When did Ridge Boards come into use?

[Pete Pedisich]

Hi,

I was up in a house addition, or what I thought was an addition turned out to be the original house, and there was no ridge board. Just rough sawn brawny square rafters that were joined at the top with half-laps and pinned with a treenail.
Any way to date this? I guess I'll climb up there again  and look for a initials and a date.
The newer part of the house I think is from the early thirties.

Thanks for any info!

Pete

 

[WarnerConstCo.]

Really depends.

Older houses seem to just but the rafters and one 4" cut nail.

You move into the 30's and you start to see a 1x for a ridge board.

Most newer construction from the early 80's and on, you start seeing an actual 2x ridge board.

Now I see them with LVL ridges and hips.

 

[Pete Pedisich]

Thanks WarnerConstCo.
I've seen this type of joinery on old books detailing late 17th and early 18th century methods, but the owner thought this part of the house dated from around the turn of the century, and my first reaction was "this looks waaay older than 1900"
Maybe it was done by someone who held on to the old ways?

 

[harry_]

Really depends.

Older houses seem to just but the rafters and one 4" cut nail.

You move into the 30's and you start to see a 1x for a ridge board.

Most newer construction from the early 80's and on, you start seeing an actual 2x ridge board.

Now I see them with LVL ridges and hips.

Darcy,

That is about what I see around here as well.

I am often amused at the 'progressive upgrade' of materials and standards. I was working on a house a few years back which had a Mansard roof. Unbelievable what the architect wanted us to do as far as adding LVL's & rafters. Sistering up ridges & hips with LVL's. Adding rafters to make it go from 24-30" O.C. to 16".

The roof was every bit as solid as the day it was built..........in 1890. But all this work was 'necessary', according to the architect.

In the end we decided to just tear it off, down to the rim as the labor was by far going to out do the materials otherwise.

 

[ajones]

Thanks WarnerConstCo.
I've seen this type of joinery on old books detailing late 17th and early 18th century methods, but the owner thought this part of the house dated from around the turn of the century, and my first reaction was "this looks waaay older than 1900"
Maybe it was done by someone who held on to the old ways?

My French farm house roof was constructed the same way and that was built in the late 1800's most unusual for a provincial french roof.it used 6"x2" oak rafters half tennoned at the ridge.with undersarking covering the roof I think there is  not much need for a ridge  board.But  when pitching a roof the ridge board makes it easier.

 

[Holzhacker]

I think to some degree that depends on Region. Our house is mid 20's, ridge board and 2x6 rafters. Most houses for the 20's to 30's around here have ridge boards. I've seen older with and newer without. For overall construction practice I'd put it at post WWI.

 

[WarnerConstCo.]

A lot of the changes come from the type of lumber available at the time.

Most of the pre 1910's are framed from green rough-cut lumber from the site usually.

Most of them around here are framed with either red oak or chestnut.

Good luck driving a nail in it.

You see all these lvl's and such with standard dimensional lumber that is usually SPF or SYP.

The quality and type of framing lumber is not what it once was.

 

[jvsteenb]

Where is the consolidated jargon buster when you need him most ?  [unsure]

Ridge board ?
Treenail ?
LVL ?
Undersarking ?
SPF ?
SYP ?

[blink]

Regards,

Job

 

[peter halle]

Job,

Ridge board ?    A board installed at the peak of the roof that is intersected with the rafters
Treenail ?          A wooden peg used to join framing members.  Usually now seen only in timber framed construction
LVL ?                Laminated Veneer Lumber.  Manufactured lumber made by gluing strips of veneer together.  Stronger and stiffer than natural wood in the same size.
Undersarking ?  A protective paper installed under roofing.  Original called felt understarking.  Called felt paper or roofing felt in the US.  Isn't felt anymore.
SPF ?                A group of species of wood types.  Often also called white wood.  Spruce.  Pine.  White Hemlock
SYP ?                Southern Yellow Pine.

This might help.

 

[jvsteenb]

Peter,

You're the man !

I'll try to fill in the Dutch translation and paste it to the jargon thread as well.

Ridge board : I'm not very sure. If it is what I think it is, the Dutch translation would be "nokbalk" but I would have called that a ridge beam instead of a ridge board ?
Treenail : There may be a special word for this, but it's usually called a "spie" or "pen". Note that "spie" is also used for keg and when it has a distinct taper, a keg is called... "keg". "pen" is also used for tenon.
LVL : We just call it "gelamineerd" and it's mainly used in large span rafters an trusses.
Undersarking : In my country, sloped roofs are 99% tiled. shingles are rare and shakes are exotic. So we may not have a synonym, though there are LOTS of vapour/moisture barriers.
SPF : Over here, constructional wood is predominantly "vuren". This is Picea abies , known as European Spruce or White deal. In some cases, there may be tiny batches of Hemlock mixed in, but it's rare.
SYP : Known as "Amerikaans grenen". Old growth ( significantly harder ) is marketed as pitch pine or "Amerikaans hard grenen".

Perhaps someone can chime in to add to this/correct/polish it before it's moved to the jargonbuster thread ?

Back to the original subject:
Over here, the only examples of (residential) roofs without ridgeboards/-beams that I can think of are the newer prefabricated roofs built with rafters and thick plywood panels - theyre joined with heavy hinges and metal joints and put in place with a crane. Mainly used for hip roofs ( "schilddaken").

Regards,

Job

 

[harry_]

Ridge board : I'm not very sure. If it is what I think it is, the Dutch translation would be "nokbalk" but I would have called that a ridge beam instead of a ridge board ?

jvsteenb,

Here in the states I think that ridge board and beam are basically interchangeable, with the caveat that beam might indicate something more massive, like a doubled or tripled LVL as opposed to a single plank of 1x or 2x stock.

[2cents]

 

[jvsteenb]

Harry,

Thanks. Over here, since most sloped residential roofs are tiled, you rarely see ridge "beams" thinner than 3x at the very least - like 3x8.
2x's would be considered OK for a garden shed, 1x would be considered barely appropriate for a henhouse....
Yes, we do use shingles for garden sheds and henhouses  [cool]

Regards,

Job

 

[Deansocial]

i understand that a ridge board is some thing for the rafters to sit against and be nailed to and tie them together were as a ridge beam actully supports the roof, typically used when ceilings are vaulted and sit lower than a ridge board and the rafters are birds mouthed over it.

 

[Billi13]

I have a house that was built in 1904 and the fascia boards were damaged in a storm and I realized the ridge board was a steel I beam and was wondering if this was common and when it started.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

I think the term "jargon" generally applies to specific situations. Each trade kind of creates its own, based on what they need/use. It is a sort of "short-hand" for those "in-the-know" and they really don't care if outsiders understand it.
In an international forum, like this, things are further complicated by language. Even the guys in the UK, who basically speak the same language as Americans, use different words for the same thing. When you hear them, they make sense, even though we would not use the same word. (In America we would call a writing instrument that holds/dispenses the graphite a "mechanical pencil". Makes sense, it has a mechanism to advance the graphite. As I understand it, in the UK, they would call this a "projector pencil". Also makes sense, the mechanism projects the graphite) Different yet equal

Shortening it further into jargon makes it worse. These terms can even be regional here in the US.

SPF is literally an acronym  "S" Spruce "P" Pine "F" Fir sometimes it is also called "Whitewood" which is just a made-up term for "basic evergreen/no-one-cares to bother with being precise"

Addressing the original question. My house was built in 1929 and it has a rather thin ridge board (3/4") in the main house and garage. Both are fairly steep pitched and decked with 1x solid wood, not sheet goods.

I would be more curious to know when trusses started to become a thing, over wider boards to be actual rafters and collar ties?

 

[Cheese]

I would be more curious to know when trusses started to become a thing, over wider boards to be actual rafters and collar ties?

I would guess...and that's all it is, trusses started to become a thing in the 70's & 80's when lumber became more expensive. Before that time, stick-built homes were popular because lumber was cheap. The upper states (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Oregon, Washington) were cutting and milling trees and sending this stuff by the trainload to supply centers across the country. 

Our house was built in 1953 and the new garage was built in 2023. What a difference in construction techniques and also in the quality of construction.

The walls inside our house were relatively straight...within a 1/8" or so, the walls in the garage loft (framed with trusses) are lucky to be within a 1/2" of being straight. When I turned the attic space in the house into a bedroom loft, I needed some 1/16" cardboard shims to straighten the walls. With the garage loft room, I'll be installing ripped pieces of 2x glued & screwed to the wall studs to straighten the walls. The trusses are cheap and strong and while they are fairly uniform in nature, they do tend to wander especially over extended lengths. Remember...what holds the elements of a truss together are a couple of thin 16 ga (?) plates that do not include fasteners, only sharp pointed projections. If thru-fasteners were part of the truss, the straightness could be held to a closer tolerance.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Our house was built in 1953 and the new garage was built in 2023. What a difference in construction techniques and also in the quality of construction.

The walls inside our house were relatively straight...within a 1/8" or so, the walls in the garage loft (framed with trusses) are lucky to be within a 1/2" of being straight.

I would say that there are a few things at play here, part of them human and part money (which is also human)
"Cheaper" materials at the forefront of the change. I would say that a Truss being built by that 1953 crew
would have been just a change be the Architect. They would have taken the 2x4s of the time, figured it out, and you would have gotten the same quality. They were "on-site" craftsmen, proud of the job they had done.
Fast foreword to the 70s or so and you get "factory made" trusses, made from crappy "modern" 2x4s that were cut from much smaller trees. This gets you fewer boards, cut closer to the pith, far less stable material, with the only plus side being lower initial cost.
It may or may not be faster (overall), but the materials cost less and you cut out some of the time of skilled workers, trading them for the factory jobs.
I'm not against trusses in general, I'm sure there are structural shapes that are better done that way.
However, I would bet that they actually use more wood, it's just that those smaller parts can be made from smaller trees. Faster growing and lower quality wood costs less.
The 2x8, 2x10, and 2x12 of the rafter style building cost proportionally more.
Then you bring in the more modern thinking of getting it done to move on to the next one faster.
"Job done" versus "Job well done, something to be proud to have accomplished".
As the expectations of the consumer have been slowly lowered over time too, "good enough is good enough", as long as it's cheap enough too.
I know it's easy for an "old guy" to romanticize the past and the "get off my lawn" mentality, but the proof is right there.
Modern advancements are great, we mostly depend on them today, but craftsmanship is dying.
Pride in your work doesn't pay any more than doing enough to not get fired. They call it "quiet quitting"
Corporate greed does not respect good work, they are so focused on artificially dragging up the pay of the lowest tier.
Starting to rant.....sorry.

 

[Packard]

I was not familiar with the ridge board vs. ridge beam distinction.

They dissect this difference pretty clearly here: https://vertexeng.com/insights/residential-roof-framing-basics-part-1/#

What is frightening is that an architect or engineer is not required to design or redesign the structure of a residential home in many (or maybe most) jurisdictions.  So some questionable practices might be brought to play.

I recall in the early 1970s that in many areas of the country they were using homasote board was being used as sheathing. 

They always started out with a single sheet of plywood sheathing in the lower left corner of the home. That, because a stiff wind would rip the homasote and collapse the structure.  However when the entire structure was sheathed in homasote it was believed to be structurally sound. 

I joked back then that I could take a bow and arrow and shoot through both sides of a homasote sheathed house.  Through the aluminum siding, through the homasote, through the fiberglass insulation, through the sheet rock, and through the paint (the final barrier to the interior) and then out again.  Perhaps hyperbole, but in my mind it pointed out a questionable building technique.

That technique was around for just a few years.  I always wondered what happened to get it outlawed. 

The problem with ridge boards, as I see it, is you would have to understand the forces being waged against a roof.  Over the years, I have found people who could mimic construction methods without understanding them.  As soon as they found themselves in a situation where an exact mimicking was not possible, and a variation needed to be used, then they got in trouble.

I think I would rather buy a fully engineered truss system than cobble together a roof with either a ridge beam or a ridge board.  I would not know how to calculate the lumber sizes other than to say, “That looks strong enough.”  Or , “That oughta do it.”

 

[Vtshopdog]

I'm compelled to share a roof beam story from a remodel we completed abut 20 years ago:
(it's a bit long, sorry...)

10' x 12'  single story addition to our bedroom extending into our yard.  I was saving some money by participating in the construction in role of contractor's go-fer, pounding some nails and general grunt work. 

First up, I volunteered to take plans from architect to zoning and planning office.  My architect friend had produced adequate, but minimal drawings.  Entering the planning office it was immediately clear that homeowners with plans hand were not, umm, "embraced".  First sat with the zoning guy who was helpful and had a few setback changes and whatnot.  Fine.

Next, I was sent back to the reception area to have someone review plans for construction details.  Clear vibe there was something akin to "who has to deal with the homeowner idiot today"?  Receptionist assigned me to "Enzo" upon which the other staff raised their eyebrows and stated "You're giving him to Enzo??"  I'm clearly screwed..

Within 90 seconds Enzo rejected the drawings for needing more tie downs, beefed up framing, extra hangers and some other things.  He simply wanted me to be gone.  Back at the architect's office my friend literally says "he wants beefed-up?  I'll give him beefed up" and proceeds to over design everything.

Contractor claims he and Enzo get along great and he happily carries the new plans down the next morning.  Couple hours later my phone rings.  Contractor:  "I've got good new and bad news.  Good news is I didn't punch Enzo.  Bad news is he wants plans sent to an engineer for structural analysis". Enzo is clearly punishing us for homeowner-me having the gall to bring in the plans.

The engineer, very aware we are dealing with a petulant bureaucrat proceeds to completely over design the already over designed plans so Enzo will have no reason to deny approval. We now have a 12" glue lam for the paltry 12' long ridge beam and another 10' long glue lam beam that is spec'ed at 14" thick.  It's built like a wooden bomb shelter:  2x10's, 2x12's, basically a whole boatload of unnecessary wood and Enzo signs off.

Fast forward 6 weeks and the framing inspector comes for inspection.  Contractor is not there so I let him into review.  He stops dead in his tracks.  "What's going on???  Tell me what you're doing here.  Why are you using so much wood?  Are you planing to put hot tub on the roof???  This is ridiculous, you've got something up your sleeve...."

He refused to sign off until he could meet with contractor and go back to home office and review with staff there.  I laugh about it to this day...

 

[Cheese]

I'm compelled to share a roof beam story from a remodel we completed abut 20 years ago:
(it's a bit long, sorry...)

Funny story...really chuckled over the "You're giving him to Enzo??"  I'm clearly screwed.." statement.  [big grin]

As they say, "Give them what they want until it hurts."