Stick vs Post and Beam

[StupidSheet]

I am building a 40 x 30 shop this summer. I have been looking around at many different threads to get ideas. I keep coming across post and beam constructed shops. This might be the way to go for me as then I could pour the concrete the following summer. I don't know anything about post and beam so can anyone tell me some of the pros and cons versus stick construction.

I did do a search and didn't find this topic so I'm hoping I'm not kicking a dead horse.

 

[Highbeam]

Post, on a big structure is cheaper and faster. More DIY friendly. There have been many threads. Try searching for "pole barn" instead of "post and beam".

 

[theoldwizard1]

Post, on a big structure is cheaper and faster. More DIY friendly. There have been many threads. Try searching for "pole barn" instead of "post and beam".

Probably cheaper and faster to put up. Some will argue about your claim of "more DIY friendly". Finishing the interior is "different".

You can pour a stick built slab separately also. Most building codes require a concrete footing that goes below the "frost line". If you are going stick buitl have the foundation crew add a 6" curb above grade.

Which ever you choose, make certain the location is "high and dry".

 

[tomroblee]

Are you talking about post and beam (that uses heavy timbers and fancy joints) or do you mean "Post Framed" aka pole barns that generally use poles set int he ground and trusses?

True post and beam (the way barns were made a hundred years ago) is going to be extremely expensive compared to either pole barns or stick building---but it is beautiful.

 

[ForceFed70]

I always worry about a pole barn and it's shelf life. How long do those poles last before rotting in the ground? I understand that they are treated, etc. But won't they be pretty rotten after say 25 years?

 

[mtwaterguy]

I always worry about a pole barn and it's shelf life. How long do those poles last before rotting in the ground? I understand that they are treated, etc. But won't they be pretty rotten after say 25 years?

The first two I built, both in the mid/late 70's are still ok, with original posts. Both built in soggy PDX.

 

[StupidSheet]

Are you talking about post and beam (that uses heavy timbers and fancy joints) or do you mean "Post Framed" aka pole barns that generally use poles set int he ground and trusses?

True post and beam (the way barns were made a hundred years ago) is going to be extremely expensive compared to either pole barns or stick building---but it is beautiful.

Yes I mean post framed. sorry.

I always worry about a pole barn and it's shelf life. How long do those poles last before rotting in the ground? I understand that they are treated, etc. But won't they be pretty rotten after say 25 years?

This is one of my worries as well along with frost.


Thanks everyone. I will try another search.

 

[CNGsaves]

I always worry about a pole barn and it's shelf life. How long do those poles last before rotting in the ground? I understand that they are treated, etc. But won't they be pretty rotten after say 25 years?

I've seen some builds where they gubbered up bottom several feet of poles before they went into the ground. Not sure if it was tar or what.

Any comments from Pole Barn owners on what you did to extend life of poles??

 

[tomroblee]

I had a 36' x 48' pole barn built several years ago. The potential for post rot was a major concern, so I specified Perma Columns (precast, reinforced concrete post bases)
https://www.permacolumn.com

I also considered using stick construction. The Perma Columns added about $100 per post to the cost, so I don't imagine that I saved a great amount by using pole barn construction. For me, the deciding factor is that there were two large pole barn builders in the general area that used Amish construction crews. They both had great reputations for quality work at reasonable prices (including concrete work) and could complete the building in just a few days.

When my barn was built, they poured the floor before they attached metal to the sides of the building. That allowed them to move the concrete truck around all sides of the building while they were making the pour. I'm guessing that adding a concrete floor to a completed building would be more labor intensive

As far as pros and cons of post frame building, the biggest pro is that the neec for a perimeter foundation is eliminated when you use posts---and that generally equates to a lower cost. The biggest con is that it is possible that the post may rot. Some people feel that it is easier to insulate and finish conventional stick framed buildings, but that seems to be a matter of experience and personal taste.

 

[Highbeam]

A lot of people "worry" about posts rotting away but you just don't see people talking about it happening. I would be more worried about them sinking into the earth due to improper engineering and construction.

 

[Flatland Dave]

A lot of people "worry" about posts rotting away but you just don't see people talking about it happening. I would be more worried about them sinking into the earth due to improper engineering and construction.

They worry, but don't look. I have a pole barn built in the '70s. Treated posts. All have various stages of rot. Some nearly rotten in two. Most of the rot is below the floor level, if the building is finished, you don't see the rot. Perhaps the modern post treat and techniques are better than the olden days?


I had a 32 x 48 x 16 pole on piers built this last summer. 6' by 24" pier as well as a 24" deep footing around the rest. Mono pour with the 6' floor.

I left it up to the builder which way to build it. Stick or pole. He chose pole. due to the height. Have 2x6 @ 2' on centers horizontally between the poles so I can finish the inside as $ allows.

 

[StupidSheet]

Thanks guys! I'm still torn on which way to go.

 

[rburke65]

My opinion is that if you are to finish the inside of the building I would stick build. If you're not the a pole build goes up quickly and is probably a more economically built.

 

[Old Moparz]

You'll get mixed answers with the pros & cons of choosing either type of construction, so you'll need to use your own specific reasons, finances, DIY abilities, etc. to make a final decision. Also, I think it's very important that the geography (where you live) will influence the method that will be best.

Before I built my garage in 1997, which is a pole barn, I was also concerned about the pressure treated wood rotting below grade. I researched what I could by calling a few contractors that specialized in this type of construction, spoke to a few people that already had these buildings, & by reading what I could find regarding the use of PT wood. (This was before the internet) I had also used my own experience with PT wood having built decks & retaining walls since the mid 1980's with some on my own property.

The posts under the original portion of my deck have been in place since 1987 show absolutely no signs of decay. There are retaining walls for my driveway that have been in place for almost as long, & also show no signs of decay. All the walls were built by me & were backfilled with a good drainage stone, (gravel) not soil, so it does not hold water & stays relatively dry. There was a stairwell for the basement door that was built by the previous owner, also PT wood, that wasn't backfilled with gravel. It was just soil & rotted out in some spots in less than 15 years.

Every pole for my garage was backfilled with gravel to allow the ground water to flow, & not stay trapped against the wood. The garage poles are still in perfect condition where they make contact with the ground. The cost was the biggest factor for my decision to go with a pole barn & not stick. The savings for the entire building was approximately 30% to 40% by deleting the foundation that would have been at least $5000 to $6000 or so.

I'm 50 now & the garage will outlast me so I am not worried.

 

[justanengineer]

They worry, but don't look. I have a pole barn built in the '70s. Treated posts. All have various stages of rot. Some nearly rotten in two. Most of the rot is below the floor level, if the building is finished, you don't see the rot. Perhaps the modern post treat and techniques are better than the olden days?

The posts today arent any better, if anything theyre worse. The best material I ever saw was treated posts dipped in tar and encased in concrete ~3 ft above grade, but not many contractors are willing to use tar anymore since its considered hazardous to the environment in many areas.

I think realistically the question of how long they last depends on the soil they go into and the environment. My grandfather had quite a few buildings on the farm built exactly as I described above, and only a few are left <50 years later. The sad part is that they looked great right up until the day they fell down, as said above, the rot occurs below grade so a building weighing ** tons seems really solid but is pretty far from it.

Im pretty glad they all rot eventually tho, it makes the extra investment pay off in the resale and to farm kids like myself (years ago) the removal/reconstruction/salvaging of those fallen buildings make great sources of income....just as wood fence post pounding does when they rot....

 

[Kevin54]

You can search and search, but in the end, it comes down to what you feel comfortable with doing as far as actually building the building yourself. There is a price difference, but in the end, both equal out to within almost the same price.

A lot of people feel more comfortable with a pole barn type of building. In going that way, it eliminates the footer and foundation. If you go that route, when it comes to insulating and finishing off the inside, whether it be drywall, OSB, or tim, you almost have to build a standard wall between the poles. With your typical wall, you are building on top of either a slab, or you will have a foundation down to your "frost line" setting on a footer and a foot, or a few feet above ground. A proper footer and foundation can run a few thousand depending on the size of the building.

I've never built a pole barn but have helped out on a couple of them helping to set the poles. To me, it's more challenging doing that, than it is to build a wall and setting it on top of a foundation. My biggest hangup with a pole building is getting the poles spaced correctly and having poles that are not going to twist and turn before you start covering them with OSB or tin.

When first starting out though, if you get good lumber and have some common sense, getting just the framing up for a pole barn will be cheaper. Where the money starts to come into play is the insulating, what I mentioned about basically building a standard wall between your post to finish off the inside, and your concrete pour.

So it's more what you feel comfortable with. I want to add on to my garage and I have been kicking around the idea of building the addition as a pole barn style addition. I've built covered decks a number of times and never had a problem doing it, but the idea of building a pole barn sort of intimidates me. I don't know why, but it does.

Good luck and be sure to post up whichever way you go.

 

[StupidSheet]

Thanks guys I really appreciate the posts, especially the long ones with lots of info. Looks like I'm leaning towards stick built, mostly because I know how to build that. I've never done a pole barn although I'm sure I could figure it out. The other reason I'm leaning toward stick frame is I just found out from the RM yesterday that I need to apply for another variance if the peak is taller than 15'. That was one advantage I saw with pole barn construction is it was easy to build high if need be. I already have to apply for a variance because I will be within 25' of the property line. That's a crock in my eyes when you live on 2 acres. The nearest neighbor is 150 yards away.I will keep you posted.