Here's my pitch....

I hope to generate some interest in this style of timber framing, and bring it more to light. My goal is that this style might be considered a genuine option for a timber framed home in North America.

First of all, some history. Some of it you probably know, some of it you may not.

American timber framing today is descended from a colonial style that was more or less an adaptation of the British style, along with a few infusions from Dutch and North German building styles. The arrival of thousands of settlers from the southern German lands, collectively known as the Pennsylvania Dutch, was really to late to really have much of an affect on the style of the frame itself -thy would build their frames according to the established American methods. Its only real effect was on the profile of the frame itself, and the design of the building as a whole. The south German style survived in America only in a few small instances of isolated communities. Even the Amish would come to build their frames according to the American style. The biggest reason for this is that it was the cultural norm, the way that the locals did things. "when in Rome..."
Another possible reason may have been the availability of tools, though I am not convinced that American tools would have made it any more difficult to make a German frame.

As for the German frame itself, it has a very ancient lineage. The frame design is the result of a fusion that occurred during the middle ages, but ultimately began as soon as the southern tribes (here we will ultimately focus on the Allemani) settled in Roma lands. The German frame developed when the earth posted frame of the migrant tribes came in contact with the far more sophisticated frames that the Romans were accustomed to building.

In the middle ages, advances in farming techniques marked the end of the transient days of the Germanic tribes, They settled down in one place, and established farms that would remain in one family for generations. As a result, they started building structures that would last for generations as well. They had already been doing this since they took over the old Roman cities. They knew how to build lasting structures, they just didn't see the need to do so if they were just going top have to move once their farmland was exhausted.

Timber framing reached its height from the 15th through the 17th century. At the end of the 1300's they developed a style that is still in use to this day, and that style rose to be the dominant form of timber framing by the late 1400's in all but the alpine regions, where log building was preferred (and still is to this day)
This style developed to make use of limited resources, yet it is quite well suited to making structures of tremendous size as can be seen in the traditional Bernese Bauernhaus.
This system has survived into the present day, and has only been marginally replaced with modern methods. The Allemanic people are, after all, fiercely traditionalist people.

The particular style that I have focused my study on in what is known as the Allemanic Style. The feature that most distinguished this style from other German styles is its simplicity. It generally does not make use of the complex decorative bracing frequently associated with German frames, and is designed first and foremost to be functional. The amount of timber used is generally the amount that is practical and sound. No more, no less. It is not exactly minimalist, but it is not ornate either.

Each floor of the structure is framed semi-independent of the others. There are no posts that extend the full height of the walls. The framing of each floor can be thought of as similar to stick framing, in that each wall is made of a rectangular frame.

Another feature is that there is no use of any bent or other cross sectional framework at all. In fact, there is nothing that can really be categorized as a tie beam at all. Instead there are a number of stout timbers that simultaneously function as floor joists and as ties, providing direct support to the floor and resisting outward thrust at the same time. On wider buildings these are joined together at a beam running through the middle of the building, rather than being cut to the full length. This tie-joist system allows for significantly less joinery to be cut. The joists may or may not join to the plate above a post.

Traditionally the braces are very long, slanting between two posts, but actually being joined in many cases to the sill and plate rather than to the posts themselves. The result is a lack of true triangulation, but the network of bracing both in the walls and in the roof structure (where true triangles certainly exist) tend to be more than sufficient. The braces are often lapped, but are sometimes mortised as well.

The roofs are not built with trusses, but rather are purlin framed. The purlins can be supported by direct posting (stehender dachstuhl), but are also commonly supported with a truss system called in German Liegendem Dachtuhl, which more or less could be translated as leaning truss (lit. reclining roof chair) Stuhl (chair) is often used to denote a roof-support system. The advantage of the latter is an almost totally open roof space.

The advantages of this system are largely the same advantages that caused it to catch on in the first place. It makes use of much smaller timbers, and each individual timber is not nearly as critical as it would be in a structure with wide spaced bents. This allows the use of smaller timbers, either from smaller trees (which is attractive if you are doing it all by hand) or multiple cuts from a single log. The design of the system is such that you can use much shorter timbers as well. There is no need for long plates, or even for long ties. The roof system is even designed so that short rafters can be used.

The joinery is also very simple and straightforward. complex scarf joints don't seem to exist except perhaps in the long purlins, and there are no complicated post/tie/plate connections. While there is more joinery to be done since there are more total framing members, the joints are all very simple.

There is no excessively heavy lifting. Such a frame can be erected without the use of any sort of crane or raising poles, or any such like. There are no bents to raise and so there are no multi-ton assemblies to carefully fly into place. A crew of 3 or 4 would be plenty sufficient to build the entire structure, even without a crane.

The smaller cavities between posts makes the infill question a whole lot easier to answer. many small spaces are a whole lot easier to enclose than few large spaces, and the amount of extra framing to support any non SIP, non natural wall system would be minimal, in same cases all the would be necessary would be small board to support drywall.

IF you are building with dried wood, smaller timber are far less expensive to kiln dry, and take far less time, and are far less susceptible to splitting and excessive cracking. If you are building with green wood, smaller timbers will move significantly less in a completed frame.

I plan on traveling to Germany and Switzerland in the near future to study the buildings up close and thoroughly document the framing and joinery involved, as well as variations in regional styles. In the mean time, however, there is quite a wealth of information available on the subject online if you can read German, including complete listings and diagrams of every timber joint known in Germany, and schematics of every 'dachstuhl' ever used. The Germans are after all known for their precision and detail.

I do admit a certain bias to this particular style. I am myself of very strong Allemanic Swiss heritage. I grew up looking at pictures from the old country, and with the idea that that is the ideal life, and those are ideal homes. However, I do think this system has a lot to offer us today.

D L Bahler

Hi DLB,

It would be helpful if you could provide us with an outline book reference list that will allow us to read up on the Germanic platform framing technique.

When / where do you plan to visit in Southern Germany ? I know of a number of people here who might be keen to make that trip.

Regards

Ken Hume

DLB, this is very interesting to me. There are a lot of similarities in your description to how we do things here at Brooks Post and Beam. Our emphasis is on efficiency and cost savings to the customer and admittedly to the bottom line!

It is no suprise to me that a germanic/swiss design should be efficient. I have to confess that I am an imposter and really don't know much other than how to build affordable timber frames by working long hours, being such an intellectual slouch I learn best from "picture books". Do you have any links or pictures of this style? Think of it as an "Introduction to Southern Germanic Timber Framing for Dummies".

Ken, I don't know when for certain I would make the trip. It depends a lot on when I have the time and money to do so.
When I do go, the study of buildings isn't going to be the only thing I do either!

As for an outline book reference, that will take some work! I am not aware of any book on the subject in the English language, and I have searched hard for one.

The website Fachwerk.de is a good starting point. The also have a books list there on that site.
search for pics of Fachwerk, Fachwerkhaus, Riegelhaus, and 'Alemannische Fachwerk'

I have been researching European framing of late and just learned about the difference between framing with full height posts (standerbauweise or geschossbau) and what relates to platform framing (rahmbauweise or stockwerkbau)in Germany. What I have read is that the platform framing is not as ancient as the two-story post type framing, though this, as everything, may relate to what region we are talking about.

Here is an illustration of three styles of fachwerk including Alemannic, Frankish and Saxon.

http://uploader.wuerzburg.de/bbz2/fst_03/fachwerk/bilder/entsteh1.jpg

I think the Dutch had more of an influence on American building history than is recognized. I recently learned that the probable origin of our every-day term bent is from Dutch gebint or, less likely, German gebinde, both of which translate in simple terms to "an assembly".

Very interesting, looking forward to more discussion.

Jim

Indeed, the Rähmbauweise is a later development, and the oldest medieval buildings are Ständerbau.

Rähm might be translated as plate, so this style could be referred to as Plate-building style
Ständer would e translated as post, so it could be translated as post-built style. The difference between them is that in Ständerbau, the posts extend from the foundation to the roof, but in Rähmbau they are interrupted.
(weise is a cognate of the English word wise or ways, like in cross-ways. It basically means style)

Ständerbau developed during the early middle ages, and Rähmbau seems to have replaced it in most regions by around 1400 to 1450, 1500 at the very latest. Some of my findings suggest that the Rähmbau style caught on much earlier in Switzerland where it quickly became the dominant style where timber framing was done.

In the context of this history, we need to examine 2 other styles.

Blockbau, which is simply the German term for log building. Blockbau is still used in alpine regions, notably in places like the Oberland region of Switzerland and in Austria. This style uses squared timbers, often with complex corner joints.

Ständerbohlenbau, which sits sort of between timber framing and log building. It is built as a timber frame and between the timbers thick boards are stacked. This style was dominant in the Swiss countryside up to the 1500's, and may indeed be the forerunner of Rähmbauweise, considering that such buildings are in fact built with a platform method. This style has survived into the modern day in Switzerland, where the thick (often stated as being 'thick as an arm') solid wood boards are replaced by processed sandwiches consisting of exterior layers of wood with an insulation material in the middle. With this style, additional triangular bracing is often applied to the exterior of the frame, half lapped into the framing members. This buildings are noted for being remarkably sturdy, and generally the oldest surviving buildings in Switzerland tend to be of this type.

here is a good image from google showing this style:


and another

Smaller, shorter members in my mind is revolutionary. Being able to handle so much of the job alone and with reduced effort is a huge plus. The other thing about smaller, shorter members is they are easier to find and maybe most important of all bring down costs tremendously.

The one thing I have trouble with mentally though is the braces. Normally when I see a TF brace it looks intuitively placed and connected. The Allemanic braces however just don't look right to my untrained eye. They also appears an inefficient use of wood to have such long braces.

That one JPG linked showed a lot, but it would be useful see more pictures of this type of frame if one could post some here.

The one image shown depicted a specific subset of the Allemanic style, a form developed for visual impact. The type I am referring to would be more of a 'country allemanic' if you will, the style prevalent on farmhouses and in villages, rather than the ornate frames of city buildings.

here is an example:


or for a more ornate, upscale version:



and as a point of clarification, what I in fact have in mind here is actually the Southern Allemanic style, and not the general Allemanic style as a whole. Some forms of Allemanic can be quite complex! The southern style is often marked by its austere simplicity, and functional building style. Exactly what you might expect from Swiss farmers.

To me, too, the use of smaller timbers seems to be one of the most desirable features. It is amazing how the dimensions of a timber affect its price, and how it affects the way the timbers act in situ. I think it is important also to note how much of an effect the use of rectangular rather than square timbers can have. If you are sawing your timbers, it means more timbers can be yielded from any one length of log. If you are hewing, it means smaller trees can be used.

Now when considering a style like this, remember one thing, there is absolutely no reason why we have to do it exactly like they do. We don't have to copy their style to the t. If you are not a fan of the long braces, you don't have to use them. I happen to like their appearance visually.

I think one reason for them though is that their length gives them more opportunity to brace. They are not only joined at the top and the bottom, but also at the middle rail or rails in each cavity (brüstungsriegel). Sort of the same idea of the long passing braces in English frames that may pass as many as 5 posts.

Hi D L;

In your opening post you said "In the middle ages, advances in farming techniques marked the end of the transient days of the Germanic tribes, They settled down in one place, and established farms that would remain in one family for generations. As a result, they started building structures that would last for generations as well."

I was aware of this transition, but I thought it started occuring 8,000 to 4,000 BC. I know there were migratory peoples until recently, an interesting example being the "forest Finns" who practice slash and burn agriculture where they clear an area of forest, burn the bursh, farm the land until the soil neutrients are reduced which can be a short time such as a few years, and then they cut down another area of forest etc. Do you think there were nomadic peoples in the area we now call southern Germany as late as say the tenth century AD?

Also, I want to agree with you that fachwerk is an ancient tradition and I think it is likely a continuation of the Roman building style of half-timbering Vitruvious called opus craticium. There are surviving buildings in Italy that were burried by the eruption of Mt. Visuvious in 79 AD that were found and excavated. Pretty cool that there are surviving half-timbered buildings from around the beginning of Christianity!!

http://sites.google.com/site/ad79eruption/herculaneum-1/insula-iii-2/house-of-the-opus-craticium


This style of a wooden frame infilled with stone or brick has been studied by engineers because the traditional Turkish houses built like this (in Turkish called Himis) tend to survive earthquakes better than other types.

I have studied plank framing starting in the U.S. and working my way backward in time to Europe. I have found good information on types of building like the Ständerbohlenbau in the Low Countries, but I had only seen references to the use of plank walls in Switzerland...I have not been able to find drawings or a good history so your informing me of the name of this style should help me find information on this style. Thanks!!

Is the Ständerbohlenbau a type of construction you are trying to bring attention to here or mainly the Southern Allemanic style of fachwerk?

Thanks;
Jim