Thank you both for your thoughts!
D L Bahler;
"First of all, 'Plank and frame' or 'Bohlenwand' techniques are the inferior of the two solid wood infill techniques. The better technique is what I know as 'Fleckwand' which you should think of as a log infill. This technique descends from a hybridization of log and timber building in the sub-alpine regions on the northern verge of the Alps (in contrast to the Bohlenwand or thin plank infill which is simply a timber frame with boards inserted between the framing)"
I can see how this would trend toward a convenient way to stack heavier timbers/logs, but I'm not certain such heavyweight construction would work for me; for a two-story structure far, far away from large-diameter lumber supplies. My plan of attack was actually to see if I could get the exterior layer to be built of staggered Hardieplank (or similar) and the interior of engineered flooring; I'm not sure how realistic these are given the spans they'd be bridging between frames, but the concept of puzzle-piece interior/exterior layers with minimal follow-on finish work is appealing to me.
It's funny you mention the Swiss & large overhangs, since it appears I am rapidly trending toward that sort of design, here. I think I may actually adopt the two-frame solution you described, since as a two-story structure it is somewhat convenient; support the roof on the outer level with a beefy frame and a lightweight interior frame supporting that face of the wall & partitions, but a heavier interior frame on the lower story to carry the floor joists as well as to stabilize the exterior frame structure.
Jay White Cloud
"Even a "light daub" system of say a "Bousillage" type would be far more robust than any modern "drywalls," and if you combine this with adobe methods of the region, (along with the appropriate lime plasters) you have an extremely durable system plastering (inside) and rendering (outside) finishes."
Very interesting. I'd always thought that plaster fell by the wayside for being crack-prone as well as labor-intensive, but perhaps only the latter? Whichever is less hassle to keep up with is my preference (and I wouldn't mind learning to plaster, at least on the room-interior walls & ceilings where it would likely be). At any rate, I'll be focusing on surface finishes more once I get further along.
"I love "Double Roofs" and can not expand enough on how functional and aesthetically pleasing they are. That was a wonderful choice..."
You may think twice about that once I get it fleshed out in the other thread a bit more. Or rather, I may think twice once the time comes to actually start figuring out how to make & assemble everything, lol.
"Foundations in general, in historic architecture, can often present as having more issues than they actually have, and/or suffer from neglect and inappropriate modifications by "ill experienced" over the decades or even centries."
Fair enough; I'm sure a good number of the vintage structures themselves suffer from inappropriate construction methods in the first place, that a properly trained professional now readily-available would be able to avoid. I still like the idea of a concrete 'bathtub' for building partially into a hill, even knowing concrete isn't all that waterproof. I'll be sure to open a thread on the topic once I have more details to discuss.
"For a "modern insulation" (yet over 150 years in use with excellent results) I employ mineral wool batt and board."
I agree the blown stuff is kind of a pain, especially when you actually have to work with it yourself instead of paying 'some other guy' to deal with it. Honestly, it may not even be that good an idea given the lack of positive seals between the posts and the planks; could be leaky. I won't be purposely seeking out sustainable solutions unless they are the best fit for my situation, but I think you're right that a quilted/batt type material --whatever it's made of-- would work a whole lot better than a loose one, and probably be easier to install. Less mess if I have to dig in there to route whatever new utility line is a 'must have' ten years from now, also (this serviceability aspect is part of the reason I am opposed to a solid infill wall system; not sure how one goes about retrofitting a conduit line through a block of cobb or wattle/daub without a whole lot of work)
"Your design is very much like a "Wall Truss" however I would say more than half of these contemporary wall systems seldom are "hung walls" (though this works well if designed well) and actually rest on foundation of some form..."
Interesting, the Larsen-type ones I saw all seemed to be suspended, and I assumed it was to shield the foundation from rain or to ensure ventilation of the more exposed wall frames. Perhaps I can get away with just my overhangs protecting me, here. I've actually been trying to figure out what the best plan is for the floorplate side of these plank walls; I assume you don't want to just have them sitting in a sunken groove in a plate that is some combination of rot-prone or ugly, but a neat trim-based solution isn't jumping to mind readily. Lot of examples in pictures just seem to have boards sitting on the foundation directly, or suspended on sacrificial spacers (presumably some sort of filler material seals the gap internally). Is that really all there is to it? I expected more complexity from the Swiss, lol.
"Wall trusses and your modified timber form of them both lend themselves well to "cold roof" and "rainscreen" modalities as well..."
I've read about cold roofs, but 'rainscreen' is a new term; could you explain? I decided to run with the double-roof once I realized that I could get a thick, insulated roof over the interior areas, but a pretty thin overhanging roof over the outside (to keep the externally-visible roof profile looking thin). One of those design choices that just seems perfect the second you visualize it.
TCB
