Square rule or scribe rule?

I visited a old barn the other day which was some what different than most. Most barns of this type are scribed. They are typically 4 bents with a dropped tie and a lower binding beam, continuous top plates, the center bay is referenced and marriage marks present and continuous top plates. The barn in question appears to be a square rule building in that it is referenced from the east face of the first three bents, the last to the outside of the west bent. No marriage marks are noticeable. The main members are hewn and scantlings are sawn. I am lead to believe square rule joinery has housings and reduction, this is what I do. This barn has none, the joinery is similar to scribe but where members come together there are broad hewn housings with the brace looking like a scribe or mill rule, no reduction. Has anyone seen this as well and is it square rule? Tim

Tim --

I suspect ( without photographs - I can only conjecturalize ) what you saw, were what I know as "flattings" a technique taught to me long ago, one which I do on occasion, and one which is observable in most hewn & scribed buildings. Usually it is quite subtle and almost inpercievable at other times it is done quite aggressivly and pronounced, as I'm guessing was done in the building you have come across.

Was the hewing in the frame somewhat more heavily textured than is the norm ? And is that found the "hewn housings" far less so, far flatter ? Does it extend several inches beyond the joinery ?

This is done with a flatting adze (A term borrowed from the Brit who taught me scribe - One with a long bill with little curve - SKA a RR adze) as the pieces go into the layup, (It was perhaps initally slightly concave) to make the scribing easier and fit better and to allow for the picking of only two points (top & bottom) and to then only connect those two points to then draw or incise a cut line.

Flattings are most easily observable when some scribe to wane is found, the wane is always "flatted" to both limit the number of points which need to be picked, and to allow the compensating shoulder cut to be at least be partially copleted with a saw, It just being easier and far more efficient to cut flat "facets" than to match natty wonk - (natural >or even hewn< wonkiness)



Were the marriage marks, true marriage marks ? Ones bridging the shoulder of the joint, or numerals on all the adjacent members ? (either is indicitive of scribe)

The so called Dutch Convention for reference is common to most of NNE's gable entry barns. Is this a gable entry barn ?

It should be possible to find a two foot mark on the arcade / aisle posts if they went into two layups - ie: Were braced in both directions.

Not familiar with the term binding beam, is this the cross sill or something higher ?

Will, I have pictures and am looking at posting. You have described it quite well. I have only looked at it for a moment and will go back with time. I saw no reference marks across the joints or on either member. That is what made me ask the question. I will do better with some photos. It is a side entry barn with a 1/4 hall and parlor house nest to the road. Tim

Also, I am some what guessing at the binding beam as I am calling it. In the guilds definition under binding joist you will find the meaning, it seem somewhat appropriate. The beam I am referring to is the one under the dropped tie beam so the second floor tie, which isn't really a tie so I have been calling it a binding beam. Would some one jump in and clear up the definition for me. Tim

Hi Tim

crossbeam ?

Ken Hume

Hi Tim

I looked up binding beam and binding joist and binder in several dictionaries and the short answer is it is the same thing as a sleeper. It is a beam which long joists cross over for intermediate support. One dictionary even listed a "binding rafter" which was defined as a "longitudinal timber in a roof supporting the rafters between the comb and eave" in other words a major purlin!

A binder can also be called a bridging joist. A floor built using a binding beam and joists is called a double floor.

Lexicon!

I'm not sure if this adds anything constructive, but from what I've seen in central Maine homes and barns, the vast majority of the framing is neither square rule or scribe rule. The buildings are just like Tim described, mostly hewn with some smaller sawn stock, but no reductions, no housings (indicating square rule), no out of square shoulders, no scribing to wane, no marriage marks, and no 2' marks (indicating scribe rule). I think they just wanted a building. I see lots of buildings with tie beams spaced maybe 4' apart sitting over continuous plates. I've seen some dovetails on the bottoms of those ties, and I've not seen them (spiked?). I mentioned this at the Maine timber framers meeting this winter. I'm also still curious what the earliest known date for a square rule building in Maine is. No one at the meeting seemed to know. If my Maine hodgepodge framing theory is correct though, the dates may also be a hodgepodge.

Two questions for you Will...what is the Dutch convention? And where do the French traditionally put their 2' mark (for posts)?

Brad

Brad --

The "conventions" don't get tossed around as much as maybe before, but then I hadn't thought about it in awhile...

Dutch - Ref begins at the reference / I end of the frame ( typ beginning either at S or E - at least hereabouts) and runs from thereon, only reversing at the last bent.

English - Ref begins at the Drive / Threashing bay and runs in both directions to then reverse at either gable bent.

As to the 2' mark question, I can't answer, though I am a plumb line scriber, I was not trained in the French Tradition...

I'm guessing Mo might be able to answer this question.

[img]http://www.flicker.com/photos/14709813@N02/[/img]

Now if this works don't mind the siding pictures. I am wondering if it highlights in blue. Oh well I will just try it. Tim

Ok, I will take any suggestions on posting pictures. I have pictures on my iphoto is there a simple way to drag them to the posting square where I am now? I have used the search engine with not much results.

My apologies for the the grey area but is binding joist a correct term for the member I described above? If not, what is? Crossbeam is simple enough but can be used just about any where in the frame. As an example, tie beam is specific, there is only one place for the tie beam, at the eve or just below the eve. A tie could be a crossbeam? A sleeper I have always pictured in the sill level floor system?

Binding Joist: Transverse floor timber (runs perpendicular to the ridge) connecting post and carrying common joists. Tim

Tim:
That possibly isn't a valid address for the photo.
You should be able to find the address and that's what you need to post between the image tags.
Jim Rogers

Tim, The glossary in The Pennsylvania Barn gives a definition of a beam below the tie beam as being a cross beam as follows "Heavy member of bent, reaching from end post to end post, positioned below tie beam"

Jim

So, Ken was onto it with cross beam? Where does binding beams come into play?

I was back inside this barn a few days ago. The reductions at the joints were cut with a axe not the adze and across the grain, not with it. (as a side note I picked up a adze such as you mentioned, Will, $3.00 a bit rusty but not bad, it has a 9" long blade and a shallow arch) Again, as a double check I saw no marriage marks. The brace tenons were reduced, I could see how they cut the tenon back, sizing the braces to a consistent number. This is done in some scribe frames where the mortice is cut first, than scribing the next member to the mortice. I could see how this could also be done as square rule. I didn't have a tape with me nor the time for further details. Tim

On NH's tread "Historic Hewing Question" dave felshaw posted a question about counter hewing. I wonder if this is how this barn was built? Re-hewn at the joints and square ruled? I will see how that goes and compare details. Tim

A quick question on snap lines. Did our fore runners use charcoal loaded onto a line for marking lines? Chalk of course was used, white. What other colors can we expect to see on traditional buildings? Red, and was it as permanent as it is today.

I remember faintly, in my grandfathers tools, a chunk of chalk I am guessing used for rubbing on a line instead of a chalk box. Tim

Tim,

I've seen red chalk lines still on old timbers. Every time, I get really excited for some reason.

You can still get carpenters chalk from Dixon. It' a slightly convex cone shape, about 2" diameter base. We use it to mark reference, or designate timbers or any other temporary working mark or label. I've heard it was rubbed onto strings for lining work.



I've heard of the charcoal thing, but don't know any hard evidence. The same for juice from a poke berry. I do know they stain your hand.

Interesting question...

Hi Gabel,

The red marks are not chalk but raddle ! This is an earth / clay based marker.

Joe Thompson can tells us all about this historical practice.

(Note :- add to glossary).

Regards

Ken Hume

I too remember seeing a chunk of blue chalk among my grandfather's tools. It was a bit bigger than a golf ball but only a half shape... it was a semi-dome shape. And it had score marks across it presumably from running over a line.

I've also read about charcoal-loaded lines.

In addition, I remember being puzzled by these "chalk chunks" when I started doing carpentry 20 yrs ago. I'd only ever saw powdered chalk (to fill a reel). My thinking was these chunks were "old school"...the carpenter had to pound them into powder before filling his reel.

Don,

I think they predate the chalk box -- as you run the line out, you would rub the chalk on it to load the line.

You can still get that chalk in red, white and blue.

I tried charcoal from my wood boiler yesterday and it worked great, a nice black line on fresh wood. I didn't try it on grey wood or bark, will do it today. I may even crush some and fill a reel. Rubbing charcoal on a string is about as messy as filling the reel with chalk from the gallon jug.

Is there historic pretension for using charcoal for chalk lines? Or am I completely imagining the possibility.

My grandfathers half ball of chalk had lines in it as well. Tim

Tim,

I seem to remember that Roy Underhill prefers willow charcoal for snapping lines -- nice and fine.

I remembered this allusion, from my copy, and I second Don's earlier reccomendation -

http://books.google.com/books?id=2W1Lq_nvlCQC&pg=PA15&dq=charcoal+for+snapping+lines&lr=&sig=QBtxpAnMiI82wzE_FPRdUGINdxk#PPA15,M1

I also find Red lines with some frequency, and Blue but twice.

I do also find the Red grease pencil markings in the universally fine cursive, you touched on in another thread Tim.

Not a big fan of the chalk disks, though I do pick them up on occasion, to abrade / break in a new braided line.

In the UK
historically there are references to rubbing white chalk on lines in Moxon, 1678, and Ellis, 1906. Good on bark, ok on darker heartwoods.
References to rubbing charcoal, half burnt sticks onto a line, also to burning straw and the carbon resulting being used to make a "smut line". Good on sapwood and heartwood.
Raddle, or Fe2O3 is used as a red powder, with the line being pulled through a pot containing the powder. Raddle lines over 200 years old are still visible today.Good on sap and heartwood.

That's one of the books where I read about charcoal, Will (Field Guide to New England Barns and Farm Buildings). And that's about the best book around in my opinion on barns in New England.

Tim:

Neat that you tried the charcoal. Makes perfect sense. Funny how we overlook the obvious and simple over the "modern."

Well, it sounds safe to use charcoal on a historical base. Thanks.

When I have more time I am going to check that book out. I should add it to my collection. Page 14 had a nice map. I am located up the coast where I see a over lap of common rafters and purlins. That's if I am reading the map correctly. Tim

Hi Don,

Please add the full reference for your book to the FAQ questions on the TFWiki. Possibly under a new section of "specialist interests - barns". I am not aware of this book.

Regards

Ken Hume

Tim:

Funny, I actually mentioned this map in an earlier discussion:
http://www.tfguild.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showthreaded&Number=15425

Would you say as a rule that purlin frames end north of Bangor?

Ken:

I will add the book at some point in the next day or so. Before purchasing this book, I looked at some of the reviews of it on amazon, etc... they give it a mediocre review, but I am really fond of it because its heavy on historical technical info, like saw marks and construction techniques. It is the best I've seen on New England barns--

It has info on why barns were laid out certain ways and even historical excerpts from 19th century farming journals on barn construction/layout advantages.

Hi Don,

I have made a blank formatted entry with the correct book title in the FAQ section for you to complete details of author, publisher, date, etc.

Regards

Ken Hume

Edit function is still out.

completed.

thanks Ken.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/14709813@N02/2506540425/

This is the same link just on a different picture which has to do with this thread from the start. Lets see how it goes. Tim

[img]http://[IMG]http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q393/timber500/100_1465.jpg[/img][/img]

Here is a photo of another frame with no visible marriage marks, or at least I didn't think so. I was reviewing some photos I shot today and noticed the faint red marks on the brace and cross beam. The marks show up via the camera, with the eye they aren't as visible, most likely the lighting is poor. The red is just under the electrical wire it looks like a 17, the white marking is from the swallows. Red on the tie is harder to see.

When did red grease pencils show up in layout? I think Will T. mentioned lead pencils were around just before the Revolution. Tim

I've tried to find information on the red grease pencil markings, and have had no luck. I'm seeing it, interestingly coupled with chiseled numbers, on the Parsonage where I'm working now, and it dates to 1821.

My mention of pencils was about the domestic production of them beginning in 1812, in response to the market being cut off by the war and the Blockade.

The picture isn't big enough to see the red marking it is there.

1812, got it. It has gone through my mind, when I see two types of marking I'm thinking the building was moved and the red marking was for the the second or more disassembly. I also when building new use both marker and chiseled numbers.

I also stopped at a remodel to look at an old cape yesterday and viewed an exposed kitchen ell. It was mucked together with somewhat odd parts, one posts, square ruled, with chisel marks in the brace housing, the #2 (II). The brace was missing and the top plate had no brace pocket to match. Tim

Hi Will;

Can you tell if the chisle marks and crayon marks both make sense? My first thought was the same as Tim's, that the building may have been disassembled and moved or built of reused timbers.

Jim

Jim --

In this instance, besides knowing the history of the house, and with it being obvious that there is also no reused timber in its frame…

The chisel and crayon marks do make sense with one another, and share the same numbers – The chisel was used to mark the 1st fl studs and the sill at each stud, crayon was used to mark the 2nd fl studs and the girts at each stud.

I had just never seen this logical mixed use before.

Funny thing is this is only a tall posted cape, the 2nd fl studs are all short, no confusing them with the ones below them, chisel would’ve served, even without flags. The marking system this framing crew used was likely one they developed for full two story frames, and just ran with out of force of habit.

Finding fun in the details

Will;
You seem to have found an early use of "lumber crayon". I too looked for information about them without much sucess. I did learn that the word crayon is very vague and means any stick used to write or mark. Often crayons were chalk or chalk mixed with a binder such as wax, grease, or oil. They have been in use for hundreds of years, Leonardo Da Vinci reffered to using crayon. I would be interested to find documentation on when they came into common use.

Raddle, as discussed in the TFWiki, is a red oxide used to mark sheep, snap lines and can be made into a crayon for marking. A synonym of raddle in this form is keel. Marking something was "keeling".

The compound words lumber-crayon and grease-pencil are absent from the Oxford English Dictionary and most others. Here is another research opportunity!

Thanks for sharing.

Jim

I came across a second barn with similar housings as the first barn mentioned on this topic. The difference is that this one is close to home, and it is all sawn materiel. The top plate brace housings are scooped out with an adze or axe,( first photo), while the post joints are house with bevels. And it is odd that it appears to be marked from the center bay, the braces are flush with the inside center of the building (second photo). This building is making my case that some buildings which first appear to be scribed could be square ruled. I am thinking they were experimenting with square rule.

The building is made up of Hemlock and a nice example with the dark and light shades in the grain, seen in the photos. Tim [img]http://[IMG]http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q393/timber500/100_2022.jpg[/img][/img]
[img]http://[IMG]http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q393/timber500/100_2024.jpg[/img][/img]