"As far as your question goes, it occurs to me that what you are proposing sounds a lot like a sort of timber framed Larsen truss. It seems like the system that you are proposing would exponentially increase the time and complexity of timber framing a given building. "
I actually got the idea for the frame-side of the concept by examining Larsen/Wall Truss builds. It seemed like they use an awful lot of vertical timber, though, almost approaching a sort of 'stick-construction' before sheathing is applied. My thought here was for the sheathing to be strong enough (and secure enough through joinery) that fewer vertical members would be needed to support it from the rear, while retaining most of the Wall Truss advantages. Think of a wall truss with several-foot gaps between the securing studs instead of 18" centers. Almost like building up a SIP between the main posts by constituent layers. The key to the framing portion is ensuring the two posts work together as a unit (which may prove trickier than I hope)
As far as complexity, it's a non-issue on this design for the time being (it's admittedly a bit of a science experiment I have several years to figure out, before deciding if it's worth it or not to preserve certain design elements). I'm also hoping the octagonal floorplan will allow for eight largely-identical "wall bents" to be fabbed up prior to raising, which would allow for a bit more subassembly complexity without being so annoying. The way it works (in my head) is that an assembled frame bent would have a second set of posts stacked onto the first before being raised. If the planks can be flexible enough to be bowed into place after raising, construction could potentially be very easy.
Jay White cloud;
"Of all the infill methods (and there are hundreds if all timber framing cultures are taken into consideration) most are much more durable and insulative than many "think" or assume to be true. These still are a dominant form of enclosing timber frames and are still reasonably common in Europe and elsewhere as an efficient way to enclose and insulate a frame. More suited for less harsh climates of the temperate zones, they can still work in the colder regions as well with proper design.."
I am certain Adobe can probably work out here with a generous overhang, and may even be quite viable to make with the limey caliche soil (basically crushed/compacted coral), but it simply isn't seen, nor was it historically common from what I can tell. Go much further west where it is much drier and it's common, though. Not sure if it's the high humidity swings (20-100), or the high temperature swings (0-120), or the character of the soil, but my worry is anything just moves around too much to avoid cracking & frequent repair. Heck, the worst part of the drought was wrecking full-on slab foundations, soil cracks being plumbed at over 10ft deep in more clay-ey areas!
Mostly though, I simply have no experience with it at all, and am uncomfortable embracing something so different from what I expect a 'wall' to look/work like. Historically, folks primarily had wood to work with (think Old Timey Hollywood western town construction), and before that frequently used cut/natural stone & mortar when they needed something more durable. Natives seemed to prefer caves, when available, or portable structures so they could follow the water. Lot of brick and limestone block, once railroads brought these products out, even to this day*.
"The modality in the attached sketch/model is a common one in several cultures."
That should mean it's as good an idea as pita bread & tortillas then, right?
"In some applications a "rendering" (aka plastering) may be necessary, yet in others and "all wood" system can be had as well..."
I figured plastering was feasible if that finish was desired; this plank scheme is somewhat like Wattle & Daub on steroids, after all. Not even drywall survives the weather swings more than a year out here without diligent climate control and high quality construction (peeling tape & warping is common in garage interiors), so plaster has its work cut out for it, even if it is slightly more flexible.
"There is...and probably too many to even begin to list... crazy Some better than others some more traditional than others.."
Interesting. Like I said, the forum I was reading through was trying to find ways to effect a double wall post/plank system, and it seemed like there wasn't much to draw from that they could find. Glad to hear it isn't such a wild idea, after all.
"When I got to the disadvantages as described, I realised that you may be trying to create a "double walled" timber frame, which also exists, but is not as efficient in material utilization typically as a simple timber frame with a "wall truss" system"
Yup, pretty much a double frame supporting a double-roof; but a stripped down one using slightly smaller timbers & wide-spaced intermediate posts. My goal is to see if the planks+support posts can rival or exceed the timber efficiency of a wall truss by halving (or more) the frequency of vertical elements supporting the infill. Admittedly, the whole purpose for the double frames was to create an airgap for better insulation, as opposed to simply making the posts thick enough for two parallel plank slots (or covering them up on one side with a wall truss)
"Since I tend to build almost exclusively on traditional stone foundations I can share also that a slab is not a necessity, even when using a double walled timber frame method"
Hill Country caliche isn't quite as bad as Blackland Prairie soil, but I think ground moisture (cycling from bone-dry to saturated several times a year) hydraulically moving things is why pier-based foundations have fallen from favor. Older pier structures have almost universal foundation problems (lots of foundation repair companies all over). They can certainly be done as the bedrock is usually less than 10ft down (or like 5ft in the Hill Country) but require more work drilling through rocky or gummy soil. Whenever someone gets a pool installed, the contractor has to bring in a massive 'rock chain saw' trencher to get anywhere!
Part of the issue is my present desire is to build into a hillside, which (needlessly) complicates things a bit, in ways our ancestors wouldn't have bothered with, but which I'd still like to explore as an option.
*Pretty much all the high-cost educational or government buildings getting designed by architects are using what I affectionately call "Jet-Stones" aesthetics; lots of limestone, lots of glass/aluminum, and arranged into rather futurist angular forms. Sort of a combination of the Flintstones and the Jetsons. New Construction at A&M