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