>of railroad ties a year. If they could come up with a reliable way to
>preserve the ties for longer, they prob. would. You cant even use
>creasote in home construction. If PT lumber lasted longer,
>they would use it instead...
In Germany I saw a lot of concrete "sleepers" or RR ties. In Germany,
however, wood is much more expensive than here in the USA.
The question, then, is why do the RR use wood when there is an alternative?
Wood must not be such a bad material for this sort of application!
Jason
Mark Kepke
Because the life-cycle costs for wood RR ties is less than for concrete RR
ties, in the U.S. "Good enough" is truly the enemy of "the best".
As regards telephone poles versus RR ties, only the bottom 6-8' of a
telephone pole stays damp for any length of time. Guess where they
normally rot out ?
Overall, I'd be wary of PTW foundations - most people have implied that
they need to installed correctly. Statistical evidence is still wanting
on wether on whether it's 'easy' or 'hard' to install PTW foundations
correctly.
--
-Mark
My opinions, etc.
danh...@millcomm.com
foundations tend to have worse radon problems than other foundation
techniques. The theory is that the backfill of pea gravel used around wood
foundations provides a reservoir of sorts to collect the radon.
Of course, if this problem is anticipated and the tile system of the foundation
is laid out to facilitate the "suction" approach to radon reduction then all of
that pea gravel could actually be a benefit.
Dan Hicks
Joseph Kral
>
>Just think, the railroad companies lay down many million board feet
>of railroad ties a year. If they could come up with a reliable way to
>preserve the ties for longer, they prob. would. You cant even use
>creasote in home construction. If PT lumber lasted longer,
>they would use it instead...
>
>As few as 5 in damp climates, but only about 19 years in
>dry climes.
>
And in the UK and Europe (where they take railroads seriously) they use
concrete ties.